| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 296/07 |
| Hearing date | 5 Sep 2007 |
| Determination date | 24 September 2007 |
| Member | D King |
| Representation | D George ; S Richmond |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Teaukura v Richmond Construction Ltd |
| Summary | JURISDICITON – Whether employee or independent contractor – No written employment agreement – Head of respondent not directly involved in applicant’s engagement and claimed unaware of arrangement’s details - Applicant alleged told would be paid same as co-worker who recruited him – No discussion about employment status - Respondent claimed all staff contractors – Applicant fully integrated into respondent’s business and told when and how to work – Not in business in on own account – Applicant employee - UNJUSTIFED DISMISSAL – Applicant unwell and obtained medical certificate – On date of expected return advised respondent still unwell - Employment terminated – Respondent alleged applicant hungover, not unwell, based on information from co-worker who attended work drunk –Respondent acted on information given by intoxicated worker without giving applicant opportunity to respond – Dismissal unjustified – Remedies –Respondent later told co-worker applicant could return to work – Applicant accepted received message but did not return as wanted to hear it from respondent –Failure to mitigate loss – Entitled to lost wages only for week before offered re-employment - Hammer hand |
| Result | Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($539)(1 week) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($2,000) ; Costs reserved ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70)(Filing fee) |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 296_07.pdf [pdf 20 KB] |