| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 135/10 |
| Hearing date | 8 Apr 2010 |
| Determination date | 25 June 2010 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | G Martin ; M Jones, W Marchant |
| Location | Ashburton |
| Parties | Fulton v Canstaff Ltd & Anor |
| Other Parties | Canstaff Ashburton Ltd |
| Summary | ARREARS OF WAGES – Applicant accepted employment agreement with personnel company and given temporary assignment – Applicant claimed given less than hour notice not to attend work one day during week – Applicant not paid for day but received holiday pay as requested – Applicant stood down from another temporary assignment at short notice – Found applicant not entitled to payment when stood down – Found employment agreement provided for payment based on hours worked only – UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Applicant claimed told assignment would last 8 to 10 weeks and unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Applicant complained to respondent about incident at temporary assignment – Applicant did not attend work following day due to childcare commitments – Applicant claimed no proper investigation and replaced without given any further assignments – Authority found assignment was to last 8 weeks – Found applicant remained unclear about assignment – Found advice applicant had been replaced amounted to dismissal – Found respondent should have sought clarification from applicant about returning to assignment – Dismissal unjustified – REMEDIES – No contributory conduct – Respondent to provide independent evidence of hours during remainder of temporary assignment – Parties to attempt to reach agreement on lost wages for 6 week period deducting earnings but not benefit received – Found 8 percent to be added to final figure – Applicant claimed matter exacerbated because respondent put on WINZ documentation applicant said work unsuitable and decided not to go to work – $3,000 compensation appropriate – RECOVERY OF MONIES – Applicant sought $1,000 damages because had to sell van quickly because of financial situation – Applicant claimed received less for van than would have if had more time to sell it – No damages in terms of van as loss too remote – Potato grader |
| Result | Application granted (unjustified dismissal) ; Reimbursement of lost wages (6 weeks) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($3,000) ; Applications dismissed (Recovery of monies) (Arrears of wages) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s103A;Holidays Act 2003 |
| Cases Cited | James & Co Ltd v Hughes [1995] 2 ERNZ 432 |
| Number of Pages | 12 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 135_10.pdf [pdf 39 KB] |