| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 89/10 |
| Hearing date | 18 Feb 2010 |
| Determination date | 26 February 2010 |
| Member | A Dumbleton |
| Representation | AC Hunt (Applicant in person) ; G Barden |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Hunt v Halls Pharmacy Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed for pregnancy – Respondent argued no dismissal occurred – Applicant agreed to complete Technician Certificate as part of employment agreement (“EA”) – Applicant failed to complete Certificate – Applicant subsequently became pregnant therefore unable to complete Certificate – Applicant advised respondent of pregnancy – Meeting held – Applicant claimed respondent dismissed applicant for pregnancy – Respondent argued applicant offered to resign and resignation accepted – Argued applicant of view that pregnancy meant unable to complete Certificate and respondent agreed with view – Parties agreed words “resignation” and “dismissal” not used at meeting – Personal grievance raised – Authority found no dismissal or resignation took place – Found employment relationship ended by mutual agreement – Found meeting’s outcome sudden and parties should have discussed intentions to reconsider matters – Found opportunity for further discussion cut short by applicant raising grievance – Found reasonable for respondent to raise Certificate issue as was relevant to EA – Found parties mutually agreed applicant’s inability to complete Certificate and continue employment due to pregnancy – Found applicant prematurely and wrongly assumed dismissal – No dismissal – No disadvantage – Pharmaceutical Technician |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | Medicines Regulations 1984 |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 89_10.pdf [pdf 22 KB] |