Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No AA 242/10
Hearing date 20 Aug 2009 - 16 Mar 2010 (2 days)
Determination date 24 May 2010
Member L Robinson
Representation P Farry ; R Dykman
Location Auckland
Parties Parlane v Ron Dykman Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Applicant informed respondent was pregnant – Applicant expected to work until one month before expected delivery date when became eligible for paid parental leave – Applicant agreed with foreman that would not perform heavy lifting or chemical spraying – Respondent told applicant having difficulty finding applicant light work – Applicant claimed told by respondent to consider resigning because condition causing problems – Respondent called applicant to meeting and gave letter stating applicant redundant effective immediately – Authority found redundancy decision not subsequently withdrawn by respondent – Authority rejected respondent’s argument that discussed potential redundancy with applicant – Found applicant not dismissed because of genuine redundancy – Found applicant dismissed because respondent considered applicant inconvenient when could not perform full duties because of pregnancy – Found redundancy not genuine or carried out fairly and sensitively – Dismissal unjustified – Remedies – Found no contributory conduct – Applicant awarded $10,080 reimbursement of lost wages – Found applicant entitled to $5,703 as lost future benefit of paid parental leave – Found applicant suffered aggravated anxiety as result of respondent’s conduct – $3,500 compensation appropriate – Landscape Gardner
Result Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($10,080.00) ; Loss of future benefit ($5,703.22) (Paid parental leave) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($3,500) ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s103A;ERA s4(1A)(c);ERA s124
Number of Pages 5
PDF File Link: aa 242_10.pdf [pdf 23 KB]