Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch
Reference No [2011] NZERA Christchurch 14
Hearing date 26 Jan 2011
Determination date 31 January 2011
Member J Crichton
Representation B Gillanders ; J O'Neill
Location Dunedin
Parties Kyle v HA & FM Brittenden Partnership
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissal – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Argument occurred between applicant and one of respondent’s owners (“B”) – Applicant objected to disrespectful way another staff member spoke to her and sought support from B – B declined to take action requested by applicant and reiterated staff member should be left to B to manage – Subsequently words exchanged between applicant and B – B argued not sending applicant away but sought to make point that applicant needed to stop raising issue – B received telephone call from applicant’s partner – Subsequently applicant called B and stated could not come back to workplace and sought final holiday pay – Applicant’s counsel sought to resurrect employment relationship but respondent’s position that applicant had resigned and respondent accepted resignation – Authority found nothing to suggest respondent sought to extract resignation from applicant in lieu of dismissal – Found evidence suggested respondent sought to retain applicant’s services because applicant good at job – Found nothing to suggest breach of duty by respondent – Found B did not seek to have applicant leave workplace by intemperate remark – Found arrangements were muddled rather than evidence of serious breaches suggesting repudiation of agreement – Found no unjustified constructive dismissal – Found although both parties to take responsibility for breakdown of employment relationship, far greater share of responsibility borne by applicant – Caf� worker manager
Result Application dismissed ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Number of Pages 8
PDF File Link: 2011_NZERA_Christchurch_14.pdf [pdf 29 KB]