| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 341/10 |
| Hearing date | 19 May 2010 |
| Determination date | 30 July 2010 |
| Member | R A Monaghan |
| Representation | N Falthaus ; R Harrison |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Ahmed v Spotless Services (NZ) Ltd |
| Summary | RAISING PERSONAL GRIEVANCE – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed following sexual harassment allegation which applicant denied – Respondent argued dismissal justified and grievance not raised within 90 day period – Incident where co-worker alleged applicant made inappropriate physical contact in nature of sexual assault – Subsequently applicant charged with offence regarding incident – Contemporaneously, respondent commenced disciplinary investigation and dismissal made – Applicant found not guilty of criminal charges – Principal question for Authority whether at end of disciplinary meeting, after decision to dismiss made, applicant’s advocate (“N”), said words indicating going to raise personal grievance – Respondent denied words used – However, common ground, final words were “I will be seeing you in the Authority” – Respondent’s evidence preferred – Authority found evidence did not support N’s account of what was claimed to have been said at end of disciplinary meeting – Authority noted counsel to be careful to ensure written statements of evidence were voice of witnesses and information recorded limited to recollections of witness – Found having observed applicant’s responses during investigation meeting did not accept applicant had independent knowledge or recollection of statements N says were made – Found N wrongly thought did enough to raise grievance at time – Found grievance not raised within 90 days – Authority accepted applicant upset and distressed by criminal charges brought, however, evidence provided not sufficient to meet requirements under s115(a) ERA – Found no affirmative evidence N instructed to raise personal grievance – Exceptional circumstances test not met under s115(b) ERA – Leave to raise grievance out of time declined – Orderly |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Raising PG |
| Statutes | ERA s114(1);ERA s115(a);ERA s115(b) |
| Cases Cited | Telecom New Zealand Ltd v Morgan [2004] 2 ERNZ 9 |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 341_10.pdf [pdf 31 KB] |