The Employment Relations Authority has been unable to rule in a dispute involving a group of Thai workers and the Hawkes Bay horticultural contracting company that employed them.
Eight Thai vineyard workers alleged they were unjustifiably dismissed by Havenleigh Global Services, disadvantaged by the loss of temporary workpermits and subjected to unlawful duress.
They were seeking reimbursement of lost wages totalling more than $72,000 and denied any overpayment of wages claimed by Havenleigh.
In an unusual application to the ERA, Havenleigh sought declarations from the authority after being unable to clarify details of the Thai workers' claims.
Havenleigh asked the ERA to declare that the Thai workers' allegations had no legal basis and sought a direction for the return of an overpayment of wages relating to two of the workers.
The Thai workers themselves made no initiating application to the ERA as required by Section 158 of the Employment Relations Act.
ERA member James Crichton said he had "reluctantly reached the conclusion" that the authority was unable to help the parties resolve their problem.
He said the authority lacked the jurisdiction to make the order sought by Havenleigh "and indeed is unable to offer Havenleigh any other order or decision that could properly address its concerns".
Although he sympathised with Havenleigh, Mr Crichton said he also had sympathy for the Thais and their "difficulty in understanding their rights and obligations in a foreign country ... "
Mr Crichton said he was concerned to hear about "significant sums of money" paid by Thai workers in their country to enable them to find work in New Zealand.
He directed that a copy of his determination be made available to the Secretary of Labour so the immigration division could take "whatever action it considers appropriate".
