Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section
Culhane and Anor v Planz College Ltd
23 Apr 2007, M Urlich, AA 117/07, (3 pages)
ARREARS OF WAGES AND HOLIDAY PAY – Applicants claimed owed arrears after made redundant – Authority set out its understanding of situation in minute - Requested respondent contact it if understanding incorrect – No response received – Arrears due and owing
Result: Application granted ; Arrears of wages ($1,540)(AC) ; ($1,300)(MY) ; Arrears of holiday pay ($2,307.69)(AC) ; ($1,730.76)(MY) : Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70)(Filing fee)
Denyer (Labour Inspector) v Alex Food Catering Ltd
23 Apr 2007, M Urlich, AA 118/07, (2 pages)
ARREARS OF WAGES AND HOLIDAY PAY - Applicant Labour Inspector sought to recover outstanding wages and holiday pay on behalf of employee - Respondent claimed employee not paid as "didn't do a good job" - Not adequately completing duties no basis for withholding payment of minimum statutory entitlements - Arrears due and owing - Interest 7%
Result: Application granted ; Arrears of wages ($293.81) ; Arrears of holiday pay ($32.23) ; Interest (7%) ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70)(Filing fee)
Nelson v Hickory Bay Ltd
12 Apr 2007, J Crichton, CA 38/07, (6 pages)
ARREARS OF WAGES AND HOLIDAY PAY – Identity of employer - IRD summary of earnings showed, with exception of brief interregnum, employed by respondent - During interregnum employed by company associated with respondent - Respondent employer for all practical purposes - Disagreement over applicable employment agreement - Parties discussed new terms and conditions and unsigned employment agreement given to applicant included substantial pay increase - Applicant's claim proposed agreement required increased entitlements to be backdated unsustainable - If applicant wanted to rely on new agreement, should have signed it - Also, not respondent's intention for term of agreement to be construed so as to entitle applicant to backdated benefits - No arrears of wages owing - Contractual term stated holidays should be taken in year fell due - Clause also said respondent could specify leave period if parties did not agree, and leave forfeited in still not taken – Second part of clause void and severable - Breached Holidays Act 1981 - Also, no evidence respondent ever specified leave period - Reliance on forfeiture provisions misconceived - Agreement also stated applicant remained responsible for operations while on leave and required to arrange for responsibilities to be met - Unreasonably limited ability to take leave - Unfair of respondent, if not for restrictive nature of clause applicant would have taken leave and not been subject to purported forfeit - Arrears of holiday pay due and owing - Farm manager
Result: Application granted in part ; Arrears of holiday pay ($5,419) ; Interest 7% ; Costs reserved
Sara v D H Bull (1988) Ltd
30 Mar 2007, P Cheyne, CA 34/07, (7 pages)
UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Constructive dismissal - Applicant claimed respondent breached apprenticeship agreement - Director originally agreed to be assessor - Later changed mind and prevented appointment of another assessor - No breach of duty - Director would not allow tutor to visit during work hours - Being difficult in response to deteriorating relationship - Breach of duty - However, not sufficiently serious to make resignation reasonably foreseeable - Director dissatisfied with applicant's work - Told him to re-evaluate position with respondent - Did not amount to ultimatum - Applicant found new position and resigned - Gave evidence would not have resigned until had other work - Led to conclusion conduct not dismissive - Applicant also claimed respondent's refusal to pay for upcoming course amounted to breach of duty - Could not claim constructive dismissal in anticipation of something that lay well in future - No constructive dismissal - UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - No disadvantage arose from preventing tutor's visits - Applicant told to repay respondent full course and manual costs before left - Respondent demanded money or car keys - Conduct angry and abusive - No doubt applicant responded similarly, but responsibility for exchange rested principally with director - Unjustified disadvantage - Remedies - Compensation reflected applicant's comparatively minor contribution to situation - ARREARS OF WAGES AND HOLIDAY PAY - Respondent retained final pay against claim for manual and course fees - Money owing under original fees agreement deducted from arrears owing - Interest 9 percent - PENALTY - Respondent failed to pay arrears even though aware of legal obligations - Circumstances warranted penalty - COSTS - Less than one day investigation meeting - Applicant sought solicitor/client costs of $4,000 - $1,500 award appropriate - Apprentice engineer
Result: Application dismissed (Dismissal) ; Application granted (Disadvantage) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($1,000) ; Arrears of wages and holiday pay (Quantum to be determined) ; Penalty ($1,000)(payable to Crown) ; Costs in favour of applicant ($1,500)
Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section
