The first case involved a meat inspector, Mr J who had been rostered on a variety of shifts for 34 years. These included night and weekend shifts, which were paid at a higher rate. The employer decided to permanently roster Mr J onto only day shifts for “operational and fiscal reasons”. Mr J was not consulted about the change in shifts, and the change meant a decrease in his earnings. Mr J was the only meat inspector whose rostered hours had been changed.
The Employment Court held that the employer was entitled to change Mr J’s hours of work as there is no guarantee that meat workers will have equal treatment with regard to the allocation of night and weekend shifts. Nevertheless, the Court found that the employer was not entitled to make such changes without consulting with Mr J. Accordingly, Mr J had been unjustifiably disadvantaged by the unilateral change to the roster and was entitled to compensation of $4,000.00 for injury to his feelings.
The second case involved a furniture remover, Mr S who had worked for a company since 2001. In 2003, Mr S had been given a new position to work outside the local area and this came with an increase in wage. After the employer received some complaints about Mr S’s performance in 2005, Mr S was demoted to his original position for two months. This meant that Mr S lost about $200 a week. Again, the employer had made this decision without consulting Mr S.
The Employment Relations Authority held that there was no basis for the unilateral change to the work schedule of Mr S. It followed that Mr S had been unjustifiably disadvantaged and that he was entitled to compensation of $5,000.00 and lost wages of $2,000.00. The damages were reduced by half because Mr S had contributed to the situation.
These cases show that whilst employers have discretion in how to roster their staff, such discretion is not absolute. If employees have been consistently working the same shifts, employers should consult with them prior to making any significant changes. Unilateral changes are contrary to the good faith in employment relationship and should be avoided.
