| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 199/09 |
| Determination date | 14 December 2009 |
| Member | G J Wood |
| Representation | P Chemis, A Pazin ; B Manning |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | All New Zealand District Health Boards (As contained in Schedule 1) v New Zealand Resident Doctors Association Inc. |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for removal to Employment Court (“EC”) – Applicants sought removal under s178(2)(a) and s178(2)(b) Employment Relations Act 2000 (“ERA”) – Respondent opposed removal – Applicants claimed important question of law regarding what was meant in s42(2)(a) ERA by “union…or its duly authorised representative” and in particular whether respondent union’s general secretary had power to delegate signing of initiation of bargaining notices and effect of pp signature on her behalf – Applicants claimed matter of urgency that basis of bargaining be determined, particularly as could impact whether current collective employment agreement (“CEA”) continued – Claimed public interest test met as all District Health Boards involved, with 2,000 union members – Authority found important question of law about use of pp signature to initiate bargaining – Found removal in public interest, because was in parties’ interests, therefore health consumers’ interests, that bargaining issues determined quickly – Found not such urgency that would need to be removed immediately to EC – However, public interest and CEA aspects supported Authority exercising residual discretion in applicant’s favour |
| Result | Application granted ; Matter removed to Employment Court |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | ERA s42;ERA s42(2)(a);ERA s178(2)(a);ERA s178(2)(b);ERA s178(2)(d) |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 199_09.pdf [pdf 25 KB] |