Trevor Loudon's New Zeal blog has moved to

redirecting you there now

Saturday, March 24, 2007

Does National Thinks This is Acceptable?

The National Party says it will not alter Labour's Employment Relations Act, should it win the next election.

That means it is willing to allow this kind of abomination to continue. How much damage is this kind of corruption doing to our economy? How much harm is it doing to this country's work ethic and moral standards?

From this morning's Christchurch Press

An Air New Zealand employee fired after being caught spending up to a third of his working hours accessing internet sites, including dating and online chat services, was unjustifiably dismissed, the Employment Relations Authority has determined.

However, the authority awarded Brian Crisp, who worked as a cargo training co-ordinator for Air New Zealand for more than 25 years before his dismissal in 2005, just $2000 in compensation, saying his behaviour significantly contributed to his dismissal.

In its determination, released today, the authority said Air NZ management became concerned about Mr Crisp's internet usage in March 2005.

A subsequent investigation found he spent between 20 and 30 percent of his work time on the internet, with the majority of sites visited for personal use.

In February 2005, Mr Crisp spent 57 hours on the internet, with extensive visits to a dating site during work hours.

Air NZ internet policy warned against unauthorised internet usage and wasting company "time and resources".

However, the authority found Air NZ's internet usage policy was not specific enough in relation to non-business-related email or internet access.

It also said there were weaknesses in the analysis of Mr Crisp's internet access which made it impossible to be exact about the extent of Mr Crisp's access during working hours.

In light of those determinations, it said Mr Crisp's summary dismissal was not the action a "fair and reasonable" employer would have taken, and was therefore unjustified.

However, it said Mr Crisp was not entitled to a high award, and ordered Air NZ to pay him $2000 as compensation for injury to his feelings.


Blogger David Farrar said...

Actually I know a bit about this case and there is more to it than meets the eye.

The hours online quoted are not accurate, and this is partly why the case went the way it did.

If you logged into a site at 9 am, spent 30 seconds on it, but then left the browser open while you worked, and then had another look at the site at 5 pm, they have you down as having spent eight hours at that site (as it was open for eight hours).

4:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

National are juyst the midweek team for Communist Labour. Many of them are halfway to being convinced communists themselves. That's why the NFP rejects the parliamentary methods of staist junkies and faux-rightists like and the Actists, and proposes mass acts of civil disobedience to bring down the communist regime, enforce the deportation of all Islamist terrorists, and defeat the radical Maori agenda for a reurn to feudalism and cannibalism.

7:34 PM  
Blogger Trevor Loudon said...

David-I'll take your word for that. As you well know though employers are getting screwed every day by the current labour laws.

It simply isn't good enough for a pro business party like National to allow this crap to continue.


Look forward to see your rhetoric turned into action.

9:27 PM  
Anonymous James said...

In all seriousness ....what is the point of putting National in power in their current step to the Left State? Why bother?

Now putting an ACT Government in with prop up support from what backbones left in National has real appeal....;-0

2:18 AM  
Anonymous Broadstairs said...

What's the beef? The employer got away with dismissing him with no penalty. It was penalised $2000 for breaching the fairness rule in the investigation. There was no reinstatement. We would all object(even you Trevor) if we were not treated fairly in any investigation that concerned us, eg. IRD. With no reinstatement this is an example of the current Labour laws working for the employer. The employer in this case is experienced and large enough to have known better.

12:50 PM  
Blogger Trevor Loudon said...

Bradstairs-the beef is that this guy allegedly committed theft of time from his employer. The amount seems to be in doubt, but that doesn't effect the principle.

If anyone should pay compensation, it should be the time thief, not the employer.

My other beef is that employment relationships should be no business of the state (unless a contract is breached) anymore than a business, social, sexual, familial or spiritual relationship should be.

4:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well said trevor. in todays business enviroment Time can be a commodity, if people misuse it there should be a penalty. Take a box of Biro's from the boss its called theft.

6:27 PM  
Anonymous Broadstairs said...

Trevor, You seem to be confused. Employment relationships(therefore agreements) are not the business of the state, but the enforcement of them is covered by law, and the right to be treated fairly and by fair procedure is, by law, an implied condition of employment agreements, just as all other contracts and agreements are. Also with your views on employment law I would have thought you would be championing the decision as the law backed up the employer's decision to dismiss and only found the dismissal unjustifiable because of the unfair procedure employed. You would complain if you were charged and found guilty based on incomplete evidence presented by the police. If they haven't got their evidence complete you go free. This employee lost his job, even though the Authority found his dismissal unjustifiable. The National party say they won't change the labour laws because by and large they work fo the employer, as long as he is fair in his dealings

6:30 PM  
Blogger Trevor Loudon said...

Interesting Broadstairs-a question-have you been an employer in recent times?

7:04 PM  
Anonymous Broadstairs said...

Until a year ago. Now I'm retired.

8:40 PM  
Blogger Trevor Loudon said...

Well all I can say then Broadstairs is that you must have a masochistic streak, or be God and have only employed angels, because employment law is a freakin' minefield that is way biased in favour of dishonest employees.

8:59 PM  
Anonymous Broadstairs said...

Maybe I was a good employer and treated everyone fairly.

10:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Or maybe that everyone you employed was hardworking and honest.

Some employers are not so lucky.


11:47 PM  
Anonymous Broadstairs said...

That comes down to an employer's skills to employ the right people and then treating them fairly and they'll treat you the same way.

9:22 AM  
Blogger Trevor Loudon said...

Nobody's perfect broadstairs and if they were, why would we need laws at all.

The current labour legislation contains several heinous provisions

The right of unions to enter your business, whether you wish them to or not, the requirement to employ existing staff when purchasing a business and the requirement to bargain with unions being three of the many.

You think such laws are acceptable Broadstairs, that's fine.

But bear in mind that others are far more jealous of our liberty than you appear to be.

10:46 AM  
Anonymous Broadstairs said...

We've got well off the original subject but, ............there are many laws and regulations we don't like and the employment area is no different. There are hundreds and hundreds of employers who manage to work around them okay. It is only those who are not fair that are caught out, and remember, laws are enacted to right a wrong or some unfairness so everybody gets a fair go. (signing off)

6:22 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home