Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No AA 119/08
Hearing date 21 Nov 2007
Determination date 31 March 2008
Member Y S Oldfield
Representation T Oldfield ; S Eden
Location Auckland
Parties Talataina v Guardian Healthcare Trust
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – Suspension – Two of applicant’s co-workers complained to facility manager (“L”) that witnessed applicant assault two residents – L interviewed co-workers and requested written statements – In disciplinary meeting, applicant denied allegations – L suspended applicant on full pay and provided details of allegations – Applicant claimed insufficient discussion of reasons for suspension, not given all details of allegations and not told duration of suspension – Authority found self-evident reason for suspension that alleged conduct put residents at risk – Found applicant provided with information relevant to suspension, had opportunity to respond and put forward no good reason against suspension – Found although duration of suspension uncertain, further meeting had been arranged – Suspension justified - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious misconduct – Relieving manager (“F”) took over inquiry – Residents did not report mistreatment, which may have been due to dementia – F considered applicant’s credibility affected by false denial of involvement in previous serious incidents – F concluded allegations true – Applicant dismissed – Authority found respondent misled applicant that alleged incidents occurred on same shift – Found respondent should have provided applicant names of co-workers who made allegations – Found respondent failed to provide applicant with all information gathered in investigation, including written complaints, incident reports and interview notes – Found respondent took past record into account without advising applicant – Found F relied on false belief that applicant had not denied allegations – Found F failed to take into consideration fact residents allegedly assaulted did not exhibit signs of abuse – No full and fair inquiry – Dismissal procedurally unjustified - REMEDIES – Eleven years service – Found difficult for applicant to find work as unable to get reference from respondent – Stress aggravated as applicant’s husband ill and not working – Applicant argued no contributory conduct as insufficient evidence of misconduct – Authority found no evidence F wrong to believe co-workers’ complaints – Considering contributory conduct, Authority concluded only remedy should be compensation for distress caused by procedural unfairness, not for dismissal itself – Caregiver for elderly
Result Application granted (dismissal) ; Application dismissed (disadvantage) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($2,500) ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Cases Cited Ark Aviation Ltd v Newton [2001] 1 ERNZ 133
Number of Pages 10
PDF File Link: aa 119_08.pdf [pdf 35 KB]