| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2011] NZERA Auckland 289 |
| Hearing date | 21 Feb 2011 |
| Determination date | 06 July 2011 |
| Member | D King |
| Representation | J Fairclough ; P Akbar |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Side v Refrigeration Engineering Co Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Redundancy - UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - Length of service 35 years - Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed and disadvantaged by respondent - Respondent claimed redundancy genuine - Respondent reviewed business as result of cash flow issues and downturn in business - Applicant informed by phone and email of meeting to discuss changes to business that could make applicant's position redundant - Applicant claimed interpreted email to mean that position could change - Applicant claimed told position would be made redundant at meeting - Applicant accepted not told position terminated but claimed tone and content of meeting conveyed that message - Chief Executive Officer of Realcold Group (CE") claimed applicant informed about circumstances of redundancy - Applicant informed new position created and given description - Applicant attended further meeting to provide feedback - CE explained differences between positions - Applicant did not apply for new position as required tertiary qualification which applicant did not possess - Applicant told day after meeting that current position was redundant - Applicant agreed to work out notice and signed two month fixed term employment agreement - Applicant claimed asked to train new employee over last four days of employment - Authority found positions different and only discussed general practices with new employee - Applicant claimed never given opportunity to read important report about business - Found applicant had access to report prior to position being made redundant - Found respondent's restructuring not based on report and applicant not disadvantaged - Found applicant's redundancy benefits and fixed term contract were not hallmarks of company wishing to dispense with applicant's services - Found respondent prepared to take account of employee's submissions as not all positions recommended for redundancy made redundant - Found consultation period short but applicant made no request for extension - Found applicant not dissuaded from applying for new position - Found redundancy genuine - Dismissal justified - No disadvantage - National Products Manager" |
| Result | Applications dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | 2011_NZERA_Auckland_289.pdf [pdf 18 KB] |