A Canterbury vehicle inspections company has been hit with an almost $50,000 order from the Employment Relations Authority, after a worker was sacked over a dispute which arose from sudden changes to her working conditions. Photo / 123rf
The owners of a company who faced a downturn in business soon after taking it on tried to trim costs by cutting staff hours, and ordering a staff member to another site some distance away.
Now, the vehicle inspections company has been hit with an almost $50,000 order which includes compensation and backpay for the worker it sacked over the ensuing dispute.
The order included a $2000 penalty for the company’s breaches of wage laws.
Canterbury Vehicle Compliance Limited (CVC) denied liability for any of the employment relationship problems raised by Wendy Darrell, an automotive technician assistant who had worked for the previous owner before CVC took on the business in August 2024.
She was dismissed five weeks later, according to the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) decision, released last week.
The decision stated CVC operated several vehicle compliance sites in Canterbury and took over an existing business operating from a site in Wigram, Christchurch, where Darrell was already employed.
Within the first three weeks, business was lower than expected and CVC was “immediately concerned about the viability of the compliance business”, the authority said.
Shareholder and director, Florin Orlandea, discussed this with Darrell, and mentioned the possibility of redundancies or taking time off work without pay.
In the fourth week, Darrell was sent home for four hours because of the lack of work, and discovered later she had not been paid for the hours she wasn’t at work.
ERA member Peter van Keulen said the following week, CVC held a management meeting in which shareholders Florin and Mihaela Orlandea decided to reassign staff to busier sites when workloads were low, and that staff would be offered unpaid leave when there was no work.
Darrell was assigned to the Belfast site, about 20km from Wigram, to assist office staff there.
With no vehicles booked for inspection the week starting September 23, Darrell was told not to come to work, van Keulen said.
She had discussed the slowdown in work with Florin Orlandea, and that it was not unusual for the time of the year and would likely pick up.
She also explained she had work to do updating files and learning the new systems put in place.
When it was raised with Darrell that she might work at an alternative CVC site, she agreed, but expected CVC to pay her for the extra time and mileage involved in the travel.
She believed this was an entitlement in her employment agreement, the ERA said.
Darrell then received an email from Mihaela Orlandea which said the business needed to use the workforce it best saw fit until the vehicle numbers went back up.
She was told she had been assigned to the Belfast testing station for the week, and that there would be no fuel allowance because her salary would cover that.
“In case you are not prepared to adapt, we also respect that, and changes will be made accordingly,” the email said.
In response, Darrell raised a personal grievance with CVC, citing concerns that they were “demanding and threatening”, and she felt bullied by them.
She was concerned she had been asked to work at another location without consultation or chance to negotiate, that she had not been offered compensation for the additional travel and time involved in getting to the Belfast site, and that she was being threatened with redundancy, thereby creating a hostile work environment.
Darrell offered a resolution and said she would continue working at the Wigram site until her grievance was resolved.
CVC felt Darrell was being unreasonable. They said there was no work at the Wigram site and the company was not prepared to pay Darrell “to do nothing”. She could either take time off without pay, work from an alternative site or be made redundant, the ERA said.
A memorandum created by the Orlandeas on September 24, 2024, said Darrell’s assistant’s job was not required, the position was at the discretion of the management’s assessment and approval, and her “lack of required qualifications” rendered her services redundant.
They said Darrell’s choice of work site was not up to her, redundancy was misconstrued as a threat when it was a credible option, and there had been formal consultation over redundancy, including redeployment, which she did not accept, so Darrell “chose redundancy herself”.
The authority said CVC emailed Darrell on September 25, 2024, noting Darrell’s grievances and said it would consider what could be done to resolve any disagreement.
A further email said Darrell’s decision not to work at the Belfast site was a dismissal of management’s directions, and “abandonment of work”.
She was asked to describe “urgently” work she had carried out the day before and her plan for the current day, as she was “expected to generate income for the company”, the email said.
Darrell reiterated her earlier stance and that CVC could not change her terms of employment without consultation and agreement, and she had not abandoned her employment as she was at the Wigram site.
A series of email exchanges followed until the morning of September 26, 2024, when CVC dismissed Darrell by serving a notice of redundancy with immediate effect, and that no redundancy payment would be made.
Van Keulen found CVC failed to engage properly with Darrell over her personal grievance, compounded by its pursuit of the question of redundancy.
He said CVC had an opportunity to correct its failings over consultation on redundancy, but didn’t.
Later in the piece, CVC was sending “very mixed messages”, which made it difficult for Darrell to know what to do, van Keulen said.
He credited her with trying to defuse the situation, but CVC only made things worse.
The authority found overall that CVC’s actions were not those that a fair and reasonable employer could do in the circumstances, and therefore its actions, which caused disadvantage to Darrell’s employment, were unjustified and her dismissal was unjustified.
Darrell was awarded $27,000 compensation for the loss and harm caused, $15,600 in lost earnings, and $5184 in wage arrears, which included four weeks’ notice she was legally entitled to.
CVC was also ordered to pay a $2000 penalty for breaching the Wages Protection Act on six occasions, three of which were remedied.
Michaela Orlandea told NZME they were still pondering if an appeal against the decision would be of any value.
Darrell has been approached for comment via her lawyer.
Tracy Neal is a Nelson-based Open Justice reporter at NZME. She was previously RNZ’s regional reporter in Nelson-Marlborough and has covered general news, including court and local government for the Nelson Mail.