| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 164/10 |
| Hearing date | 29 Sep 2010 |
| Determination date | 14 October 2010 |
| Member | D Asher |
| Representation | S Mitchell ; G Malone |
| Location | Napier |
| Parties | Scott v AFFCO NZ Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Applicant claimed alterations made to work station without consultation resulted in changed procedures – Claimed changes caused back pain and health safety issues ignored by respondent – Respondent argued applicant on final warning, changes made after consultation, and applicant did not refer to back pain during disciplinary process which culminated in dismissal – Collective employment agreement (“CEA”) required three written warnings to be provided – Applicant claimed only received two warnings – Authority found fair and reasonable employer would rely on, and fully implement, contractual terms between parties, before dismissing employee – Found fair and reasonable employer would have relied on CEA requiring third particularised written warning – Found in absence of third written warning, fair and reasonable employer could not proceed to dismiss applicant – Found disagreement between parties as to reasons given by applicant for problems could be attributed to speed with which respondent investigated matter and proceeded to dismiss applicant – Dismissal unjustified – Remedies – Applicant sought reinstatement – Found respondent’s breach of contracted disciplinary steps not evidence of any impracticality other than lack of adherence to own obligations – Reinstatement ordered – Authority found while narrowly applied no evidence of contributory fault, however, broader context showed history of applicant’s bad attitude and not doing job properly – Found no compensation for humiliation etc to be awarded – Meat Processing Employee |
| Result | Application granted ; Reinstament ordered ; 100 percent contributory conduct ; No other remedies awarded ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s4(1A);ERA s103A;ERA s125;ERA s126 |
| Cases Cited | Air New Zealand Ltd v V (2009) 9 NZELC 93,209 ; 6 NZELR 582;Sky Network Television Limited v Duncan [1998] 3 ERNZ 917 |
| Number of Pages | 8 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 164_10.pdf [pdf 28 KB] |