Reserve Bank acted fairly in this case

Stuff reports:

A former Reserve Bank employee was locked out of her office building after a dispute that saw her threaten to take the bank “to the cleaners”.

Sounds bad, but isn;’t in reality.

Things went awry for the woman when she began searching for her next job in July 2023. She received a conditional offer of employment from an organisation that was subject to satisfactory reference checks.

When the organisation withdrew its offer the woman believed it was because the two referees she had nominated had made negative comments during the reference checks.

One referee was her Wellington-based team leader, the other was a colleague in the Auckland office.

The woman sent messages to both referees which they found concerning. She repeatedly told her team manager that she had “backstabbed” her.

This is a bad idea. That is not the way you raise an issue if you think reference was unfair.

The bank became concerned about the woman’s welfare and asked how she felt about finishing at the bank but remaining on full pay for the rest of her contract while she sought another job.

The woman wasn’t happy with this and posted on her work team’s group chat the next morning to claim the bank was trying constructively dismiss her.

“I don’t care anymore I will take RBNZ to the cleaners… I’m disgusted. I’m applying for legal aid and I will absolutely take RBNZ to the cleaners at the MBIE or Employment Relations Authority or even as high as the damn Employment Court,” she wrote.

Posting on a work chat channel you will take the employer to the cleaners is a bad idea.

Following that message the bank suspended the woman’s electronic access to her RBNZ email, remote working systems and buildings, and sought a meeting with her.

The woman didn’t attend the meeting. She remained on paid leave until her contract ended.

She has little to complain about – she got paid out the rest of her contract.

The bank, in reply, said the woman wasn’t suspended. It said she had agreed to a period of paid leave and subsequently refused to return to work. The bank said its decision to to disable her access to its systems was a fair and reasonable response to the messages she was sending colleagues.

Authority member Robin Arthur said the bank had behaved fairly towards the woman, by proposing she take paid leave for a “cooling off” period.

The woman’s application was declined.

A good decision.