Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch
Reference No CA 109/09
Hearing date 23 Mar 2009
Determination date 21 July 2009
Member P Montgomery
Location Nelson
Parties Connew v A & P Balck
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Misconduct – Applicant claimed suspension and dismissal for false theft allegation unjustified – Respondent argued followed proper procedures – Respondent discovered fuel can and garden hose in applicant’s accommodation and believed applicant had stolen petrol – Disciplinary meeting held, applicant issued with written warning to improve attitude but theft allegation not mentioned – Respondent requested applicant resign from employment but applicant declined - Respondent instructed applicant to attend second disciplinary meeting regarding theft allegation before suspending applicant – At second meeting applicant explained can contained diesel siphoned from friend’s ute to light bon fire – Meeting closed with response from respondent to applicant’s explanation – Applicant summarily dismissed – Authority found respondent’s alleged theft investigation poor and failed to establish facts to support allegation – Found respondent should have requested independent investigator to establish facts and then carry out investigation in employment setting – Found respondent not entitled to suspend applicant under employment agreement – Disadvantage unjustified – Dismissal unjustified – REMEDIES – No contributory conduct – Reimbursement of one weeks lost wages – Found $5,000 global compensation for humiliation appropriate – ARREARS OF WAGES – Authority ordered respondent to pay applicant $115 for arrears of wages – Farmhand
Result Applications granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($576.92) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($5,000) ; Arrears of wages ($115.38) ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s103A
Number of Pages 8
PDF File Link: ca 109_09.pdf [pdf 37 KB]