| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | [2011] NZERA Wellington 70 |
| Hearing date | 18 Jan 2011 |
| Determination date | 04 May 2011 |
| Member | P R Stapp |
| Representation | S Mitchell ; G Malone |
| Location | Gisborne |
| Parties | Robinson v AFFCO New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – Discrimination – Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent when employed in different position – Applicant claimed discriminated against because of union activities – Length of service 24 years – Applicant attended meeting where offered different position on lesser pay for new season – Applicant told change of position would enable applicant to attend union matters – Authority found respondent informed applicant of new position without consultation – Found applicant’s position was implied term given length of service, number of seasons employed in same role and attended induction without knowledge of change – Found no evidence of restructuring or change process – Found no broader changes for restructuring and cost savings – Found fair and reasonable employer would have consulted applicant on change for input and comment – Found fair and reasonable employer would have consulted applicant because of length of service and seniority – Found as seasonal worker, applicant had reasonable expectation of being consulted – Found change substantial – Found change not based on any considered or proper analysis of actual cost of applicant having time off for union matters – Found change based solely on anticipated time off for union matters which fair and reasonable employer would have consulted applicant and union over – Found fair and reasonable employer would have consulted union about decision to do away with skill pool because impacted applicant’s position – Found applicant’s role changed without adequate and proper consultation and paid at reduced rate – Found applicant adversely affected in relation to availability to deal with union matters – Unjustified disadvantage – Found applicant only union official affected by decision – Found no proper restructuring process followed and decision appeared to have more to do with applicant’s role in union and needing time off – Found lack of analysis of actual costs for time previously taken off – Found no pattern in respondent’s actions at other plants – Found but for applicant’s role in union, applicant would not have been moved from butcher position – Found applicant discriminated against because of role in union – REMEDIES – Applicant sought reinstatement to butcher position – Found reasonable to reinstate applicant because not at fault in decision – Found respondent failed to adequately prove reinstatement impracticable – Reinstatement ordered – Found applicant entitled to lost wages caused by respondent’s decision to employ applicant in lesser role – $3,915 reimbursement of lost wages appropriate – $5,000 compensation appropriate – Labourer/Butcher |
| Result | Application granted ; Reinstatement ordered ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($3,915.53) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($5,000) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Number of Pages | 9 |
| PDF File Link: | 2011_NZERA_Wellington_70.pdf [pdf 26 KB] |