| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2011] NZERA Christchurch 195 |
| Hearing date | 18 Oct 2011 |
| Determination date | 06 December 2011 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | L Herbke ; S Saunderson-Warner ; R McLeod |
| Location | Dunedin |
| Parties | South v Stab in the Dark Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissal – Applicant claimed constructively dismissed by respondent – Respondent principal (“M”) informed applicant over phone that had security footage of applicant standing in office next to tills from which money had gone missing – M claimed asked applicant for explanation as to why was near tills as did not need to be for work purposes – Applicant did not offer explanation but denied stealing money from respondent – Applicant claimed M said applicant could resign or M would take matter further – Applicant claimed believed take matter further meant M was going to refer matter to police – Applicant resigned – M claimed applicant unable to provide explanation on spot and so determined it necessary to have formal disciplinary meeting – M claimed urged applicant to think matter over before resigning – Authority found applicant erroneously concluded M would refer matter to police if did not resign – Found M entitled to contemplate formal disciplinary inquiry – Found respondent’s process in putting matter to applicant over telephone was defective – Found respondent’s process only became defective because applicant acted hastily and jumped to erroneous conclusion – Found M never sought applicant’s resignation – Found not breach of duty case – Dismissal justified – Cleaner |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs to lie where they fall |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | 2011_NZERA_Christchurch_195.pdf [pdf 34 KB] |