| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 146/10 |
| Hearing date | 30 Apr 2010 |
| Determination date | 15 July 2010 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | P Cranney ; N McPhail |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Chivers and 30 Ors v Foodstuffs South Island Ltd |
| Other Parties | National Distribution Union |
| Summary | DISPUTE – First issue, whether issuance of resolution proposing a strike an action which constituted a “strike” under s81 Employment Relations Act 2000 (“ERA”) – Second issue if action not a strike, whether applicant union members entitled to arrears of wages due to suspension – Applicants’ union issued resolution providing workers on day shift give up their work for last hour of their shift and afternoon workers give up first hour of their shift – Respondent believed action was a “snappie” strike - “Snappie” strikes called on random basis at behest of site delegates acting on authorisation from union – Because of belief, respondent elected to suspend applicants under s87 ERA – Respondent subsequently lifted suspension – Applicants’ union claimed suspension unlawful as did not occur during currency of strike - Applicants’ claimed start and finish times of strike action discernible by appropriate observation - Respondent argued applicants’ stop work action created stoppages indiscriminate to start and finish times – Argued could suspend as strike ongoing even if work did not stop - Authority found strike was not a “snappie”, however immaterial whether “snappie” were strikes under s81 ERA – Found applicants’ resolution to hold strike did not constitute strike as there was no “act” but rather agreement to act at later time – Found proper construction of s81 ERA excluded resolution to agree to hold strike – Found contrary to common sense if employer could treat resolution to strike as a strike itself – Found suspension outside of s87 ERA – Found applicants entitled to arrears of wages – Authority directed parties to confer on arrears of wages and penalty – Leave reserved - Questions answered in favour of applicant union members |
| Result | Questions answered in favour of applicant union members ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Statutes | ERA s81;ERA s86;ERA s87 |
| Cases Cited | Bickerstaff v Healthcare Hawkes Bay Ltd [1996] 2 ERNZ 680;Heke v Attorney-General in respect of the Department of Corrections [1998] 1 ERNZ 583;Inspector of Awards v Wilsons (NZ) Portland Cement Ltd [1986] ACJ 812;Northern etc Road Transport Drivers etc IUOW v Mobil Oil NZ Ltd [1980] ACJ 295;NZ Labourers' Union v Fletcher Challenge Ltd [1988] 1 NZLR 520;NZ Air Line Pilots Assn IUOW v Air New Zealand Ltd [1991] 1 ERNZ 1001;Sorrell v Smith [1925] AC 700 (HL) |
| Number of Pages | 8 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 146_10.pdf [pdf 29 KB] |