Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No AA 269/07
Hearing date 5 Jun 2007
Determination date 30 August 2007
Member Y S Oldfield
Representation C Bennett ; J Wickes
Location Auckland
Parties Williams v Camira Furniture Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Poor performance - No written employment agreement - Respondent claimed applicant unprofessional, not maintaining relationships with clients and failed to generate business - Respondent claimed had not repaid monies for charge to company account and excessive personal use of internet - Also crashed and impounded company car - Two meetings held to discuss behaviour and performance - Applicant dismissed after second meeting - Applicant claimed viewed feedback given at meeting part of training process and not told employment at risk - Respondent accepted not clear that meetings were disciplinary - Authority found applicant not given opportunity to be heard or rectify alleged poor performance - Applicant should have been told employment in jeopardy and given clear and specific warnings - Also found respondent did not establish at time that behaviour towards clients as bad as alleged - Respondent claimed applicant failed to repay personal expenditure owing, despite negotiations - Reasonable for respondent to expect repayment, however not made clear that failure to repay would result in dismissal - Dismissal unjustified - Respondent claimed probationary employment term expired - Authority found parties had agreed on 6 month probationary period, however term ineffective because not in writing - Authority found penalty claimed by applicant for unwritten employment agreement barred by 12-month time limit in s135(5) Employment Relations Act 2000 - REMEDIES - Authority found applicant started new employment prior to dismissal by respondent - Found applicant elected to start new job at reduced level of earning - No lost earnings flowed from dismissal - Authority found applicant embarrassed by unjustified dismissal - Contributory conduct 30 percent - Applicant to pay respondent for personal internet use and charge to company account - Salesperson
Result Application granted ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($5,000 reduced to $3,500) ; Recovery of monies ($4,635) (Payable to respondent) ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s65;ERA s67(1)(a);ERA s67(2);ERA s67(3);ERA s123;ERA s135(5)
Number of Pages 8
PDF File Link: aa 269_07.pdf [pdf 29 KB]