Dairy milker awarded more than $50,000 by Employment Relations Authority after being constructively dismissed

Kimberley Price has been awarded more than $50,000 after being constructively dismissed from her milking job. Photo / John Stone

Dairly milker Kimberley Price had fallen on tough times after an outbreak of M. bovis left her without a job. But it wasn’t long until she found a new role where she was offered $70 for each milking.

However, things turned soured a year-and-a-half later when she found herself being accused of abusing animals and not being paid fairly.

Price took her employer, Pinevale Farms Limited, to the Employment Relations Authority, which has today declared she was constructively dismissed, awarding her more than $50,000.

Price began working for Pinevale in Rangiora in January 2020, “purportedly” as a casual relief milker after losing her previous job due to the outbreak.

Pinevale’s sole director, Mark Hurst, informally agreed to pay Price $70 per milking, including a “pay as you go” 8 per cent holiday entitlement. The authority ruled it more likely than not that Price was never given an employment agreement.

During the hearing, Hurst openly admitted administration and record keeping was not his strength and he left the administration of pay up to his accountant.

Hurst directed the work Price would undertake, usually via text message which the authority reviewed and deemed typically cordial. Price would usually milk the animals on her own.

Evidence around the nature of the work was disputed. Price, and her witnesses, said milking took three to four hours. Hurst and his witnesses said it would only take two to three hours.

“As Mr Hurst had no time-recording system it was impossible to resolve this dispute,” the authority ruled.

The nature of the employment was also disputed. Hurst said Price detailed her availability on a calendar left in a milking shed. Price said Hurst directed her hours of work.

Although there was no tenancy agreement, the authority heard Price stayed in accommodation on the farm. Both parties said the initial agreement required her to pay $120 per week in rent, but this was never paid for the duration of the employment. There was no evidence Hurst ever chased up the missing rent or deducted it from her pay.

Eventually, the employment relationship became more fraught. Price said she was frustrated with Hurst’s communication, failure to provide agreed time off on weekends and not being paid regularly.

Hurst said Price was a difficult employee with communication issues. He further claimed he had cause to issue warnings related to animal-welfare concerns. Price strongly denied ever harming an animal or receiving warnings.

“It was unlikely that issues were formally brought to Ms Price’s attention and the evidence from witnesses around the allegations of animal ill-treatment was unconvincing,” authority member David Beck concluded.

Price provided the authority with a recording of a call with Hurst on September 14, 2021, described by Beck in the decision as a call where the pair were “effing and blinding at each other”.

The exchange also proved that Hurst controlled the allocation of Price’s rostered days off, “which gave no credence to his suggestion that Ms Price could pick and choose the days she worked”.

Eleven days later, Price wrote a resignation letter and left it for Hurst. He initially claimed she stopped coming to work the next day, but later conceded she worked out her notice period until October 1.

The letter detailed all of Price’s concerns surrounding hours, holidays, pay and communication.

Hurst admitted he didn’t pay Price for her final week of work as she left the accommodation “untidy”. He told the authority he realised holiday pay was owed, but he had not paid any.

The authority ruled that Price was not a casual relief milker but a permanent employee.

“What reinforces this view was Mr Hurst did not engage another permanent milker and Ms Price’s work was ongoing and involved other farm tasks.”

While not an abusive employer, Beck determined Price was the subject of “ongoing breaches of a serious nature and that Mr Hurst, when made aware of them, chose to wilfully ignore”. He ruled she was constructively dismissed.

“Ms Price impressed the Authority as a proud, independent, and determined person who placed a significant emphasis in her life on the care of animals and allegations of mistreatment caused her unnecessary distress and potentially damaged her reputation.”

She was awarded $20,000 in compensation, $25,000 in unpaid wages, holiday pay of $8287 and $2160 for the nine public holidays she worked.

Price was unavailable for comment on Friday but her lawyer, Geoff Martin, told NZME she was happy with the result.

“She is very pleased her reputation has been cleared. There were allegations of animal cruelty, which blatantly did not happen. It affected her greatly.

“Incidents like this don’t help the reputation of dairy farmers. And she wished it hadn’t happened.”

Price will be seeking an order for costs.