| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 345/07 |
| Hearing date | 17 Oct 2007 |
| Determination date | 31 October 2007 |
| Member | A Dumbleton |
| Representation | J Minto ; G Finnigan |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Metua v Independent Liquor (NZ) Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFED DISMISSAL – Serious misconduct – Applicant verbally abused and physically assaulted by co-worker – Reported incident and allowed to go home – As he left, intentionally damaged co-worker’s car – Although respondent aware of damage did not raise it with applicant when investigated assault, and he did not volunteer information – Co-worker dismissed and respondent began investigating damage to car – Applicant admitted damage and arranged to pay for repairs – Respondent concluded actions serious misconduct and dismissed him – Reasonable for respondent to conclude applicant had no reasonable excuse – Applicant no longer in harms way when retaliated and no reason to suppose complaint not taken seriously, or would not be investigated properly – Respondent entitled, and had responsibility, to keep premises safe and secure from damage caused from within - Also had interest in discouraging reasonably large work force from committing acts of revenge or retaliation in workplace - Dismissal justified |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s103A |
| Cases Cited | Air New Zealand Limited v. Hudson [2006] 3 NZELR 155; X v Auckland District Health Board [2007] ERNZ 66 |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 345_07.pdf [pdf 24 KB] |