Employer’s poor records lead to higher pay out…

The Employment Court recently upheld a decision made by the Employment Relations Authority to support an employee’s claim to commission from sales.

 

The employee argued he was to receive commission when his entire sales team reached a target over 50%. The employer disputed this and claimed the employee was only entitled to commission when he was reaching the 50% target himself. The employer supported this claim by arguing that the employee did not hold a supervisor role and was therefore not entitled to claim commission from the team’s sales. The ERA rejected this as a lot of the employee’s functions were to oversee the team’s sales. The employer was not able to support its position by records of sales made.

 

The other key issue for employer’s to note is the need to have an Employment Agreement updated if an employee’s role changes. In this case the dispute was around what the employee’s role actually was. Updating the role description would have avoided a lot of the arguments.

 

Alan Knowsley

Employment Lawyer Wellington

Employer unjustifiably dismisses employee for poor performance…

An office assistant has been dismissed for poor performance after making one too many mistakes at work. The employee failed to correctly package and despatch parcels to several clients and on one occasion sent the wrong watch and repair to a customer.

The Employment Relations Authority upheld the employee’s personal grievance claim for unjustified dismissal.

The ERA held that the employer failed to act as a fair and reasonable employer could have done in the circumstances by not providing the employee with a full opportunity to improve her performance.

The ERA also found that the employer had failed to put the employee on notice that her employment was in jeopardy.

The ERA ordered the employer to pay the employee three months’ lost wages and $7,500 compensation for humiliation, loss of dignity, and injury to feelings plus $1,750 towards her costs.

Alan Knowsley

Employment Lawyer Wellington

Employee awarded $14,000 compensation after being made redundant…

An employee was made redundant and given three weeks’ notice by his employer under the guise that his role within the company was no longer economical.

The Employment Relations Authority upheld the employee’s personal grievance claim for unjustified dismissal.

The ERA found that the employee had not been adequately consulted about the redundancy, and that the redundancy was not genuine. The ERA held that the employer had ulterior motives for getting rid of the employee, namely his poor performance.

The ERA awarded the employee $15,000 compensation for hurt and humiliation. The employee had been working for the employer for over 20 years and was deeply affected by his dismissal. The employee noted that his employer was absent on his last day of work and did not offer a reference, or organise a farewell function.

Compensation was reduced by $1,000 because the employee breached his good faith obligations by applying for new employment while at work.

Alan Knowsley

Employment Lawyer Wellington

Employee dismissed after forcing elderly man to make her cups of tea…

An employee working as a Community Support Worker has had her personal grievance claim for unjustified dismissal rejected by the Employment Relations Authority.

The ERA held that the employer carried out a comprehensive and fair investigation into a complaint made against her by one of her clients. The client was a frail and elderly man who alleged that the employee had abused her position by requesting cups of tea and making him do the housework while she sat on the couch.

The ERA noted that the employee had been informed of the serious nature of the matter, and that dismissal was a possibility. The employee was advised that she could bring a support person to the disciplinary meetings, and was provided with all of the relevant information.

The employer considered all of the potential options open to her but noted that the client no longer wanted the employee in his home. The employer genuinely considered the employee’s response to the possibility of her dismissal but ultimately decided that her trust and confidence in the employee had gone. This was an action that a fair and reasonable employer could take in all of the circumstances.

Alan Knowsley

Employment Lawyer Wellington