| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 102/10 |
| Hearing date | 19 Mar 2009 - 26 Aug 2009 (4 days) |
| Determination date | 04 March 2010 |
| Member | R Arthur |
| Representation | M Quigg, S Martin ; P Kiely |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Beavis v Teradata (NZ) Corporations Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Redundancy – Applicant alleged redundancy not genuine and former role since re-established – Applicant informed role disestablished and sales manager position established in Sydney – Position advertised as well as sales manager for New Zealand – Applicant claimed respondent recreated area leader role earlier declared redundant – Authority found respondent entitled to make redundancy decision – Applicant claimed not properly provided with information about redundancy and opportunity to comment on decision – Found adequate opportunity for applicant to comment on prospective redundancy – Found respondent met with applicant, explained proposal and arranged subsequent meeting – Found respondent provided email summary of options – Found applicant able to provide 13 page written response – Found applicant not denied access to actual decision-maker – Found applicant clearly indicated not interested in new role – Found respondent tardy in providing notes - Found no failure by respondent to constructively consider alternatives to ending employment – Found disestablishment of position genuine and redundancy fairly carried out – Dismissal justified – Area leader |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s4(1A)(c);ERA s174 |
| Cases Cited | GN Hale and Son Ltd v Wellington Caretakers IUOW (1990) ERNZ Sel Cas 843;Simpsons Farms Ltd v Aberhart [2006] ERNZ 825 |
| Number of Pages | 12 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 102_10.pdf [pdf 41 KB] |