| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 106/07 |
| Hearing date | 16 Jul 2007 |
| Determination date | 30 July 2007 |
| Member | V Campbell |
| Representation | A Millar ; H Kynaston |
| Location | Palmerston North |
| Parties | Dr Shie Sato v Vice Chancellor of Massey University |
| Summary | DISPUTE – Interpretation of Collective Employment Agreement (“CEA”) – Applicant sought declaration that contracted quantum of weekly hours was maximum of 37.5 under CEA or 40 under Minimum Wage Act 1983 (“MWA”) – Respondent claimed nothing limiting hours and applicant required to work whatever hours necessary to complete duties - Applicant claimed parole evidence rule applied – Respondent claimed written material did not contain all terms of employment – Authority found necessary on facts, and permissible under s160(2) Employment Relations Act 2000, to take extrinsic evidence into account to resolve issue – Parole evidence rule did not apply – Applicant “academic employee” for purposes of CEA – CEA did not define academic employees’ hours of work, rather required them to devote full “contracted hours” to work – “Contracted hours” undefined – Applicant claimed clause 1.6(i) CEA set hours of work – Authority found applicant’s interpretation stretched natural meaning of clause – Clause set out calculation of hourly rate where necessary to apply it – Applicable to academic employees in very limited circumstances - Applicant relied on reference to “75 units” on pay slip to support claim only required to work 37.5 hours per week – Applicant did not complete time sheets or any other documentation which showed paid only for hours worked – Authority found units purely administrative and not for salary calculations - In the alternative applicant claimed s11B(1) MWA fixed her maximum weekly hours at 40 - Section 11B(2) allowed parties to agree to longer hours of work – Applicant claimed told at outset of employment would work maximum of 37.5 hours per week, and should be careful not to overwork – Applicant claimed sometimes worked less than 40 hours per week and sometimes more – Two policies implemented to provide guidance on expectations of staff’s work input – Applicant’s department’s policy stated workload calculations based on 37.5 hour working week but recognised employees worked longer hours at peak periods – Evidence that academics preferred freedom from set hours – Authority found CEA and University policy contemplated academic employees may work more or less than 37.5 hour week and that hours of work will be dictated by peaks and troughs of academic work undertaken – That constituted agreement pursuant to s11B(2) MWA – Applicant’s hours of work not fixed at either 37.5 or 40 per week |
| Result | Question answered in favour of respondent ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Statutes | ERA s160(2);Minimum Wage Act 1983 s11B;Minimum Wage Act 1983 s11B(1);Minimum Wage Act 1983 s11B(2) |
| Cases Cited | ASTE v Chief Executive of Bay of Plenty Polytechnic [2002] 1 ERNZ 491 |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 106_07.pdf [pdf 35 KB] |