| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 301/07 |
| Hearing date | 18 Sep 2007 - 20 Sep 2007 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 01 October 2007 |
| Member | A Dumbleton |
| Representation | S Mitchell ; A Caisley, R Larmer |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Service and Food Workers Union Nga Ringa Tota Inc v Air New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | DISPUTE - Whether applicant’s consent required before respondent changed shift work rosters - Respondent’s discontent with present 6/3 rosters expressly noted in collective employment agreement (“CEA”) - Respondent subsequently proposed new 5/2 roster as part of “in-house solution” agreed with other unions to avoid outsourcing work - Applicant did not agree to change CEA to conform with solution - Sought declaration respondent did not have contractual power to change roster in circumstances - Contended changes could not be shown to be for purpose of meeting “needs of the service” as required by CEA - Respondent gave applicant required notice and endeavoured to consult - CEA provided respondent could revert to standard 5/2 shift pattern if no agreement reached - Reversion to standard shirt provision not subject to “needs of the service” qualification - Respondent had contractual power to change roster in absence of agreement with applicant provided it consulted after giving of notice of change - Obiter comments on “needs of the service” |
| Result | Question answered in favour of respondent ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Cases Cited | G N Hale & Sons Ltd v. Wellington etc Caretakers etc IUOW [1990] 2;NZILR 1079 |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 301_07.pdf [pdf 45 KB] |