Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No AA 400/08
Hearing date 8 Aug 2008
Determination date 24 November 2008
Member R Arthur
Representation E Hartdegen ; D Mackinnon
Location Auckland
Parties Le Comte v Vero Insurance New Zealand Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – BREACH OF CONTRACT – Redundancy – Applicant sought payment of redundancy compensation, compensation for hurt and humiliation and imposition of penalty for breach of employment agreement - Applicant alleged position created in respondent’s management hierarchy effectively made applicant’s position redundant – Respondent argued applicant properly consulted about restructuring proposal, given opportunity to apply for new senior role, and not redundant because present role still required by respondent – Respondent alternatively argued if applicant’s position deemed redundant by addition of senior role, applicant effectively redeployed to closely comparable position – Authority found respondent’s chief executive’s comments in speech at company conference not targeted specifically at applicant – Found no negative inference drawn from discussion at conference about business results in applicant’s area – Found applicant chose not to participate in opportunities for feedback and comment in restructuring – Found ten days after restructuring confirmed, applicant advised manager not happy with restructure and had consulted lawyer – Found applicant fairly consulted and provided insufficient evidence to support allegation of concerted campaign against him – Applicant claimed new role almost identical to applicant’s prior role, but elevated up with minor added accountabilities and cosmetic enhancements – Authority found areas of overlap between roles, but new role had higher level of ultimate accountability – Authority accepted respondent’s evidence that if applicant resigned, position would have to be filled – Found new position not so similar to applicant’s position or took over applicant’s position so much that should have been promoted to new position – Authority found applicant’s claim of lack of comparable position was, at very least, prematurely advanced – Found too early to say whether changes applicant suspected would occur would be so significant and unreasonable as to make applicant’s position incomparable with previous position – No personal grievance – No breach of contract - 38 years service with respondent and predecessors – Rural Market Manager
Result Applications dismissed ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Number of Pages 7
PDF File Link: aa 400_08.pdf [pdf 27 KB]