| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 137/10 |
| Determination date | 31 August 2010 |
| Member | P R Stapp |
| Representation | S Mitchell ; G Malone |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | New Zealand Meat Workers' and Related Trades Union Inc v AFFCO New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application for removal to Employment Court (“EC”) - Applicant sought urgent removal of employment relationship problem to EC - Respondent did not oppose removal and agreed matter should be heard in EC - Parties had current collective employment agreement (“CEA”) - CEA made provision for site agreements to be negotiated - Parties disputed whether was site agreement but if was had not been put in writing - Parties in dispute in regard to terms and conditions of employment that should apply to Ovine workers from specified date - Authority satisfied important question of law likely to arise in matter other than incidentally - Found likely status and enforceability of any oral agreement applicant claimed had with respondent would become issue as respondent claimed no enforceable site agreement - Respondent claimed entitled to offer reemployment to employees based only on seniority and terms of CEA - Found was issue about whether any site agreement should be required to be in writing - Found other issues likely to arise were extent to which respondent could be required to change site agreement by variation to existing terms and enforceability of bargaining process agreement - Found another matter likely to arise was recognition of applicant and extent to which respondent could negotiate directly with Ovine workers in running plant - Authority satisfied case of such nature and urgency that in public interest be removed immediately - Found were timeframes around respondent offering work to certain employees - Found as respondent major employer in small town were wider economic and employment issues for employees and town - Authority satisfied EC’s involvement more likely to provide certainty in one hearing - Grounds for removal made out - Application granted - Matter to be removed to EC - Related employment relationship problem between parties currently before Authority put on hold until EC’s substantive judgment |
| Result | Application granted ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | ERA s159;ERA s178;ERA s178(2)(a);ERA s178(2)(b);Employment Relations Authority Regulations 2000 r8 |
| Number of Pages | 4 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 137_10.pdf [pdf 14 KB] |