Restrictions Includes non-publication order
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch
Reference No CA 144/08
Determination date 26 September 2008
Member P Cheyne
Representation L (Applicant in person) ; K Smith
Location Invercargill
Parties L v Alliance Group Ltd
Summary PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Applicant’s name prohibited from publication – Applicant’s allegations against supervisors and co-workers covered eleven year period and related to swearing, indecent assault, rape, intimidation and bullying - Authority found allegations from incidents nine to twelve years ago barred by six year limitation period – Applicant claimed raised some issues with respondent four years prior to Authority proceedings – Authority found if that was correct, proceedings lodged outside of three year time limit from when first raised with respondent – Found applicant raised other allegations in letter outside 90 day period – Found most of allegations in statement of problem either not raised with respondent within 90 days or proceedings not initiated within three years or six years – Authority found one allegation regarding applicant’s supervisor (“S”) raised within 90 days - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissal – Applicant claimed constructively dismissed following incident with S, and sought redundancy compensation - Conflict in evidence between S and applicant – Applicant claimed S swore at applicant – S claimed applicant swore at him, which was repeat of conduct which applicant given final written warning about – S reported incident to management – Respondent’s investigation found S’s version correct – Disciplinary meeting resulted in applicant’s transfer to another department – Applicant absent with medical certificate – Applicant transferred to new department – Applicant raised then withdrew complaint about S – Applicant’s seasonal employment ended – Respondent advised applicant would be vacancies available in applicant’s preferred department next season – Applicant resigned, citing health issues – Authority found applicant resigned, so dismissed applicant’s claim that entitled to redundancy pay – Authority found matters between S and applicant resolved, when applicant avoided potential dismissal and withdrew complaint against S – Also found on balance of probabilities, S did not behave improperly in exchanges with applicant – No unjustified dismissal – Seasonal freezing works employee
Result Application dismissed ; Costs reserved
Main Category Practice & Procedure
Statutes ERA s114(1);ERA s114(6);ERA s142
Number of Pages 5
PDF File Link: ca 144_08.pdf [pdf 21 KB]