| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 129/09 |
| Hearing date | 16 Dec 2008 |
| Determination date | 21 April 2009 |
| Member | J Wilson |
| Representation | YC Ye (Applicant in person) ; S & S Shen |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Ye v Ruifa Produce Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissal – Applicant claimed constructively dismissed following series of unfair actions – Respondent claimed acted in good faith at all material times – Respondent company changed ownership – New owners advised staff of three month trial period before new offer of permanent employment given – Applicant’s work hours were 46 hours per week prior to new ownership – Applicant injured back and hours changed to 32 hours – Applicant not advised of employment terms and conditions under new ownership and no written employment agreement (“EA”) provided – Applicant claimed blamed for shortfall in till by respondent – Applicant claimed respondent approved annual leave in June but subsequently withdrew approval and required leave to be taken immediately – Applicant refused because had brought plane tickets for June - Respondent told applicant respondent had right to dictate when annual leave could be taken – Applicant required to sweep street outside business and discovered work hours reduced – Respondent claimed applicant part-time employee therefore could change hours - Applicant sought sick leave and did not return to workplace – Applicant raised personal grievance – Authority found respondent failed to carry out obligations as new employer, which cumulatively led applicant to believe employment could no longer continue – Found by requiring applicant to take annual leave immediately without consultation led applicant to believe cost of air fares had to be forfeited – Found changing applicant’s work hours without consultation led applicant to believe hostile work environment – Found applicant’s unwritten EA entitled applicant to 46 hours per week – Respondent claimed applicant’s performance poor – Found poor performance concerns should have been addressed through proper procedures - Dismissal unjustified – REMEDIES – No contributory conduct – Reimbursement of 8 weeks lost wages – Found $2,500 compensation appropriate – ARREARS OF HOLIDAY PAY – Applicant sought arrears of holiday pay and unpaid sick leave – Authority found arrears due and owing – Respondent ordered to pay sick leave and arrears – COSTS – Applicant represented self |
| Result | Applications granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($4,416) ; Compensation for humiliation ($2,500) ; Arrears of holiday pay ($353) ; Sick leave (quantum to be determined) ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70)(Filing fee) |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s124 |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 129_09.pdf [pdf 34 KB] |