| Summary |
BREACH OF CONTRACT – Applicant claimed salary not properly set – Applicant claimed salary had to remain relevant to requirements of position as professor of economics and finance, and that 2.6 percent pay rise inadequate when academics employed under collective employment agreement (“CEA”) received 4.5 percent, as recommended by Head of School – First issue to determine what individual employment agreement (“IEA”) required of respondent when reviewing applicant’s salary – Authority found decision maker (“T”) considered applicant’s position’s requirements – Found requirements of position were standard expectations of professor of any sort – Found fair and reasonable employer must conform to terms of IEA, but otherwise able to exercise managerial discretion in setting salary - Second issue whether respondent’s decision impacted by apparent bias, alleged inability of decision maker to properly assess salary, or unacceptable time delay in concluding process – Applicant claimed potential conflict of T’s interests, as applicant opposed initiative by T – Authority found unreasonable to expect T to stand aside in circumstances – Found nothing in IEA requiring T to accept salary recommendation - Authority found delay in confirming pay rise resolved by respondent’s offer of interest on back-dated sum – Third issue whether respondent’s actions those of fair and reasonable employer given terms of IEA, performance, pay rise under CEA and recommended pay rise – Authority found CEA and recommendation were relevant factors in salary review process – However, found IEA did not provide for set relativity between salaries of CEA staff – Found T concluded applicant met performance expectations but did not follow that 4.5 percent increase required – Applicant claimed academic salaries should be assessed against other countries – Authority found not required by IEA – Authority accepted national comparators similar – Authority found respondent could not compete with salaries in private sector – Found overall, T’s decision not generous, but properly assessed requirements of applicant’s position, CEA pay rise, recommendation and performance review in determining salary – Found T entitled to consider applicant’s light workload, absences from workplace and performance factors – Found no breach of contract |