| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 188/10 |
| Hearing date | 23 Sep 2010 |
| Determination date | 27 September 2010 |
| Member | P R Stapp |
| Representation | R Thompson ; no appearance |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Keene v Carod Ltd t/a CarSpa and Cafe |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - No appearance for respondent - Less than three month’s employment - Applicant given contractually required seven days notice of dismissal via text message - Applicant worked two days of notice period then informed via another text message not required to work out rest of notice period - When applicant asked for reason for dismissal told was “costs thing” and “nothing personal” - Applicant claimed dismissal unjustified and not paid notice period - Authority found no justification provided for any costs savings - Found no consultation on making costs savings and potential impact on applicant’s employment - Applicant given no opportunity to have input before dismissal decision made - Found respondent provided reasons for dismissal after event which were different to reasons given at time of dismissal - Found those matters not raised with applicant prior to dismissal to enable applicant to comment on them - Dismissal unjustified - Remedies - No contributory conduct - Respondent failed to provide wage and time records as requested - Authority accepted applicant not paid for notice period - Respondent to pay applicant for notice period - Found applicant attempted to mitigate loss - Applicant entitled to three months reimbursement of lost wages - Applicant provided evidence suffered financially and suffered loss of dignity and embarrassment of having to borrow money - $3,500 compensation appropriate - PENALTY - Found respondent deliberately and wilfully failed to provide wage time and holiday records - Found failure to pay notice breach of employment agreement - Found in absence of proper explanation respondent’s failure to pay notice was wilful and deliberate breach of obligation to pay applicant - Authority noted respondent no longer trading - Authority declined to impose penalty as applicant’s personal grievance resolved employment relationship problem - COSTS - Approximately one hour investigation meeting - Applicant legally aided but required to repay legal aid grant of $1,562 - Found although appeared likely respondent would not attend investigation meeting applicant and representative had to be prepared for respondent’s appearance - Respondent to pay applicant $1,562 contribution to costs - Caf� worker |
| Result | Application granted (Unjustified dismissal) ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($5,070) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($3,500) ; Pay in lieu of notice ($546) ; Application dismissed (Penalty) ; Costs in favour of applicant ($1,562) |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA Second Schedule cl12 |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 188_10.pdf [pdf 19 KB] |