| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 328/09 |
| Hearing date | 10 Jun 2009 |
| Determination date | 11 September 2009 |
| Member | J Wilson |
| Representation | L Williams ; M kamphorst |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Williams v Allphase Electrical Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Misconduct – Poor performance – Applicant claimed dishonestly allegation false and dismissal unjustified – Respondent argued applicant’s conduct constituted serious misconduct – Applicant consistently failed to attend classes and failed unit standard examinations – Respondent unsuccessfully reinforced requests for applicant to attend classes – Applicant refused to take responsibility for own actions and blamed others for misconduct – Respondent sent applicant letter advising performance unsatisfactory, disciplinary action possible and employment may be in jeopardy if found matter serious – First meeting concluded respondent needed to think about applicant’s future with company – Applicant subsequently informed respondent unable to work due to illness – Following day, respondent asked what applicant done night before – Applicant maintained was at home and then admitted re-sat exam – Applicant re-sat exam because knew failure to do so would result in dismissal – Second meeting held - Respondent claimed applicant’s explanation “ridiculous” and showed failure to accept responsibility for own actions – Applicant dismissed for dishonesty and poor performance – Authority found applicant received letter and knew respondent concerned with applicant’s performance – Found respondent failed to notify applicant second meeting was to consider applicant’s future with company – Found respondent predetermined conclusion that applicant lied before second meeting – Found fair and reasonable employer would have provided applicant with information supporting allegation and advised dismissal would result if allegation proven – Found although law did not require processes adopted by employer to be perfect, respondent’s procedural deficiencies sufficiently serious to render process unfair – Dismissal procedurally unjustified – REMEDIES – Found 75 percent contributory conduct as applicant’s failure to be open and transparent with respondent contributed to dismissal – Reimbursement of three weeks lost wages – Found $500 compensation appropriate – Electrician apprentice |
| Result | Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages (Quantum to be determined) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($500 after reduction) ; No order for costs ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70)(Filing fee) |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s103A;ERA s124 |
| Cases Cited | New Zealand Ltd v V [2009] ERNZ 185 |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 328_09.pdf [pdf 35 KB] |