| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 204/10 |
| Hearing date | 6 Oct 2009 |
| Determination date | 03 May 2010 |
| Member | Y S Oldfield |
| Representation | P Blair ; P Swarbrick |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Whitney & Ors v New Zealand Post Ltd |
| Summary | DISPUTE – Interpretation of Collective Employment Agreement (“CEA”) – Applicants argued rostered hours of absent employees must be specified as hours to be worked by on call employee – Respondent argued rarely called on call employees to perform specific duties of absent employees so hours may be different depending on operational requirements – Applicant claimed on call employee would otherwise be required to work extra hours and would not benefit from early release provisions without loss of pay – Respondent claimed job and finish arrangements did not apply to on call employees and such employees would be paid for hours specified at time of call out should they not be needed for all of those hours – Authority found respondent not required to specify any particular number of hours to on call worker – Found on call employees missed out on certainty of work and hours that permanent employees enjoyed – Found on call workers not entitled to rostered hours – Found on call employees worked for variable times for variable periods – Found no evidence on call workers expected to work past specified hours to deliver all mail |
| Result | Question answered in favour of respondent ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 204_10.pdf [pdf 32 KB] |