| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 109/09 |
| Hearing date | 19 May 2009 |
| Determination date | 14 August 2009 |
| Member | P R Stapp |
| Representation | R Heperi (in person) ; R Gibson |
| Location | Napier |
| Parties | Heperi v Heinz Wattie's Ltd |
| Summary | DISPUTE – First issue, whether there was agreement to remove annualised salary clause from 2006-2008 collective agreement (“CEA”) – Second issue, whether respondent breached CEA by changing work pattern – Third issue, whether respondent consulted applicant’s union prior to changing work pattern – Applicant employed under CEA and member of union (“TIG”) – TIG and respondent agreed to vary 2004/2005 CEA to change work pattern and remove annualised salary clause from 2006/2008 CEA – TIG organisers ratified agreement by ballot on show of hands by union members – TIG advised respondent agreement ratified - Applicant sought compliance for annualised salary clause and original work pattern to be restored – Sought declaration to give effect to applicant’s proper work hours – Applicant claimed changes TIG and respondent made not valid as not properly ratified – Claimed did not agree to changes – Respondent argued entitled to rely on TIG organisers to properly ratify agreement– Argued applicant consulted before work patterns changed – Authority found validity of CEAs questionable as ratification process may not meet statutory requirements – Found respondent entitled to rely on TIG’s advice settlement ratified – Found if relevant CEA not valid, respondent would have to revert to applicant’s individual employment agreement – Found applicant suffered no loss by working new hours - Found applicant signed off and worked new work pattern – Found no evidence to support claim respondent hiding important information from applicant – Compliance order declined – Declaration declined – BREACH OF CONTRACT – Misrepresentation – Authority found applicant’s claim misconceived – Found respondent acted in good faith – Damages declined – Process Worker |
| Result | Applications dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Statutes | ERA s163;Contractual Remedies Act 1979 |
| Cases Cited | Waikato District Health Board & Ors v New Zealand Public Service Association Inc [2008] ERNZ 80 |
| Number of Pages | 12 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 109_09.pdf [pdf 48 KB] |