| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 213/09 |
| Hearing date | 4 Jun 2009 |
| Determination date | 14 December 2009 |
| Member | P Cheyne |
| Representation | D Clark ; M Beech, A Scott |
| Location | Blenheim |
| Parties | Hall v Transotway Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Redundancy – Respondent claimed redundancy genuine after decision made to discontinue applicant’s driving run – Applicant assigned to different runs to suit business requirements – No contractual entitlement to any particular run – Applicant diagnosed with eye problem and subsequently reassigned to different run – Respondent informed applicant of redundancy because could not continue operating run in financially viable way – Respondent argued applicant failed to provide suggestions or proposals for consideration and no redeployment options because of applicant’s back injury – Authority found applicant not given any details of extensive company wide restructuring – Found decision to cease run made before consultation – Found written communications and meetings mere formalities – Found branch manager knew run would cease when applicant reassigned to run – Found fair and reasonable employer would not have reassigned applicant to affected run and treated applicant as only person who could be dismissed – Found respondent failed to establish position superfluous to needs – Found respondent failed to properly consult with applicant about redundancy – Dismissal unjustified – REMEDIES – No contributory conduct – $8,000 compensation appropriate – $11,000 reimbursement for lost remuneration – COSTS – Applicant sought costs of $2,500 – Respondent did not make costs submission – Found sum claimed reasonable – Respondent to lodge memorandum if sought different outcome – If no submissions received respondent to pay applicant $2,500 contribution for costs – Driver |
| Result | Application granted ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($8,000) ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($11,000) ; Costs in favour of applicant ($2,500)(if memorandum not received from respondent) |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s128;ERA s128(3) |
| Cases Cited | GN Hale & Sons Ltd v Wellington etc Caretakers etc IUOW [1990] 2 NZILR 1079;Simpsons Farms Ltd v Aberhart [2006] ERNZ 825 |
| Number of Pages | 12 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 213_09.pdf [pdf 37 KB] |