Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No AA 250/10
Hearing date 26 Feb 2010
Determination date 24 May 2010
Member M Urlich
Representation M Nutsford ; J Duckworth
Location Auckland
Parties Radu v Duct Work Specialities Ltd
Summary BARGAINING - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Redundancy – Applicant claimed redundancy unjustified – Respondent argued dismissal justified as fixed term EA expired – Alternatively argued redundancy genuine – Applicant commenced employment on fixed term EA – Respondent argued EA fixed term because applicant needed training before commencing duties – Authority found reason for fixed term not genuine – Found respondent could not rely on EA’s termination date to end employment relationship – Respondent advised applicant made redundant – Found no consultation and no redundancy process implemented – Found redundancy not justified – Dismissal unjustified - Applicant claimed EA entered into under duress on grounds EA presented as “take or leave it” basis – Claimed did not have opportunity to seek independent advice – Claimed was recent immigrant therefore no knowledge of legal rights – Found applicant took EA home to discuss with family and recruitment company – Found no duress – REMEDIES – No contributory conduct – Reimbursement of three months lost wages calculated as difference between new wage rate and wage rate received at respondent – Authority declined to exercise discretion to make award above three months as no evidence employment would continue to 12 months – Found $3,000 compensation appropriate as duration of employment short – Autocad Designer
Result Application granted (Unjustified dismissal – Redundancy) ; Application dismissed (Unfair Bargaining) ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($9,550) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($3,000)(Redundancy)
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s4(1A);ERA s4(4)(c);ERA s66;ERA s66(2);ERA s66(3);ERA s66(4);ERA s66(6);ERA s68;ERA s68(2)(c);ERA s69;ERA s128(3)
PDF File Link: aa 250_10.pdf [pdf 30 KB]