Reliability of claims queried

Photo/File

Sands Wanganui, an organisation set up to provide support and resources to bereaved parents and families following the death of a child, went into recess in 2012 with the shadow of an employment dispute hanging over it.

Amanda Weck-Clunie joined the organisation as a volunteer and became a committee member before being employed as events and programmes co-ordinator.

She brought a claim against Sands Wanganui for unpaid wages and also a personal grievance for unjustified disadvantage. These were heard by the Employment Relations Authority last year.

Ms Weck-Clunie claimed $14,942.15 in unpaid wages, though there was some dispute as to when her employment ended.

She stopped reporting for work in April 2012 but said she continued to work from home and submitted time sheets.

The time sheets were not produced at the employment tribunal, which was heard by ERA member Paul Stapp.

In his determination, Mr Stapp said: "Ms Weck-Clunie's late submission of time sheets, and that without proof that she did submit time sheets ... does raise a question in my mind of the reliability of the claims especially when Ms Weck-Clunie says she worked from home, and that this was without proper supervision and accountabilities for her hours and work."

He said Ms Weck-Clunie's claim for wages was against Catherine Bronnimann, co-ordinator of Sands Wanganui at the time and the person who employed Ms Weck-Clunie. He ruled that Ms Weck-Clunie was entitled to $11,114.25 in wages, of which $8401.34 had already been paid. He also offset $600 for a facilitation paid in advance and ruled that Ms Bronnimann owed Ms Weck-Clunie $2112.35, plus $66.84 in interest.

Ms Weck-Clunie had not established any unjustified disadvantage action to have a personal grievance "given her own role in the committee and as a volunteer", Mr Stapp ruled.

"Also, she has not established that the actions of the employer were to try and end her employment. I hold that she made a decision to work from home afterwards and any authority for this and submitting time sheets is unclear."

In September, the Employment Relations Authority made a determination of costs for the earlier proceedings. Ms Weck-Clunie claimed $14,137.05 in costs, while Ms Bronnimann claimed $4650.

The determination noted that Ms Weck-Clunie had been offered a total of $6600 in February 2013 to settle her claim to avoid further legal costs. Ms Bronnimann had offered $4500 and other committee and former committee members the remainder. Ms Weck-Clunie rejected the offer.

Mr Stapp referred to Ms Weck-Clunie's "overly legalistic approach" in his consideration of costs. This "approach to the employment relationship problem extending the employment relationship problem hindered any possibility of earlier and proper settlement.

"Ms Weck-Clunie sensibly should have settled to avoid further costs after February considering the full amount of the ... offer at the time. I hold it was a reasonable offer considering the risks of her claims."

He also said: "Her rejection of the offer was surprising."

No costs were awarded by the authority, with each party responsible for their own costs.

The financial accounts of Sands Wanganui were inspected by the Employment Relations Authority and financial statements concerning grant use were forwarded to the Sands national board.

Cathy Buntting, chair of Sands New Zealand, wrote in December 2012 that suggestions of fraud or dishonesty by members of the Wanganui organisation had not been proven.

Sands Wanganui provided a 24-hour on-call support service, a direct link for families and midwives to call upon when a baby or child died.

It also ran a successful children's grief workshop for children who had lost a sibling or any other family member.