| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 185/08 |
| Hearing date | 22 Oct 2008 - 27 Nov 2008 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 09 December 2008 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | D Goldwater ; S Biggs |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Shadbolt v Star Moving Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by manager (“R”) – Respondent argued applicant abandoned employment – Applicant claimed had difficult relationship with co-worker (“P”) and bullied by P – Applicant gave evidence that only told R about one bullying incident – R argued dealt with incident promptly by speaking to P – Authority found applicant understood allegation of bullying supported by number of instances had little force unless employer made aware of all allegations – Applicant argued called to R’s office where R alleged applicant threatened co-worker – Applicant claimed yelled at by R and R refused to disclose who applicant allegedly threatened – R argued tried to get information from applicant about allegation but applicant removed company uniform and left workplace – Applicant claimed told by R to remove company shirt and “fuck off” – Applicant claimed rang R four times but R hung up each time – In third call applicant claimed asked for job back and R replied “Get your arse back here and clean trucks” – Applicant claimed truck cleaning not part of responsibility – On fourth call applicant asked specifically if could come back as offsider and R replied “get fucking arse in or get a lawyer” – R argued cleaning trucks part of applicant’s responsibility – Authority found applicant not dismissed – Authority preferred R’s evidence that applicant abandoned employment – Found even if mistaken that no dismissal at initial meeting clear that during phone calls R reiterated applicant should return to work – No dismissal – UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – Authority found deficiencies in R’s process in conducting investigation about alleged threat to co-worker – Found applicant particularly anxious to obtain details about alleged threat – Found R would not tell applicant nature of threat and who threat directed at – Found in absence of information applicant could not be expected to respond to allegation – Disadvantage unjustified – Found if respondent had responded to applicant in clear terms, grievances would have been avoided – Remedies – Found no contributory conduct – Found unable to award lost wages as not satisfied applicant lost remuneration as result of personal grievance – Found $2,500 compensation appropriate – COSTS –Respondent to pay applicant $750 contribution to costs – Offsider |
| Result | Application dismissed (Dismissal) ; Application granted (Disadvantage) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($2,500) ; Costs in favour of applicant ($750) |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Number of Pages | 8 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 185_08.pdf [pdf 29 KB] |