| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | [2011] NZERA Wellington 36 |
| Hearing date | 3 Mar 2011 |
| Determination date | 07 March 2011 |
| Member | G J Wood |
| Representation | P McBride ; D Burton, C McGuinness |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | Ravnjak v Wellington International Airport Ltd |
| Summary | INJUNCTION – Application for interim reinstatement - Applicant had worked for respondent for over 20 years prior to summary dismissal for serious misconduct - Respondent installed covert camera in restricted area - Camera showed applicant entering area while on duty number of times – On several occasions applicant accompanied by female employee (“X”) who reported to him – Camera showed applicant and X engaged in sexual activity even though both still clothed and then going into room not covered by surveillance – Respondent carried out investigation and had several meetings with applicant - Applicant denied having sexual relationship with X - X admitted to having sexual relationship with applicant when questioned – Applicant dismissed for serious misconduct because of; significant waste of company time; accessing area not supposed to be in; acting inappropriately during work hours and on work property with direct report and; complete loss of trust and confidence in him as result - Respondent carried out significant restructuring after applicant’s dismissal with applicant’s position to be disestablished – Applicant’s duties to be spilt between lower and higher graded positions - Authority found applicant had tenably arguable case - Found were questions about reasons for dismissal and whether relationship with X specifically excluded from its scope in course of investigation process – Found applicant’s manager’s involvement at issue over alleged support of applicant and whether manager was decision maker - Found was dispute over whether applicant knew not allowed in restricted area - Found applicant partly dismissed for wasting company time yet time spent in emergency room over three months constituted significantly less than break times - Found appeared applicant not given all information entitled to before dismissal - Found failure on any of those grounds could prove dismissal unjustified and some of them could also lead to finding reinstatement would be ordered - Authority found balance of convenience favoured respondent – Found no evidence of any financial need for applicant to be granted interim reinstatement - Found substantive investigation meeting less than four weeks away - Applicant accepted interim reinstatement only sought because believed if not reinstated in interim would be locked out from permanent reinstatement because of restructuring – Authority did not accept applicant’s claim as necessarily correct - Found applicant’s claim could be dealt with by monetary remedies alone if no redeployment opportunities available – Authority found overall justice favoured respondent - Found while applicant had tenably arguable case for permanent reinstatement were number of issues in dispute that if resolved in respondent’s favour would make reinstatement impractical - Found higher graded position may be so dissimilar to current job redeployment not appropriate – Found respondent could establish applicant under duty not to engage in activity of sexual nature with subordinate while on duty at its premises – Found respondent could establish applicant misled it over denial of sexual relationship with subordinate – Found even though that not reason for dismissal managers could not expect reinstatement to senior positions if found to have misled employer in investigation – Application for interim reinstatement dismissed - Duty Manager |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Injunction |
| Cases Cited | Wellington Free Ambulance Service Inc v Adams [2010] NZEMPC 59 |
| Number of Pages | 12 |
| PDF File Link: | 2011_NZERA_Wellington_36.pdf [pdf 42 KB] |