| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 298/08 |
| Hearing date | 12 Aug 2008 |
| Determination date | 18 August 2008 |
| Member | M Urlich |
| Representation | M Lauago (in person) ; no appearance |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Lauago v Marketing Promotions Systems Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Misconduct – No appearance for respondent – Respondent’s sole director (“F”) gave applicant letter from co-worker – Co-worker alleged applicant wore work merchandise (necklace) during work time then left store wearing it – Co-worker claimed applicant did not return necklace at next shift – F told applicant behaviour criminal and would take applicant to court – Before applicant’s next shift, respondent sent text message advising applicant’s pay including holiday pay was banked in her account – Applicant understood was dismissed – Applicant gave F resignation letter and keys - Authority found respondent terminated applicant’s employment by depositing final pay in bank account and notifying dismissal by text message – Applicant dismissed – Authority found appropriate for F to raise letter of complaint with applicant as serious issues raised – However, found F did not provide fair opportunity for applicant to explain behaviour before F advised applicant considered conduct criminal – Found applicant had reasonable explanation for conduct, that wore necklace to merchandise it, forgot to remove it at end of shift, then returned it later – Found had F been aware of all circumstances, could not reasonably have concluded applicant intended to permanently deprive respondent of property – Dismissal unjustified – Remedies – Applicant found alternative employment six weeks after dismissal – Applicant entitled to six weeks reimbursement of lost wages – Applicant claimed shocked and intimidated by F raising theft issue – Authority found applicant entitled to moderate compensation award – Authority found applicant made honest mistake but failure to draw F’s attention to mistake immediately, when F did not know staff wore merchandise, contributed to grievance – Lost wages and compensation reduced by 10 percent for contributory conduct - ARREARS OF WAGES – Applicant claimed F increased pay rate then unilaterally reduced it without explanation – Applicant provided wage slips as evidence – Authority awarded applicant difference in hourly rate for period rate unilaterally reduced – ARREARS OF HOLIDAY PAY – Applicant claimed written employment agreement provided for statutory holiday pay for Christmas Day – Authority awarded relevant daily pay and 8 percent holiday pay for public holiday not worked - COSTS – Applicant entitled to filing fee – Part-time shop assistant |
| Result | Applications granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($3,240 reduced to $2,916) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($2,000 reduced to $1,800) ; Arrears of wages ($34.40) ; Arrears of holiday pay ($131.22) ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70)(filing fee) |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA Second Schedule cl 12 |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 298_08.pdf [pdf 23 KB] |