Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No AA 224/07
Hearing date 14 May 2007
Determination date 01 August 2007
Member J Wilson
Representation Q Wu (in person) ; S Tay
Location Auckland
Parties Wu v Jireh Restaurants Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed – Respondent argued applicant given numerous warnings regarding misconduct and quality of food – Argued confrontation between applicant and manager resulted in applicant refusing to return to work – Respondent argued genuine efforts made to resolve difficulties and when offer of alternative employment refused decision made to terminate employment – Respondent produced signed written warning which alleged given to applicant prior to dismissal – Applicant claimed had never seen letter or received any written warnings – Claimed letter had been written post dismissal to justify dismissal – Applicant claimed no confrontation with manager occurred – Claimed received call asking to return to work in evening – Claimed when asked why attendance required, received second call that employment terminated and to collect pay – Applicant refused to take pay until given reasons for dismissal – Respondent alleged misunderstanding at meeting where believed applicant had resigned – Authority found establishment of facts problematic since evidence given via translator – Authority found by piecing together witness evidence able to establish reasonable understanding of probable events – Authority found if any warning given to applicant likely given without due process – Authority found likely misunderstanding between applicant and manager – Respondent believed conduct confrontational and insubordinate while applicant felt conduct inconsequential given 10 years of service – Authority concluded words conveyed to applicant gave impression that dismissed – Warning letter evidence that respondent predetermined dismissal – Dismissal unjustified – REMEDIES – Authority accepted applicant’s dignity wounded and entitled to believe not wanted by respondent – Applicant contributed to situation giving rise to grievance by failing to be fully open to respondents suggestions to salvage employment – Contribution nullified any entitlement to reimbursement of lost wages – Applicant’s entitlement to compensation not affected by contribution – Award of $5000 appropriate – Chef
Result Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages (Reduced to $0) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($5000)
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s124
Number of Pages 8
PDF File Link: aa 224_07.pdf [pdf 28 KB]