| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2011] NZERA Christchurch 18 |
| Hearing date | 12 Oct 2010 |
| Determination date | 01 February 2011 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | R Gillanders ; D Hudson |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Harris v Homeplus Otago Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissal – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed as result of bullying and harassment by respondent – Respondent denied claims and argued applicant failed to follow instructions and made frequent mistakes – Issues arose after applicant sought pay out of outstanding holiday pay before annual leave – Dispute arose and applicant sought advice from labour inspector – Applicant claimed involvement of labour inspector catalyst for deterioration in respondent’s behaviour towards applicant – Applicant claimed after labour inspector’s involvement respondent became bullying, irritable, angry, and at times abusive – Respondent denied allegations and argued applicant’s work performance deteriorated and frustrated by applicant’s disobedience over cell phone and vehicle use – Applicant invited to disciplinary meeting to discuss petrol card, phone account, annual leave, and new employment contract – Most serious matter was use of fuel card for personal use during holiday – Applicant claimed needed to use card because not paid properly – Subsequently applicant given final written warning for not obeying company policy regarding petrol card, company vehicle and cell phone for work purposes only, and for not requesting annual leave – Authority noted dispute also around request for applicant to return car, cell phone, and laptop while on sick leave – Applicant told respondent would return laptop once computer technician wiped all personal information – Applicant returned laptop and claimed computer technician appeared to have removed all information from computer – Subsequently applicant resigned and raised personal grievance – Authority found nub of issue whether respondent’s conduct crossed line from inconsiderate conduct to dismissive or repudiatory conduct – Found on occasions respondent’s frustration caused inconsiderate or rude communication – Found respondent left dealing with performance concerns and other issues until matters resolved by labour inspector – Found respondent’s actions not unreasonable but could have led to increased tension and communication difficulties – Found respondent’s conduct not designed to coerce applicant to resign or crossed line from inconsiderate to dismissive or repudiatory conduct – Found respondent’s conduct did not amount to bullying – Found respondent not intending to replace applicant because sought company items be returned – No unjustified constructive dismissal – Salesperson |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | Holidays Act 2003;Minimum Wage Act 1983 |
| Cases Cited | Auckland & Gisborne Amalgamated Society of Shop Employees and Related Trades etc IUOW v Woolworths (NZ) Ltd [1985] ACJ 963 ; [1985] 2 NZLR 372 ; (1985) ERNZ Sel Cas 136;Wellington Clerical IUW v Greenwich (1983) ERNZ Sel Cas 95 |
| Number of Pages | 14 |
| PDF File Link: | 2011_NZERA_Christchurch_18.pdf [pdf 52 KB] |