In October 2020, Thompson was given a final written warning after management discovered excessive use of a company fuel card.
The decision says the salesman admitted he was filling jerry cans “for emergencies”, and when he felt the fuel in the cans was getting old, he would use them to fill up his own personal car.
Later, in December, as the business was preparing for its summer closedown. Thompson told branch manager Graeme Wedlake he had made a large number of sales over December.
Thompson was reminded that sales needed to be confirmed, not just quotes which he had previously been warned for lodging as sales.
Three days later, Wedlake found Thompson had lodged sales “well above what would be expected, even for a high performer”.
Wedlake became concerned after finding many of the sales had notes to contact the buyer after the summer break. This was unusual as sales staff rarely contacted the customer after the sale was made.
Thompson’s commission on the large number of sales was paid before the closedown, but soon after Wedlake went about contacting the purchasers to see if they had actually agreed to sign on.
The exact number of sales made and cancelled cannot be reported due to a non-publication order on the basis of commercial sensitivity but percentages can.
Under consumer law, customers have five working days to change their minds on a door-to-door purchase.
On average, every five weeks around 15 per cent of Thompson’s sales were subsequently cancelled.
For the three-week period before the summer closedown, 34 per cent of his supposed sales were cancelled. Some customers said they had never signed up for what Thompson said he had sold them.
He was called into a meeting with Wedlake in early January after the manager also found some sales had unapproved discounts. One $450 sale was discounted to just $40.
Wedlake said Thompson admitted in this meeting that he was under-pricing jobs, but in the authority hearing Thompson denied this.
Wedlake found even more questionable contracts days later, and Thompson was suspended, pending an investigation and a further meeting.
At that subsequent meeting, Wedlake told Thompson he believed there was a consistent pattern of cancellations and under-pricing, and suggested Thompson had acted fraudulently in order to boost his commission.
Thompson said some were genuine cancellations, others were sales with a proviso to “return to confirm the sale”. He said he had intentionally worked hard over December, and the figures were a reflection of his work rather than dishonesty.
Considering the former warning for taking the fuel, the company concluded it had lost trust in Thompson and dismissed him. A month later, Thompson took his case to the ERA.
Thompson told the ERA that on the balance of probabilities the company could not have reasonably concluded the cancellations were a result of dishonesty because cancellations were normal.
He accepted he made some errors and was “an aggressive salesperson” but said sometimes sales fall over.
“An overall pattern emerged of jobs that were not firm sales with no real explanation given for the under-pricing of jobs, yet Mr Thompson knew permission was required to discount prices,” authority member Sarah Kennedy found.
She found it was reasonable for the company to conclude Thompson was motivated to increase his sales figures so he could make more commission.
Thompson’s application was dismissed.
