| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 143/08 |
| Hearing date | 21 Aug 2008 |
| Determination date | 24 October 2008 |
| Member | P R Stapp |
| Representation | T Kennedy ; A Caisley |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | Tamatea v Cityline (NZ) Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Serious misconduct - Applicant suspended then dismissed following investigation into alleged verbal altercation with car driver after driver failed to give way while applicant driving bus - Authority found respondent came to reasonably held belief not to accept applicant’s version of events - Found respondent had independent corroboration of driver’s version of events from witness - Found applicant had opportunity to put point of view and aware was conflicting evidence - Found applicant accepted was angry and upset - Authority found open to fair and reasonable employer to dismiss applicant - Found applicant’s action of following and confronting driver breached trust and confidence and was serious misconduct - Found open to respondent to rely on that ground given applicant’s job unsupervised and involved public safety that could have been compromised by decision to confront driver - Found grounds relied on within bounds of respondent’s behaviour code - Found applicant had training on handling stressful situations - Found respondent took into account applicant’s prior service - Authority found respondent’s process fair - Found applicant represented and assisted by union - Found applicant had access to relevant information - Found information applicant not provided with either immaterial or not prejudicial - Found applicant given opportunity and time to respond to allegations and comment on respondent’s conclusions - Found respondent considered driver’s racist comment but only so far as comment made after applicant started altercation - Found respondent’s conclusion racist comment provided insufficient justification for altercation open to fair and reasonable employer - Applicant claimed disparity of treatment with other employees not dismissed for more serious allegations - Authority found no disparity of treatment - Dismissal justified - UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - Dispute as to whether applicant challenged suspension - Authority found prior to filing of statement of problem neither applicant nor union challenged suspension - Found was serious complaint that would ordinarily justify suspension - Authority found if wrong on that point, applicant suffered no disadvantage as continued to be paid, had union representation and investigation and disciplinary process followed - No unjustified disadvantage - Applicant claimed day after altercation respondent’s General Manager said he wanted applicant “off his shift now” - Authority found allegation comment made had no foundation - No unjustified disadvantage - Bus driver |
| Result | Applications dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Number of Pages | 13 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 143_08.pdf [pdf 41 KB] |