| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 195/09 |
| Hearing date | 9 Dec 2009 |
| Determination date | 11 December 2009 |
| Member | P R Stapp |
| Representation | E Nightingale (in person), T O'Connor ; A Price, A Osborne |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | Nightingale v BP Oil New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | DISPUTE – UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Incapacity – Applicant’s employment terminated on medical grounds – Applicant argued cleared to work 20 hours per week – Respondent claimed applicant unable to do light duties – Applicant had stroke and temporary replacement appointed while off work – Respondent obtained medical information and was aware applicant medically unfit to return to work – Authority found respondent entitled to form those views given medical information and responsibility for health and safety to applicant – Misunderstanding as to whether applicant cleared to work light duties for 20 hours per week – Applicant dismissed because medically unfit to work in all tasks required – Applicant claimed other employees given light duties when injured – Found applicant’s situation different because was long term – Found respondent acted within rights to terminate applicant’s employment – Respondent considered alternatives to assist applicant when not able to return to full time role but no options available – Employment agreement provided for termination on medical grounds – Found applicant did not have benefit to comment on decision to terminate – Found respondent failed to give applicant medical information relied upon in decision to terminate employment – Found no notice on termination – Found applicant denied access to decision maker – Found respondent not required to provide applicant with 20 hours work per week – Found applicant did not meet legal requirements of raising personal grievance – REMEDIES – Found any remedies would be minimal because unable to work – Authority unable to assess damages because personal grievance not raised – Found respondent failed to pay final entitlement of 2 weeks wages in lieu of notice – Authority suggested payment of wages otherwise wages arrears claim could be brought – Caf� team leader |
| Result | Question answered in favour of respondent ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70)(filing fee) |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Statutes | ERA s113 |
| Number of Pages | 9 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 195_09.pdf [pdf 31 KB] |