| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2011] NZERA Auckland 484 |
| Hearing date | 29 Jun 2011 |
| Determination date | 10 November 2011 |
| Member | D King |
| Representation | G Pollak ; C Blake |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Catton v Canam Interiors Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Constructive Dismissal – Applicant claimed respondent failed to prevent verbal abuse from respondent’s foreman (“T”) – Applicant claimed advised manager (“W”) of abuse, offered resignation but parties agreed matter would be reviewed in two weeks’ time – W claimed immediately arranged meeting after applicant made complaint and did not want applicant to resign – W denied T was aggressive and swore at applicant at meeting – W denied told applicant would just have to tolerate T’s behaviour – Applicant claimed further incident and T swore at applicant – Applicant suggested to respondent that could focus on other project and reduce hours to avoid contact with T – W claimed parties agreed applicant changing projects would not resolve matter - Applicant claimed W told applicant needed to continue with current project as did not need to communicate with T directly – Applicant claimed reported incidents repeatedly but respondent failed to take action – Respondent denied applicant reported further incidents - Applicant resigned and claimed due to regular abuse had been advised by doctor to end employment – W responded did not agree or accept applicant’s reasons but accepted applicant’s resignation – W claimed applicant resigned after unexplained absence – W claimed unsuccessfully tried to contact applicant after resignation – Applicant declined respondent’s offer applicant of new role at another site - Applicant went to workplace to collect personal property and discovered graffiti with sexual content referring to applicant – Applicant took photographs – Respondent’s managing director (“P”) claimed applicant had done graffiti himself as part of plot to extract money from respondent – P later withdrew allegations and respondent claimed graffiti done by school children – Authority found suggestion graffiti done by schoolchildren improbable as content very personal and more likely done by someone who knew applicant – P claimed had been complaints about applicant’s behaviour – Found tone of applicant’s emails to co-workers unacceptable - T acknowledged had strained relationship with applicant and claimed swore at applicant as frustrated by applicant’s disorganisation and response to asbestos concerns – Found was issue with asbestos at workplace – Found respondent did not coerce applicant to resign – Found respondent dealt with T’s behaviour very promptly – Authority accepted respondent’s evidence of what happened at meeting – Found when applicant raised concerns respondent dealt with concerns satisfactorily – No constructive dismissal - Site Manager |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Cases Cited | Auckland Electric Power Board v Auckland Provincial District Local Authorities Officers IUOW Inc [1994] 1 ERNZ 168 |
| Number of Pages | 8 |
| PDF File Link: | 2011_NZERA_Auckland_484.pdf [pdf 33 KB] |