Employee fired over her epilepsy

Kelly Somerville worked as an administrator for a freight forwarding company, but lost her job over her epilepsy.

A Christchurch freight company employee fired over her epilepsy has been awarded more than $12,000.

Kelly Somerville had been employed as an administrator by FR8 Base Ltd, a freight forwarding company, from November 4, 2013.

She claimed before the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) that she was unjustifiably dismissed after a meeting on February 4 last year.

The company's then-director Laurence Griffith -- who later rebranded and sold the company as LDK Investments Ltd -- denied Ms Somerville was unjustifiably dismissed.

He said her epilepsy, and what she had told the company about her epilepsy when she was interviewed, justified her dismissal.

Mr Griffith also said Ms Somerville did not perform her role as well as the company expected and required.

Ms Somerville told the ERA she was not paid the two weeks' notice period she was entitled to under her individual employment agreement and also claimed she was owed lost wages and compensation.

Mr Griffin told the authority that Ms Somerville was not honest in her reply when she was asked at her interview how her epilepsy would affect her work.

He said Ms Somerville told him her seizures were usually at night and very seldom during the day. However, he claimed she had two seizures at work during the day, one in the first month and one on February 3 last year.

Mr Griffin further submitted that Ms Somerville was not up to speed on the tasks required of her after the first three months, and said he had health and safety concerns for her.

The submissions were not accepted by ERA member Christine Hickey, who found that Ms Somerville's dismissal was unjustified.

"I do not accept that Ms Somerville lied or misled LDK when she was asked at her interview how much her epilepsy could affect her work.

"Ms Somerville is simply unable to predict when her seizures might occur despite being on the appropriate type and amount of medication.

"It remains the case that the seizures are unpredictable even though Ms Somerville told Mr Griffin that she is more likely to have a seizure if she is hormonal."

Ms Somerville did not misrepresent the state of her health to the company, Ms Hickey said.

"She expressed her opinion based on her previous employment experience that her epilepsy should not interfere with her work."

Although the business was small, it was not so small that it could not have carried out an investigation into the allegations it put to Ms Somerville that her work was sub-standard and likely caused by her inadequately controlled epilepsy, Ms Hickey said.

Furthermore, there was no objective way of knowing what, if any mistakes were made by Ms Somerville in the accounts system and which were made by the other user of the system -- Mr Griffin's daughter -- as they both used the same log-in.

The way the company acted in dismissing Ms Somerville was not what a fair and reasonable employer would have done, Ms Hickey said.

She ordered the company to pay Ms Somerville $11,000 compensation for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to her feelings, and $1350 for lost and unpaid wages and holiday pay.

Ms Somerville and Mr Griffith both declined to comment on the authority's findings to NZME. News Service.