| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 106/07 |
| Hearing date | 8 May 2007 - 12 May 2007 (3 days) |
| Determination date | 19 September 2007 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | C French ; D Robinson |
| Location | Dunedin |
| Parties | Williams v Napier Motors Ltd t/a Dunedin City Ford |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – Applicant saw co-worker viewing pornographic image on manager's computer screen (First incident) – Applicant shocked and upset – Applicant made complaint to manager – Manager assured applicant problem would be dealt with – Applicant claimed saw no action in response so elevated complaint to principal – Principal referred matter back to manager – Applicant received apology from co-worker – Applicant assured by manager there would be no more pornography in workplace – Second incident where co-worker brought pornographic hardcopy image to workplace – Manager told co-worker to put image back in personal briefcase – Applicant proceeded to collect pornographic images from workplace – Applicant took hardcopy image from co-worker's personal briefcase – Applicant claimed was isolated and marginalised by colleagues – Claimed colleagues received rugby tickets when she did not – Applicant also claimed respondent failed to pay commission owed – Applicant also claimed bullying and sexual harassment by manager – Authority satisfied first incident handled reasonably by respondent – Authority satisfied applicant made views known regarding second incident – Manager knew or ought to have known that appropriate to respond positively to objection and required to act – Applicant should have let principal deal with complaint – Opening colleagues private briefcase inappropriate behaviour – Not job of aggrieved party to collect evidence – Manager failed to deal with issue appropriately – Authority satisfied applicant not provided with safe and secure workplace – Unjustified disadvantage – Applicants other claims dismissed – Authority found discriminatory claim not made out – Authority satisfied available to employer to make final decisions about commission disputes – Applicant failed to jointly identify and raise bullying and harassment concerns with employer – Authority satisfied with inquiries and investigation made by respondent regarding sexual harassment claim – Authority satisfied manager not assailant – REMEDIES – Facts support applicants contention that workplace culture supportive of pornography – Authority found applicant did not contribute to grievance by collecting evidence of pornography, however, behaviour was improper – Applicant’s failure to upgrade complaint of second incident to principal minor contributory factor – Unjustified dismissal not advanced in claims – Respondent’s acknowledged failure to run fair disciplinary meeting taken into account in assessing remedies – Sales representative |
| Result | Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($10,000 reduced for contribution) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($7,500 reduced for contribution) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Number of Pages | 19 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 106_07.pdf [pdf 60 KB] |