| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 171/10 |
| Hearing date | 25 Mar 2010 |
| Determination date | 14 April 2010 |
| Member | A Dumbleton |
| Representation | P Cranney ; D France |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Wallingford v Chief Executive of the Bay of Plenty Polytechnic |
| Summary | DISPUTE – Interpretation of Collective Employment Agreement (“CEA”) – Applicant claimed provisions of CEA not correctly applied so as to provide opportunity of progressing towards maximum salary – Respondent claimed applicant not entitled to further salary increases – Applicant already achieved all eight criteria stipulated in guidelines – Respondent argued each criteria could only be achieved once – Authority found imposing once-only limit on rewarding each specific criterion inconsistent with CEA – Found development of academic staff needed according to Statement of Intent – Found limiting rewards on once-only per criterion basis disincentive to ongoing development – Found applicant entitled to apply for progression more than once – Found respondent failed to apply CEA correctly in denying applicant opportunity of making successful applications for assessment on same criteria |
| Result | Questions answered in favour of applicant ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 171_10.pdf [pdf 26 KB] |