| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 136/09 |
| Determination date | 25 August 2009 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | J Burke ; M Wecke |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Burke v Compass Group New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | DISPUTE – Whether applicant entitled to retiring gratuity under 2006/2007 collective employment agreement (“CEA”) – 1993/1994 CEA provided employees party to CEA prior to 1993, and had no less than ten years service with qualifying organisation, entitled to retiring gratuity – Applicant party to 1993/1994 CEA prior to 1993 and provided 10 years service from when applicant commenced employment – No CEA covering applicant’s employment from 1995-2003, however, applicant claimed was union member throughout employment – 2003/2005 CEA contained retiring gratuity clause - 2006/2007 CEA omitted clause – Respondent argued omission of clause in 2006/2007 CEA extinguished applicant’s entitlement - Authority found applicant met requirements in 1993/1994 CEA gratuity clause – Found clause did not require applicant to provide ten years service prior to 1993 - Authority accepted applicant’s evidence employed under CEA throughout entire employment period – Found omission of gratuity clause in 2006/2007 CEA did not extinguish applicant’s entitlement as clause in 2003/2005 CEA rolled over to 2006/2007 CEA – Found interest not warranted – Question answered in favour of applicant |
| Result | Question answered in favour of applicant ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70)(Filing fee) |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 136_09.pdf [pdf 18 KB] |