Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch
Reference No [2011] NZERA Christchurch 32
Hearing date 24 Jan 2011
Determination date 21 February 2011
Member J Crichton
Representation CM Simons (in person) ; F McMillan
Location Christchurch
Parties Simons v Halswell Tavern & Retail Liquor Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Sexual Harassment – Serious Misconduct – Applicant involved in incident as patron which led to dismissal – Respondent claimed applicant’s behaviour, language used and references made to fellow workers inappropriate and asked to leave premises – Parties attended meeting – Applicant claimed meeting resolved all matters and as consequence, applicant to apologise to co-worker and thereafter return to duties – Manager (“N”) claimed matter not concluded as had not received all statements from staff – N claimed became more concerned about incident following receipt of second statement from co-worker – Respondent instructed applicant not to return to work until matter resolved – Applicant entered workplace and behaved badly again – Respondent attempted to arrange meeting with applicant but received no response – Respondent advised applicant reached finding of serious misconduct as tired of waiting for applicant’s response – Applicant made sexual harassment claim against duty manager (“J”) – Investigation into sexual harassment claim against J undertaken and found no sexual harassment – Applicant dismissed – Applicant claimed investigation into sexual harassment unsatisfactory and alleged serious misconduct resolved at meeting – Authority found given no dates, times and little supporting evidence of sexual harassment, inevitable that respondent would reach conclusion J’s actions did not amount to sexual harassment – Found respondent failed to take account of applicant’s sister’s evidence – Found sexual harassment allegation historical in nature – Found respondent sought comment from female staff who claimed no inappropriate conduct occurred – No sexual harassment – Found applicant treated as any other patron when asked to leave premises following incident – Found because applicant employee appropriate for respondent to consider whether applicant’s obligations in terms of employment relationship breached – Found respondent did best to limit unpleasantness in applicant’s removal from premises – Found respondent acted reasonably in response to behaviour – Found respondent acted as fair and reasonable employer when confronted with employee who refused to promptly engage with employer and frustrated employer’s process – Found respondent did everything reasonable to get applicant to address behaviour complained of – Found applicant did not act in good faith – Found fair and reasonable employer would have concluded applicant guilty of serious misconduct when faced with uncooperative behaviour – Dismissal justified – Bartender
Main Category Personal Grievance
Number of Pages 9
PDF File Link: 2011_NZERA_Christchurch_32.pdf [pdf 35 KB]