| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 26/09 |
| Determination date | 09 March 2009 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | J Henning (in person) ; no appearance |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Henning (Labour Inspector) v Vizual Photomedia Ltd |
| Summary | COMPLIANCE ORDER – No appearance for respondent – In earlier determination Authority found no inherent power to simply enforce Labour Inspector’s assessment of moneys owed to employee – Application brought as compliance order not demand notice as compliance sought under both Holidays Act 2003 (“HA”) and Wages Protection Act 1983 (“WPA”) – Section 224 ERA conferred power on labour inspectorate to generate demand notices in respect of enforcement of HA and Minimum Wage Act but not WPA – Authority satisfied wages due and owing under WPA – Compliance ordered – ARREARS OF HOLIDAY PAY – Authority satisfied applicant made out arrears of holiday pay claims under ERA – PENALTY – Applicant sought penalty for breaches of WPA and HA – Authority found penalty appropriate under s13 WPA – Found respondent had ample opportunity to make payment or make arrangements with applicant but failed to do so – Found penalties also appropriate for breaches of s23 and 49 HA given respondents inordinate delay in dealing with matter appropriately |
| Result | Compliance ordered ; Arrears of wages ($996.92) ; Arrears of holiday pay ($1,435.15) ; Penalty ($1000 breach of HA) ($2000 breach of WPA) (Payable to applicant) ; Costs to lie where they fall |
| Main Category | Compliance Order |
| Statutes | ERA s224;ERA s228(1);Holidays Act 2003 s23;Holidays Act 2003 s49;Minimum Wage Act;Wages Protection Act 1983 s11;Wages Protection Act 1983 s13 |
| Number of Pages | 4 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 26_09.pdf [pdf 17 KB] |