| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | [2011] NZERA Wellington 14 |
| Hearing date | 17 Dec 2010 |
| Determination date | 31 January 2011 |
| Member | G J Wood |
| Representation | S Mitchell ; G Malone |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | New Zealand Meat Workers Union v Affco New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | DISPUTE – INJUNCTION – Following comments made and actions taken by applicant’s organiser (“M”), respondent (Affco NZ Ltd – Employer) informed applicant (NZ Meat Worker’s Union – Union) would not meet with M to discuss further issues – Applicant sought determination that respondent’s actions in refusing to meet M breached good faith obligations and required respondent meet with M – Applicant sought interim compliance order or interim injunction requiring respondent to enable M attend bargaining, other meetings, and to recognise M’s role and authority – Authority noted history of bad blood between parties but matters in dispute related to 4 month period – Parties entered into agreement for negotiation of site collective agreement – Parties agreed would recognise and respect role and authority of persons representing respective parties and would negotiate only with those representatives – Respondent alleged M’s actions either wrong or breached duties of good faith – Subsequently respondent wrote to applicant stating impossible to deal with M in good faith and would not meet with M to discuss issues – Authority outlined law in New Zealand dealing with recognition and operation of unions – Authority noted law from United States provided for apparently unconstrained rights for unions and employers to appoint own representatives, however, judgments also made where one party was found to be entitled not to accept particular representative – Authority found remedy of interim compliance order not within Authority’s jurisdiction – However, Authority had ability to issue interim injunctions – Found in effect consequences of permanent injunction could be seen as equivalent to compliance orders despite non-availability of interim compliance orders – Found not possible to determine at interim stage without tested evidence whether M breached duties of good faith to respondent – Found given applicant’s power to determine own policies, procedures, and operations, and apparent absoluteness of rules of law allowing this, applicant had arguable case – Authority found while in interim respondent mildly inconvenienced, could continue dealing with M – Found by contrast applicant would be substantially inconvenienced – Found balance of convenience with applicant – Found no evidence M had taken position inconsistent with that of applicant – Found even if M had committed alleged breaches of good faith not sure breach reached high threshold to override apparently absolute powers unions have to run own affairs – Found difficulties in concluding site agreements between parties not same as sheeting home responsibility for that to M – Authority noted no precedent known in area so views on law only tentative – Found axiomatic unions and employers hindered in respective roles if one allowed to determine actions of the other – Possible interpretation that penalties only remedies available for serious breaches or breaches intended to undermine bargaining – Found if any exceptions to rule allowing union to organise own affairs law would most likely require some significant incident that would justify taking serious step without notice, or, proven breaches of good faith, warnings, and further non-observance of duty of good faith – Found exceptions to rule had not occurred – Found overall justice of case favoured applicant – Interim injunction granted – Orders accordingly |
| Result | Application granted ; Orders accordingly |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Statutes | ERA s12;ERA s18;ERA s32;ERA s236 |
| Cases Cited | Credit Consultants Ltd v Wilson and Anor [2007] ERNZ 205;General Electric Company v National Labour Relations Board, 412 Federal Reporter, 2d 512;National Labor Relations Board v Kentucky Utilities Co 132 Federal Reporter, 2d 810;National Labour Relations Board v International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union AFLCIO 274 Federal Reporter, 2d 376;New Zealand Meat Workers and Related Trade Workers' Union v AFFCO (NZ) Ltd, unreported, WA 197/10, 13 December 2010 |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | 2011_NZERA_Wellington_14.pdf [pdf 45 KB] |