| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 40/08 |
| Hearing date | 2 Apr 2008 |
| Determination date | 10 April 2008 |
| Member | L Robinson |
| Representation | D Lima ; A Bell |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | Cooper v Levin Meats Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious misconduct – Applicant applied hot adhesive to carton which co-worker (“S”) lifted and subsequently sustained injury to hand – Co-worker gave evidence that saw applicant apply adhesive liberally to carton when not required and where likely to be handled by S – Authority found co-worker told supervisor (“H”) that applicant applied adhesive to burn S – Authority accepted H’s evidence that S confirmed applicant “clowning around” and put glue where S picked carton up – Authority found H told S to see plant manager (“P”) next day – P called applicant to office and asked if wanted “someone with him” – Authority found applicant did not expressly decline invitation – P and H argued applicant stated had deliberately applied glue to burn S – Applicant argued confirmed intentionally applied glue because was assigned that work task – P obtained applicant’s employment agreement (“EA”) and made summary dismissal – P argued no choice but to dismiss applicant because actions constituted serious misconduct under EA – P also argued applicant knew could put disciplinary meeting off until had support person – Authority found no previous warning given to applicant – Authority found P and H wrong to rely on verbal warning argued previously given – Found respondent could not justify decision to terminate on warning not given – Authority found applicant confirmed to P and H that had deliberately burned S – Authority found respondent did not comply with prescribed process – Found applicant not told of allegation and given opportunity to explain – Also found applicant not given advance notice of disciplinary meeting – Authority also found applicant did not appreciate significance of having support person present – Authority also considered regrettable respondent did not consider applicant was young adult and circumstances had element of intimidation – Dismissal unjustified – Remedies – Authority accepted evidence that applicant had propensity to burn colleagues in the past – Authority found applicant’s behaviour seriously blameworthy and completely causative of dismissal – 100 percent contributory conduct – No award of remedies – Process worker |
| Result | Application granted (Dismissal) ; No award of remedies ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s103A;ERA s124 |
| Number of Pages | 9 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 40_08.pdf [pdf 34 KB] |