Senior constable's ordeal with workplace allegations ends in posthumous ERA victory for his family
The New Zealand Police's handling of a lengthy internal investigation unjustifiably disadvantaged a veteran officer, whose ordeal continued up to his death, the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) has determined.
The estate of a late senior constable (SC) has been awarded $25,000 in compensation, following a determination that found serious failings in how the Police handled allegations against him and managed his employment during his terminal illness.
The late officer joined the Police in 1988, serving predominantly in the Waikato District, before being promoted to SC in 2004.
In 2016, he suffered post-traumatic stress disorder after attending a fatal accident, and then was diagnosed with advanced mantle cell lymphoma. Despite his illness, he returned to work in a limited capacity as the district fleet manager.
Allegations against the officer
In July 2020, while still recovering, the officer was confronted with a series of serious allegations from his supervisor, including claims of corruption, misuse of police vehicles, and improper use of police resources.
The allegations were escalated to senior management without first being discussed with the officer, and he was stood down from duty.
Criminal investigations eventually cleared the officer of the most serious charges, but employment investigations dragged on, marred by delays, poor communication, and repeated requests for information.
The officer, already vulnerable due to his health, described feeling "crushed, worthless, and stressed," according to evidence presented to the ERA.
He died in August 2024, before his case was heard, leaving his wife and two children to continue the fight for justice.
ERA: Police actions were unjustified
In its decision, the ERA found that the Police failed in several key respects.
Firstly, the escalation of allegations without first understanding the officer's role or discussing concerns at a lower level was deemed premature.
"The escalation of the Report was premature and disadvantaged [the SC] unjustifiably. This was not the action of what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in the circumstances," the ERA said in its decision.
Secondly, the Authority criticised the Police for the delays in commencing employment investigations after criminal proceedings had concluded.
"There was a delay of almost seven months between the conclusion of Police's first criminal investigation and the start of its employment process," the decision notes, adding that the delay "affected him physically, mentally, and spiritually with respect to his mana and self-worth to both his family and to his local community," it said.
Thirdly, the Police's failure to provide the officer with a redacted copy of the report containing the allegations after the criminal investigation ended was found to have further disadvantaged him.
"Doing so would have spared [the SC] from further unnecessary stress and anxiety which only made worse his already compromised psychological and physical challenges both of which Police knew about," the authority added.
The ERA awarded $25,000 in compensation for hurt and humiliation to the late officer's estate, recognising the cumulative impact of the Police's actions.
