| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 119/10 |
| Hearing date | 3 Jun 2010 |
| Determination date | 30 June 2010 |
| Member | P R Stapp |
| Representation | B Manning ; F McMorran |
| Location | Palmerston North |
| Parties | Spernat v Mid-Central District Health Board |
| Summary | DISPUTE – Whether applicant entitled to reimbursement of training costs after employment relationship with respondent terminated under collective employment agreement (“EA”) – Applicant claimed ordinary interpretation of clause provided for reimbursement of training costs – Respondent argued word “undertaken” meant clause provided for reimbursement where person making such claim currently employed by respondent – Argued employment relationship with applicant ended therefore applicant not covered by clause – Authority found word “undertaken” meant training “undertaken” must fit within criteria specified in CEA – Found no dispute between parties training in accordance with CEA - Found employers under CEA shared benefits and burdens of trainee scheme – Found production of receipt for costs part of bargain agreed to by parties when employment relationship began – Found not reasonable to imply term claimant must currently be employed by respondent into CEA – Found such implied term would distort parties’ bargain - Found applicant entitled to reimbursement after termination of employment relationship – Question answered in favour of applicant |
| Result | Question answered in favour of applicant ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Cases Cited | Association of Staff in Tertiary Education Inc: ASTE Te Hau Takatini o Aotearoa v Hampton, Chief Executive of the Bay of Plenty Polytechnic [2002] 1 ERNZ 491;Attorney-General v New Zealand Post Primary Teachers Association [1992] 1 ERNZ 1163;BP Refinery (Westernport) Pty Ltd v Shire of Hastings (1977) 16 ALR 363;Devonport Borough Council v Robbins [1979] 1 NZLR 23;Godfrey Hirst New Zealand Ltd v National Distribution Union Inc unreported, Colgan;J, 27 October 2004, AC 62/04;NZ Air Line Pilots Assn v Bilmans Management Ltd (t/a Ansett NZ Ltd) [1991] 1 ERNZ 670 |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 119_10.pdf [pdf 25 KB] |