| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2011] NZERA Auckland 429 |
| Hearing date | 12 Jul 2011 |
| Determination date | 03 October 2011 |
| Member | R Arthur |
| Representation | G Ireland ; S Fox |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Benton v New Zealand Tertiary College |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Redundancy - Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent - Respondent claimed redundancy genuine - Applicant claimed ulterior motives for redundancy - Authority found no ulterior motives - Found combination of commercial factors led to respondent to review viability of number of positions - Found respondent knew about funding cap before applicant appointed but its effect on student numbers heightened by other factors which occurred after applicant started - Found change to English language standards required of international students reduced enrolments - Found unexpected delay in approval of new postgraduate programme meant budgeted income would not actually be generated until following year - Found respondent did not provide documentary evidence on matters but applicant knew enough about them and likely effects on respondent to be able to adequately engage in consultation meetings - Found applicant's position primarily established as part of plans for postgraduate programme - Found respondent incurred costs of applicant's position without receiving anticipated revenue to fund job - Respondent asked applicant for ideas about redeployment options should position be disestablished - Found roles fairly considered but rejected for valid commercial reasons - Found respondent failed to meet standard in how it dealt with applicant's departure once applicant informed of decision - Found applicant did not chose to leave day informed of decision but agreed to suggestion - Applicant claimed phone and email access already cut off before finished - Found notice period unintentionally misrepresented at time of dismissal but rectified three months' later - Found respondent should have accurately identified notice period - Found respondent did not offer applicant job counselling or other resources which would assist in applicant's job search - Found no appropriate farewell for applicant - Found applicant left with feeling of being hurriedly bundled out of premises - Redundancy genuine - Found manner in which respondent carried out dismissed was less than fair and reasonable employer would have done - Dismissal unjustified - REMEDIES - Found applicant not entitled to reimbursement of lost wages because redundancy genuine - $5,000 compensation appropriate - Research and Scholarship Manager |
| Result | Application granted ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($5,000) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s4;ERA s4(1A);ERA s4(1A)(c) |
| Cases Cited | Aoraki Corporation Limited v McGavin [1998] ERNZ 601;Coutts Cars Ltd v Baguley [2001] ERNZ 660;Good Health Wanganui v Burberry [2002] ERNZ 668;PBO Limited v Da Cruz [2005] ERNZ 808;Simpsons Farms Limited v Aberhart [2006] ERNZ 825 |
| Number of Pages | 9 |
| PDF File Link: | 2011_NZERA_Auckland_429.pdf [pdf 41 KB] |