Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section
Postal Workers Association v New Zealand Post Ltd
23 Jul 2007, R Arthur, AA 215/07, (13 pages)
DISPUTE – Applicant sought declaration whether respondent entitled to withhold pay from workers (“Posties”) in relation to strike – Strike comprised posties delivering some mail and “reposting” rest – Strike surprise to respondent – Parties agreed activity comprised legal strike under s81 Employment Relations Act 2000 ("ERA") – Posties notified of suspension following day, and did not return until bargaining resolved – Respondent backdated suspension to beginning of day posties undertook partial delivery – Applicant claimed posties entitled to be paid for hours worked and suspension only effective from proper service of notice – Section 87 ERA essentially unchanged for 30 years – Scheme allowing suspension inherently linear and contemplated strike, notice of suspension and no entitlement to wages happening on timeline – Suspension could not be imposed retrospectively – Disentitlement to wages applied on event of suspension rather than from event of strike – Respondent argued surprise strike action denied it proper opportunity to suspend posties – Surprise strikes legal – Employer not entitled to notice of strike – Respondent argued doctrine of abatement available – Abatement appeared inconsistent with principle underlying s85(1)(c)(i) ERA that employee cannot be sued for damages for breach of employment agreement - Abatement inconsistent with integrity of legislative provisions for suspension of employees engaged in lawful strike – If doctrine applied, part of benefit of what is otherwise immunity for striking workers from civil suit lost – Remedies – Declarations respondent not entitled to backdate suspension notices and to pay for hours worked on day – Comment on disciplinary actions open to employer when employees striking
Result: Questions answered in favour of applicant
Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section
