Apprentice awarded nearly $30,000 after unjustified dismissal
An apprentice carpenter has been awarded nearly $30,000 after the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) declared that his dismissal from Jayu Developments Limited (JDL) as unjustified.
Ray Witana, who worked for JDL as an apprentice carpenter from January 2023, received compensation for humiliation, loss of dignity, and injury to feelings, as well as reimbursement for lost wages.
The case stems from Witana's dismissal in January 2024, when he received an email from JDL's director, Neihana Pickering, informing him that due to financial difficulties and a lack of work, his position had become "no longer viable."
Witana, 18 years old at the time of his termination, had worked for JDL for over a year, receiving positive feedback and even a pay rise. His role included responsibilities such as transporting tools and colleagues to job sites, and he had invested in a vehicle and tools for his work.
The email stated that his two-week notice period would begin immediately. The following day, however, Witana discovered that JDL was advertising for an apprentice, leading him to file a claim with the ERA for unjustified dismissal.
In his submission to the ERA, Witana expressed confusion, as he had been in close contact with Pickering the day before and was not informed of any issues with the business or his performance.
After reviewing the case, the ERA concluded that JDL had not followed proper procedures required by the Employment Relations Act 2000.
The law mandates that redundancy decisions be based on genuine commercial reasons and require clear communication with the affected employee, including providing an opportunity for the employee to respond.
"Mr Witana was entitled to have his employer put its concerns to him and to be provided a fair opportunity to respond and have any response fairly considered before the decision to terminate employment was made," the ERA said in its ruling. "The defects in the process followed were significant and resulted in Mr Witana being treated unfairly."
The ERA further emphasised that JDL had not given Witana prior notice or a fair warning that his position was at risk.
"JDL's explanation of why it advertised roles the day after giving notice to Mr Witana is unclear and if it was information relevant to the decision not to continue Mr Witana's employment, he should have been given access to that information," it said.
In light of these procedural flaws, the ERA awarded Witana $15,000 in compensation for the humiliation, loss of dignity, and emotional distress he suffered due to the unfair dismissal.
Additionally, he was entitled to $13,260 in lost wages, covering the equivalent of three months' ordinary remuneration.