Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No AA 108/09
Hearing date 27 Mar 2009
Determination date 06 April 2009
Member M Urlich
Representation S Majeed (in person) ; no appearance
Location Auckland
Parties Majeed v Bentley Property Developments Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Abandonment – No appearance for respondent – Directors and shareholders of respondent were husband (“A”) and wife (“B”) - Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed without warning – Respondent claimed abandonment – Altercation occurred between applicant and A – Applicant advised B of incident, was not feeling well and wished to go home early – A “shrugged shoulders” in reply – Applicant informed B going home early and B replied “okay” – Applicant obtained advice from Department of Labour and attempted to contact A – Applicant obtained medical certificate and advised A unfit to work for three days – Meeting held to discuss incident – Respondent advised applicant kitchen closed due to renovations and to take paid leave – Applicant gave A medical certificate – Applicant received text message few days later requesting attendance at meeting concerning termination of employment – Applicant dismissed for being a “disadvantage to the business” – Authority found absence from workplace expressly authorised by respondents therefore no abandonment – Found dismissal procedurally and substantively unjustified – Dismissal unjustified – REMEDIES – No contributory conduct – Found $2,000 compensation appropriate – Reimbursement of three months lost wages – Caf� Manager
Result Application granted; Reimbursement of lost wages ($7,290) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($2,000) ; Disbursement in favour of applicant ($70)(Filing fee) ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s103A;ERA s128(2)
Number of Pages 5
PDF File Link: aa 108_09.pdf [pdf 19 KB]