| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 53/08 |
| Hearing date | 16 Jan 2008 |
| Determination date | 19 February 2008 |
| Member | R A Monaghan |
| Representation | J Anderson (in person) ; P Akbar |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Anderson v Resolution Audio Visual Consultants Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Applicant initially raised matters outside Authority’s jurisdiction – Actual claims identified during investigation meeting – Applicant also claimed respondent breached Protected Disclosures Act 2000 as dismissal amounted to retaliation for disclosing matter to be filed with Authority – Authority found allegation more appropriately addressed as personal grievance – Employment agreement (“EA”) included twelve week probation period – Respondent had informal practice of conducting four weekly meetings during probation period – Applicant claimed felt being “set up” and respondent trying to terminate employment when respondent sought to schedule meeting – Respondent’s manager (“R”) conducted visit of applicant’s site to ensure applicant had necessary tools to complete work and upon concerns by client regarding work done by applicant – Applicant claimed became agitated because R expressed concern about speed of work – Authority found discussion did not amount to harassment or bullying by R – Applicant claimed became aggravated when R made comment about settlement agreement (“SA”) with previous employer (“X”) – Authority found R not aware of X or details of SA and comment made no reference to details – Respondent made enquires with Northern Employers Manufacturers Association (“EMA”) about other problems involving applicant – Inquiry produced Authority determination with no connection to SA – Authority found EMA information was extent of respondent’s knowledge of applicant’s problems with previous employers – Authority found initially respondent had no knowledge of SA until told by applicant – Second incident occurred where applicant required to visit X by respondent – Authority found applicant oversensitive to reception received at X and had no reasonable grounds to assume X discussed SA with respondent – Respondent had previously agreed with client that applicant would not attend client site without supervisor – Incident occurred where applicant threatened to take respondent to Employment Court when respondent attempted to set applicant’s tasks – Co-worker gave evidence applicant shouted loudly and was embarrassed applicant made a scene – Next day applicant filed statement of problem in Authority – Fourth incident occurred where applicant refused instruction of respondent claiming task that of junior technician – R told applicant that respondent’s continuing refusal could be viewed as serious misconduct which could result in dismissal – Authority accepted applicant’s response as “fine” and entitled to “protest” – Applicant told to attend disciplinary meeting to discuss incidents – Applicant claimed meeting convened for unjustified reasons – Authority found applicant did not attempt to dispute facts put to him and instead disputed legal basis for respondent’s concerns, misapplying material and taking misconceived position – Authority found applicant’s aggressive and argumentative conduct breached consensus of acceptable behaviour – Authority found instructions given to applicant lawful, reasonable, and within scope of EA – Found applicant insisted on unsustainable position and acted on incorrect assumptions of facts and misunderstood law – Dismissal justified – GOOD FAITH – Applicant claimed respondent’s denial of knowledge of settlement agreement before applicant provided details amounted to breach of good faith – Authority did not accept applicant lied to about respondent’s possession of confidential information regarding SA – Application dismissed – Audiovisual Technician |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | Human Rights Act 1993;Protected Disclosures Act 2000;ERA s4(1)(b);ERA s104;ERA s105;ERA s105(2);ERA s107 |
| Cases Cited | Anderson v CanWest Radioworks Limited unreported, Y S Oldfield, 3 November 2006, AA 338/06 |
| Number of Pages | 12 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 53_08.pdf [pdf 38 KB] |