The company did not provide sufficient training before dismissing the worker three weeks after she started. Photo / 123rf
An office worker at a steam cleaning company who was sacked after just 15 days on the job has been awarded more than $30,000.
The woman could not afford to send her child to kindergarten and had to apply for more than 60 jobs after her unjustified dismissal, the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) decision said.
Auckland Steam ’N Dry director Graeme Stephens also failed to provide the correct notice period, and in fact slashed the worker’s notice period in response to her reminding him she was entitled to four weeks’ notice.
Shania Mortimer started working as an office administrator at the business on July 29, 2024, ERA member Rachel Larmer said in a decision released this month.
“She had not previously worked in an office environment and she told Mr Stephens that before she was employed ... She was not given any structured training or an induction. She was shown the computer and given some template documents to use as references, but that was it,” Larmer said.
On August 16, after 15 days of work, Stephens emailed Mortimer a letter that stated it “did not make sense to continue with the remainder of the three-month trial” and “I can offer you two weeks’ working notice in fairness if you like?”
The dismissal letter referred to discussions regarding performance issues, citing issues with customer communication, professionalism and grammar, as well as “the financial income hardship the company is experiencing”.
Mortimer told the ERA there had been no such discussions and she did not know what the letter was referring to. She said her requests to Stephens to be given more time to prove herself were declined.
When she pointed to her employment agreement and requested the four-week notice period she was entitled to, Stephens reduced the offer to one week. He then emailed her on August 19, just one working day later, informing her that would be her last day of work.
That same day, she was verbally told she could not work out her notice period because a complaint had been made against her, alleging she made an unidentified person “uncomfortable”.
She was not given a copy of the complaint, any further information or an opportunity to respond. She could not think of anything that had occurred to generate the complaint.
No evidence was provided to show she was paid for any of her notice period.
Mortimer told the ERA she immediately started applying for jobs after the dismissal, applying for more than 60 before securing contract work as a cleaner in December 2024.
She said she could not afford to send her daughter to kindergarten during that time, and had to sell her possessions to cover household expenses. She also had to ask extended family to buy items for her daughter, and could not afford to participate in family activities.
Auckland Steam ’N Dry did not engage with the ERA process beyond lodging an initial statement in reply, in which it stated Mortimer was dismissed because she was unsuitable for the role, and claiming she could not pursue a grievance because she was fired under the trial period provision in her employment agreement.
The company also asked for the claim to be “paused” as it was facing financial difficulties and Stephens was busy. The ERA said the hearing would continue as scheduled, and the company did not respond further or attend the hearing.
The ERA noted multiple failings by the company, including discrepancies between Mortimer’s payslips and the earnings reported to the IRD, no record of KiwiSaver contributions, holiday pay, or pay for her notice period, and a failure to provide Mortimer with requested employment documentation.
Larmer said the company gave Mortimer no opportunity to respond to the decision-making around her dismissal, and that it breached its duties of good faith and minimum procedural fairness.
“A fair and reasonable employer is expected to train and support a non-performing employee to the required performance standards before dismissing them, particularly if the employee had only been employed for 15 days.
“The respondent failed to provide any induction or training to Ms Mortimer, despite knowing it was her first office-based job. She was not given any feedback, constructive criticism or guidance to support her to meet the requirements of her new job.”
The company attached a text message to its statement in reply suggesting Mortimer was taking too long to train, despite the fact no training was provided and no plan put in place to address such a concern.
The ERA also found there was not a valid trial period provision in Mortimer’s employment agreement, meaning she was actually a permanent full-time employee.
Larmer awarded Mortimer $30,087.30 in costs, which included wage arrears, interest, lost remuneration, KiwiSaver contributions, holiday pay, legal costs and a $10,000 fee for distress compensation.
If the company did not pay the full amount within 28 days of the decision, Stephens was ordered to pay the amount personally.
Melissa Nightingale is a Wellington-based reporter who covers crime, justice and news in the capital. She joined the Herald in 2016 and has worked as a journalist for 12 years.