Process vs Substance

Those with a background in employment law will know that there is a huge fixation on process, to the degree that if you sack on the spot an employee, they will almost win damages no matter what their conduct.

A good SST article talks about how a hairdresser was sacked for lying that she had a bereavement, when she actually went to the Big Day Out, and she won $2,000.

In the most outraegous case a Nelson seaman was awarded almost $10,000 for the Employment Tribunal for being sacked after he and his colleagues

*behaved offensively to a visiting tour party at the Rutherford Hotel (which was owned by the same people who part opwned their fishing company)
*took off with the female tour leader’s bag
* indulged in some cross-dressing, with one man donning her clothing and her pearls.
* one of the men urinated in the bag
* someone also vomited in the room.
* scored a direct hit on the assistant manager of the hotel then standing outside the hotel, by urinating out of the 6th floor hotel window on to him.

Luckily for once sanity prevailed as the company appealed and the Employment Court ruled “this was an extraordinary case of atrocious conduct where the lack of procedural fairness was justifiable”.

Good to see there are law changes planned to make life harder for certain legal parasites who encourage personal grievances, no matter the merits. Both unions and employers are supporting the change.