Further echoes to ERA ruling

Former Whangarei District Council CEO Mark Simpson enters an Employment Relations Authority hearing in July last year which later found he had unjustifiably dismissed his PA, Jan Walters-Gleeson. Photo / File

Whangarei District Council spent more than $9000 on a legal opinion on whether it should appeal an Employment Authority ruling that found former CEO Mark Simpson had unjustifiably dismissed his personal assistant.

In August last year an Employment Relations Authority (ERA) ruling found Mr Simpson had unjustly dismissed his PA, Jan Walters-Gleeson.

The ERA ruled that Mr Simpson was not justified in sacking Mrs Walters-Gleeson in September 2013 after she signed an election nomination form for mayoral candidate Stan Semenoff. The ERA ruled she was unfairly dismissed and should be awarded more than $37,000 in lost wages and compensation.

The ERA also found Mr Simpson left himself open to bias criticism, made an untrue statement, conducted a "sham" interview and used double standards during the dismissal process. He had allowed another staff member to work for a different mayoral candidate.

Last September, the WDC revealed that its cost for responding to Mrs Walters-Gleeson's claim to the ERA came to $184,609.12. The cost of an earlier internal council review of her dismissal came to $9059, including GST.

It's not clear what action, if any, the WDC took against Mr Simpson over the ERA ruling and he is no longer employed in the almost $300,000 a year job after his contract expired at the end of last month.

However, after an Official Information Act request from the Northern Advocate, it has been revealed that the council has accrued further legal expenses over the fiasco.

"Since [September last year] there have been additional legal costs for the work done on the costs agreement ($2787.51) and for an opinion on whether the decision should be appealed ($9283.27)," the council said in response to the OIA request.

The council decided not to appeal the ERA decision to the Employment Court, which would have incurred further legal costs.

Meanwhile, it has also been revealed that the council spent $5830 on legal costs after an allegation that a WDC staff member breached the confidentiality agreement relating to the settlement agreement reached with Mrs Walters-Gleeson after the ruling.

"There has been an allegation that the settlement agreement ... was breached. This matter has been dealt with and there is no further action required by council. Council will not be detailing who the allegation was directed at or what the outcome of the matter was," it said.