| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2011] NZERA Auckland 59 |
| Hearing date | 12 Nov 2010 |
| Determination date | 15 February 2011 |
| Member | V Campbell |
| Representation | P Corin (in person) ; G Service, E Moore |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Corin v Transfield Services (New Zealand) Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Applicant’s fixed term agreement with respondent extended four times due to operational demands of projects – Respondent claimed applicant left employment before last extension to fixed term agreement expired – Authority found applicant never promised permanent position but actively encouraged to apply for permanent position – Found had applicant remained in employment, employment would have ended by expiry of agreed fixed term – Applicant invited to apply for permanent position – Applicant did not want to apply for position as did not want to work solely for construction team – Applicant approached construction manager and advised too upset to continue working in light of new permanent position created – Found applicant left employment of own volition – No dismissal – UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent when issued verbal warning and through treatment received from manager – New seating plan implemented and applicant and colleague asked to move desks – Applicant failed to move desk – Following disciplinary meeting applicant issued with verbal warning – Found applicant issued with fair and reasonable instruction to move desk – Found reasonable timeframe given to allow desk to be moved – Found resulting failure led to hazard in workplace as placement of desk did not allow ease of access – Applicant claimed supported colleague (“S”) who was considered troublemaker and therefore applicant also deemed troublemaker – Respondent claimed applicant risked being “tarred with the same brush” by supporting S – Reception desk supposed to be manned at all times – Applicant and S left reception desk unmanned in order to have lunch together – Applicant and S invited to attend disciplinary meeting about matter – Applicant resigned before disciplinary meeting held – Found applicant failed to establish treated in unprofessional manner – Found applicant’s concerns support of S barrier to possible appointment to permanent position unfounded – No disadvantage |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s66;ERA s103A |
| Cases Cited | Bilkey v Imagepac Partners unreported, Colgan J, 7 Oct 2000, AC 65/02;Mason v Health Waikato [1998] ERNZ 84;McCosh v National Bank unreported, Colgan J, 13 Sept 2004, AC 49/04;NZ Storeworkers IUW v South Pacific Tyres (NZ) Ltd [1990] 3 NZILR 452;Shortland v Alexander Construction Co Ltd [2010] NZEMPC 41 |
| Number of Pages | 14 |
| PDF File Link: | 2011_NZERA_Auckland_59.pdf [pdf 46 KB] |