Employee penalised for Facebook post in breach of settlement agreement…

The Employment Relations Authority has ordered the respondent to pay a penalty after she breached her settlement agreement with a small oil and gas exploration company by posting an article on Facebook criticising the company and its management. The article remained on Facebook for approximately three months and was then republished on an international forum.

The settlement agreement contained a term prohibiting the respondent from speaking ill of the company and its managers. The respondent had received legal advice and had asserted that she understood the terms of the agreement.

The ERA noted that despite the respondent believing her statements to be true it did not provide her grounds of exemption from the settlement agreement.

The ERA emphasised the importance of settlement agreements for the resolution of employment disputes and stated that breaches of them are not to be tolerated.

The ERA ordered the respondent to pay a penalty of $2,000 to reflect their disapproval of her actions and to deter her from committing further breaches. The respondent was also ordered to reimburse the company over $500 for disbursements.

Alan Knowsley

Employee pepper-sprayed by police and then dismissed…

An employee who worked as a truck driver has had his personal grievance for unjustified dismissal upheld by the Employment Relations Authority due to the employer’s failure to follow a fair process.

The employee was stopped by police for a routine vehicle check. The employee failed to produce his log book and failed to remain stationary while the officer checked his vehicle. The employee then refused to give his details and drove away. The police pursued and pepper sprayed him after he resisted arrest.

The ERA found that the employer failed to act as a fair and reasonable employer could in the circumstances by only advising the employee of their concerns for his behaviour in general terms. The employer also failed to provide the employee with all the relevant information that was influential in their decision-making. This information was only given to the employee half way through the disciplinary meeting and no opportunity was given to him to consider or obtain advice before giving his response. The ERA stated that this information should have been included in the letter informing the employee of disciplinary proceedings.

The ERA awarded $5,000 compensation for hurt and humiliation but reduced this amount by 80 per cent for the employee’s own contribution to his dismissal.

Alan Knowsley

Employee disadvantaged by allegations of bullying…

An employee who worked as a Fire Risk Management Officer has had her personal grievance for disadvantage upheld by the Employment Relations Authority.

The employee was disadvantaged in her employment after she received an oral warning following an investigation into allegations that she had bullied a colleague.

The ERA held that the employer did not conduct a full and fair investigation into the matter as he had failed to address whether the employee’s behaviour was repetitive, and whether it had had a detrimental effect on the colleague’s wellbeing. Consequently, the ERA ordered that the warning and all references to it be removed from the employees file.

The ERA found that because the warning was unsubstantiated it had disadvantaged the employee in her employment by causing her application for a job transfer to be overlooked. It had also placed her one step closer to dismissal, and was inconsistent with other warnings issued in the past.

The ERA rejected the employee’s claim that her employer had breached the terms of her employment by failing to provide her with a safe workplace. The ERA held that this claim could not be addressed because it was not raised within the 90 day timeframe.

The ERA awarded $7,000 compensation but deducted 25 per cent for the employee’s own contribution for failing to openly engage in the disciplinary process.

Alan Knowsley

Employer fires employee after his involvement in workplace theft…

An employee who worked as a Service Technician has had his personal grievance claim for unjustified dismissal upheld by the Employment Relations Authority.

The employee was due to attend a disciplinary meeting concerning lateness and unauthorised absence, when his friend (who was acting as his support person) stole a bar fridge which he had left outside his work premises. The employee was then dismissed for orchestrating the theft.

The ERA held that the employer failed to act as a fair and reasonable employer could in the circumstances as they failed to conduct a sufficient investigation into the events, and had already made up their mind as to the employee’s guilt before completing enquires.

The ERA awarded over $8,200 for lost wages and holiday pay, plus over $5,200 compensation for humiliation, loss of dignity, and injury to feelings.

Alan Knowsley
Employment Lawyer Wellington