| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 316/07 |
| Hearing date | 27 Jul 2007 |
| Determination date | 11 October 2007 |
| Member | R A Monaghan |
| Representation | J Bale ; M Reid |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Feo & Ors v Technology Ucan Trust Ltd |
| Other Parties | Barlow, Wybro, Botka, Young |
| Summary | JURISIDICITON – Whether employees or independent contractors – Respondent disputed status of second, third, fourth and fifth applicants - Applicants responded to broadly-worded advertisements offering opportunity to earn specified sum of money per week, with no experience necessary – Signed standard ‘independent agent agreement’ indicative of contracting relationship – Written agreement more than an attempt to label arrangement and given weight as genuine reflection of parties’ intentions - Respondent exercised relatively high degree of control but this appeared to flow from applicants’ lack of experience and did not outweigh freedoms that were also conferred – Integration test not helpful – Most applicants did not appear to approach work as if in business on own account, however not because of limits in agreements – No employment relationship – Respondent directed to mediation in respect of grievance raised by first applicant - Sales |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Orders accordingly ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Jurisdiction |
| Statutes | ERA s6;ERA s6(3)(a) |
| Cases Cited | Bryson v Three Foot Six Limited [2003] 1 ERNZ 581;Bryson v Three Foot Six Limited [2005] SC 34;Cunningham v TNT Express Worldwide Limited [1993] 1 ERNZ 695 (CA) |
| Number of Pages | 11 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 316_07.pdf [pdf 38 KB] |