| Restrictions | Includes non-publication order |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 87/10 |
| Hearing date | 1 Apr 2010 |
| Determination date | 09 April 2010 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | A McKenzie ; P Shaw |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | National Union of Public Employees Inc v Jackson & Anor |
| Other Parties | Richmond Fellowship New Zealand Inc |
| Summary | DISPUTE – Whether instruction to second respondent (“J”) to work new roster reasonable instruction considering terms of Collective Employment Agreement (“CEA”) – J worked according to rotating roster – J worked another job and could not work rostered shifts during particular times so work covered by casual staff – Roster changed to take into account health and safety issues and fairness to staff – J invited to attend meeting about changes to roster – J stated could not comply with new roster due to other employment – Alternative roster proposed – Alternative roster not compliant with policy – J argued instruction to work unreasonable because of work history and never been required to work particular shift now asked to work – J argued CEA did not give right to roster J for those shifts – Authority found fair process undertaken and included 10 week grace period before J required to work new roster – Found no basis to imply term that J not be rostered on particular shifts – Found respondent entitled to require J to work according to rotating roster – Whether introduction of new roster changed J’s position or entitlement to redundancy – Applicant argued position permanently changed so position redundant – Found position not permanently changed – Community Service Professional |
| Result | Questions answered in favour of respondent ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Statutes | ERA Second Schedule cl10(1) |
| Number of Pages | 11 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 87_10.pdf [pdf 37 KB] |