Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No AA 60/10
Hearing date 8 Feb 2010
Determination date 11 February 2010
Member A Dumbleton
Representation D Feist ; K Nicol, S Lorimer
Location Auckland
Parties Ta'Amilo v Computer Transport Services (NZ) Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious misconduct – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed – Respondent argued applicant admitted to serious misconduct therefore dismissal justified – Respondent requested meeting to discuss applicant taking excessive breaks and smoking inside company vehicles – Respondent notified applicant if explanation unsatisfactory, termination possible – Applicant admitted to misconduct allegations – Second meeting held – Applicant confirmed admission to respondent and own representative – Respondent advised applicant’s misconduct brought respondent into disrepute – Applicant dismissed – Authority found first meeting investigative and respondent entitled to hold fact-finding meeting before disciplinary meeting – Found applicant represented at disciplinary meeting and given second opportunity to explain allegations – Found respondent justifiably concerned for reputation – Dismissal justified – ARREARS OF WAGES – Authority declined claim due to insufficient evidence – PENALTY – Applicant sought penalty for respondent unduly pressuring applicant to withdraw from union – Authority found no coercion – Found respondent emailed applicant regarding whether applicant wanted to withdraw from union – Penalty declined – Authority ordered applicant to pay respondent disbursements - Noted applicant’s representative’s unprofessional conduct and would order representative to contribute to expenses if had jurisdiction – Heavy Truck Driver
Result Applications dismissed ; Disbursements in favour of respondent ($175)(Transport costs)(Loss of time)
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s103A
Number of Pages 8
PDF File Link: aa 60_10.pdf [pdf 30 KB]