| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 258/10 |
| Hearing date | 1 Mar 2010 - 4 Mar 2010 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 28 May 2010 |
| Member | V Campbell |
| Representation | A McInally ; D Blackbourn |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Gillard v APN Print NZ Ltd |
| Summary | DISPUTE – Whether applicant entitled to “No 1 Printer” wage rate pursuant to collective employment agreement (“CEA”) – Applicant claimed entitled to “No 1 Printer” wage rate as paid at that rate for seven months – Respondent argued applicant not carrying out required duties to be entitled that rate – Argued applicant erroneously paid at that rate but error subsequently rectified – Authority found applicant’s duties did not include duties specified in CEA to be entitled to “No 1 Printer” wage rate – Respondent accepted applicant erroneously paid at that rate – Found respondent did not seek to recover overpayment and applicant did not seek reinstatement of wage rate within one year – Found applicant not entitled to be paid at “No 1 Printer” rate – Question answered in favour of respondent - UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – Applicant claimed respondent unilaterally changed work hours without consultation causing unjustified disadvantage – Respondent argued applicant aware work hours would be changed – Respondent implemented restructuring process and changed applicant’s work hours – Respondent consulted applicant’s union regarding restructure - Applicant unhappy as required to work different hours from other employees - Parties negotiated over new hours however no agreement made – Applicant required to work different hours from other employees – Authority found respondent had not met statutory or contractual obligation to consult applicant over new work hours – Found action constituted unjustified disadvantage - Respondent ordered to comply with CEA - Parties directed to mediation at applicant’s request – Printer |
| Result | Questions answered in favour of respondent ; Application granted (Disadvantage) ; Compliance ordered ; Orders made ; Parties directed to mediation ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Statutes | ERA s103A |
| Cases Cited | Air New Zealand Ltd v Barker & Ors [2002] 2 ERNZ 719;Association of Staff in Tertiary Education & Ors v Hampton, Chief Executive of the Bay of Plenty Polytechnic [2002] 1 ERNZ 491;Bilkey v Imagepac Partners, unreported, Colgan J, 7 Oct 2000, AC 65/02;McCosh v National Bank, unreported, Colgan J, 13 Sep 2004, AC 49/04;Mason v Health Waikato Ltd [1998] 1 ERNZ 84;NZ Storeworkers etc IUOW v South Pacific Tyres (NZ) Ltd [1990] 3 NZILR 452;NZ Tramways Public Transport Employees Union Inc & Others v Transportation Auckland Corporation Ltd & City Line (NZ) Ltd [2006] 1 ERNZ 1005 |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 258_10.pdf [pdf 21 KB] |