| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 185/07 |
| Hearing date | 15 Jun 2007 |
| Determination date | 20 June 2007 |
| Member | R A Monaghan |
| Representation | H White ; P Muir |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | New Zealand Dairy Workers Union v Fonterra Brands (Tip Top) Ltd |
| Summary | DISPUTE - Interpretation of collective employment agreement (CEA") - CEA provided four weeks annual leave to employees after five years continuous service - Also provided additional week's leave to shift workers with less than five years service in certain conditions - Whether employees entitled to five weeks leave after 1 April 2007 amendments to Holidays Act 2003 ("2007 amendments") came into force - Four weeks holiday provided by CEA intended as enhancement of minimum entitlement - Parties had addressed annual leave issue during negotiations, but no mutual intention to increase minimum entitlement once 2007 amendments in force - No reason to conclude long service employees entitled to fifth weeks leave - Shift workers in different situation as entitlement expressed as being "additional" week's holiday - Applicant claimed "additional" should have same meaning as in New Zealand Tramways and Public Transport Employees Union Inc v Transportation Auckland Corporation Ltd (cited below) and shift employees entitled to five weeks leave - However, shift workers clause referred to long service clause - Reference intended to link types of leave provided, not distinguish them - Also, history of CEA showed respondent had drawn line over maximum amount of leave it would agree to - Applicant's interpretation would mean shift workers lost entitlement to five weeks leave after working five years, an absurd result - "Additional" in CEA had similar meaning to enhanced - No reason to conclude shift employees entitled to five weeks leave - Applicant's submission regarding relativity previously rejected by Court - No breach of s6(3) Holidays Act 2003 - 2007 amendments did not operate on CEA to provide employees with entitlement to fifth week of annual leave - Question answered in favour of respondent" |
| Result | Question answered in favour of respondent ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Statutes | Holidays Act 2003 s3;Holidays Act 2003 s6;Holidays Act 2003 s6(2);Holidays Act 2003 s6(3) |
| Cases Cited | New Zealand Tramways and Public Transport Employees Union Inc v Transportation Auckland Corporation Ltd [2006] 1 ERNZ 1005;New Zealand Tramways and Public Transport Employees Union Inc & Anor v Transportation Auckland Corporation Ltd & Anor [2007] ERNZ 202 ; [2007] NZCA 116 |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 185_07.pdf [pdf 36 KB] |