| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2011] NZERA Christchurch 48 |
| Hearing date | 28 Mar 2011 |
| Determination date | 08 April 2011 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | B Nevell ; K Thompson |
| Location | Dunedin |
| Parties | Aberdeen v Air New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | RAISING PERSONAL GRIEVANCE – Whether grievance raised within 90 days – Applicant claimed instructed Union to raise grievance – Applicant claimed Union unreasonably failed to ensure grievance raised within 90 days – Applicant finally raised grievance 5 months after 90 day period expired - Respondent received email from another employee alleging misconduct by applicant – Applicant dismissed for serious misconduct after meetings between parties – Immediately after dismissal applicant contacted Union – Applicant claimed instructed Union to raise grievance on his behalf – Union claimed no instruction ever received and only considered whether would take applicant’s case – Applicant claimed never advised Union had not lodged grievance – Union claimed told applicant would not represent applicant and contacted legal team about confirming meeting in writing – Decision in writing received by applicant month after conversation – Authority noted written confirmation should not have taken so long – Authority not satisfied applicant prejudiced by delay as applicant knew, or ought to have known, Union was not going to represent applicant – Union’s notes of meeting with applicant did not refer to decision would not represent applicant – Applicant denied was told Union would not represent applicant – Authority noted no subsequent emails between Union and applicant after meeting – Found Union made clear in letter would not take applicant’s case – Applicant aware needed to raise grievance within 90 days but instead spent next five months looking for advocate – Found applicant did not make reasonable arrangements to raise grievance – Refusal of Union to represent applicant did not amount to unreasonable failure to raise grievance – Found ignorance of the law not an exceptional circumstance – Authority noted respondent conducted extremely thorough investigation – Found highly unlikely successful substantive grievance claim would succeed – Application to grant leave to raise grievance out of time declined - Customer Services Agent |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Raising PG |
| Statutes | ECA;ERA s114;Legal Services Act 2000 s40 |
| Cases Cited | Creedy v Commissioner of Police [2007] ERNZ 678;McCullough v AFFCO New Zealand Ltd [1998] ERNZ 367;Melville v Air New Zealand Ltd [2010] NZEMPC 87;Wilkins v Field Ltd v Fortune [1998] ERNZ 70 |
| Number of Pages | 12 |
| PDF File Link: | 2011_NZERA_Christchurch_48.pdf [pdf 37 KB] |