| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 6/09 |
| Hearing date | 3 Jun 2008 - 4 Jun 2008 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 21 January 2009 |
| Member | P Montgomery |
| Representation | H Evans ; S Langton |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Cotton v General Distributors Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Redundancy - Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed following refusal to transfer between stores – Applicant promoted and changed from collective employment agreement to individual employment agreement (“IEA”) – IEA provided for transfer of employees between stores when necessary – Applicant signed IEA after consideration – Respondent proposed applicant be transferred to new worksite when current store closed – Applicant claimed current and offered positions substantially different and new IEA required for transfer – Respondent claimed positions similar and current IEA covered transfers – Applicant accepted position after discussions – Applicant later withdrew acceptance and sought redundancy compensation for non-acceptance of transfer – Respondent held discussions to accommodate applicant’s preferences – In final meeting respondent advised no redundancy, transfer consistent with IEA and refusal may be viewed as rejection of IEA – Applicant did not respond to efforts made to explore further options – Mediation unsuccessful – Applicant sought sick leave - Applicant dismissed for “repudiation of employment” – Authority found respondent entitled to transfer applicant under current IEA – Found no ground for applicant to challenge legitimacy of IEA – Found positions similar however applicant entitled to withdraw because circumstances analogous to a “new applicant responding to a public advertisement” – Found respondent negotiated in good faith to accommodate applicant - Found dismissal procedurally unjustified for failure to put termination to applicant for comment – Dismissal unjustified – REMEDIES – Authority found just to provide moderate remedies rather than apportion fault due to applicant’s depression – Applicant entitled to twelve weeks remuneration comprised of $2,367 lost wages for three weeks and $1,440 for difference in salary between respondent and new employer – Found $2,000 compensation appropriate as respondent attempted to accommodate applicant and applicant persistently refused - Manager |
| Result | Application granted ; Reimbursement of wages ($3,807) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($2,000) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s103A;ERA s124;ERA s128 |
| Number of Pages | 16 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 6_09.pdf [pdf 59 KB] |