| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 95/07 |
| Hearing date | 19 Jul 2007 |
| Determination date | 08 August 2007 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | M PcPherson (in person) ; D Knapp |
| Location | Alexandra |
| Parties | McPherson v Olivers Central Otago Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissal – Applicant appointed as general manager of respondent with intention would ensure viability of business – Respondent argued almost immediately began having second thoughts about appointment due to employment issues that arose – Applicant claimed respondent’s owner (“L”) raised employment issues in general way during drive home – Applicant claimed told by L that resignation best way to resolve issues – Applicant claimed when got home told partner had been fired – Respondent argued sought applicant’s impressions of “how things were going” and informed applicant “had some concerns” which happy to discuss – Respondent alleged told applicant employment not being terminated, however, number of issues to discuss on formal basis – Respondent suggested applicant take time off as observed applicant upset – Applicant sent email to L early next morning claiming resignation was sought during drive home – Succession of emails followed which eventuated in applicant being called to disciplinary meeting – Authority satisfied allegations properly put to applicant at meeting – Authority satisfied applicant given fair opportunity to respond to allegations – Authority also satisfied applicant accepted allegations true and apologised because thought doing good work – Authority put all allegations again to applicant – Applicant accepted all allegations true except allegation that abused owner – Applicant called to further meeting where respondent told applicant had lost trust and confidence in ability and dismissed applicant – Authority satisfied no dismissal constructive or otherwise during drive home – Applicant’s behaviour inconsistent with claim that constructively dismissed – Applicant pestering L to discuss concerns inconsistent with notion that already dismissed – Authority found difficult to understand why applicant would attend two disciplinary meetings if already dismissed – No constructive dismissal – Authority satisfied dismissal process adopted by respondent fair in circumstances – Authority concluded respondent justified in dismissing applicant for misconduct at second meeting – Restaurant general manager |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s103A |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 95_07.pdf [pdf 27 KB] |