| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2011] NZERA Auckland 72 |
| Hearing date | 1 Sep 2010 - 28 Sep 2010 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 24 February 2011 |
| Member | A Dumbleton |
| Representation | M Robson; P Gallagher |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Arkompat v Thai Chilli Co Ltd |
| Summary | RAISING PERSONAL GRIEVANCE – Whether grievance raised within 90 days – Applicant claimed respondent asked for $30,000 in return for support with work permit – Applicant claimed respondent’s refusal to support application for work permit amounted to dismissal – Applicant claimed previously paid respondent $40,000 in Thailand for support in acquiring initial work permit – Respondent claimed applicant abandoned employment and never sought or received payment from applicant – Authority found no jurisdiction to deal with alleged payment – Found not all witnesses told whole truth about matter – Authority doubted some witnesses’ language difficulties – Applicant claimed delay occurred after instructing specialist immigration firm on employment matters – Found if firm thought not competent should have referred applicant to specialist practitioner – Found no reasonable explanation for delay in lodging statement of problem – Applicant claimed obvious to respondent employment would end because permit would expire and applicant unable to make payment to gain respondent’s support with work permit – Found grievance not raised within 90 days – Found letter to Associate Minister of Immigration did not raise grievance – Found letter suggested applicant terminated employment – Found respondent did not have sufficient time to respond to exceptional circumstances application – Found unjust and unreasonable to expect respondent to reply to application made so late – Found no reason for delay in raising personal grievance – Found applicant not affected by matter giving rise to grievance that unable to properly consider raising grievance – No exceptional circumstances – Leave to raise grievance out of time declined – ARREARS OF WAGES AND HOLIDAY PAY – Applicant claimed $5,520 unpaid wages and holiday pay – Respondent claimed no outstanding wages or holiday pay – Found no record of applicant working during period unpaid wages and holiday pay claimed – Found evidence in support of claim for unpaid wages and holiday pay unreliable and insufficient – No arrears owing – Chef |
| Result | Applications dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Raising PG |
| Statutes | ERA s65;ERA s114;ERA s114(1);ERA s114(2);ERA s114(3);ERA s114(4);ERA s122;ERA s144;ERA s174;ERA s130;Immigration Act 1987;Wages Protection Act 1983 |
| Cases Cited | The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections v Waitai & Ors [2010] NZEMPC 164;Mehta v Elliott (Labour Inspector) [2003] ERNZ 451 |
| Number of Pages | 14 |
| PDF File Link: | 2011_NZERA_Auckland_72.pdf [pdf 42 KB] |