Uni forced to pay ‘F-you’ man $20,000

Waikato University has to make a $20,000 payout to a psychologist who said he wanted to finish his job there ‘‘with a big F... You’’.

The Employment Relations Authority (ERA) ruled that Dr Eric Messick was unjustifiably dismissed in 2013 from his job in the School of Psychology, where he had been employed since 2000.

On May 16, 2013, Messick emailed HR manager Carole Gunn: ‘‘I’d like to finish my employment at the University of Waikato with a big F... You. Either dismiss me by the end of today or I will come to the University tomorrow and destroy something that you have to. No more emails, phone calls, letters or EAP. Do it and I will just go in peace, leave me alone and leave my colleagues out of it. I’ve been humiliated enough.’’

Gunn replied: ‘‘The University regards this email as your intention to resign with immediate effect without notice.’’

She further advised that his IT and security access to university buildings had been cancelled and his final pay, including outstanding annual leave entitlement, would be paid into his bank account the following day.

In a decision made public on November 30 following an investigation meeting in August, ERA member Tania Tetitaha said the university had got it wrong.

‘‘In my view, a fair and reasonable employer would not have accepted the 16 May email as a resignation without notice. It would have warranted disciplinary action, but that did not occur.’’

Before he was dismissed and for some time afterward, Messick had been suffering from depression, which was connected to troubles he had been facing at work. He had been seeing a psychologist and taking medication for it – and the university was aware of this.

‘‘There is sufficient evidence to warrant an award of compensation of $20,000,’’ Tetitaha decreed.

While the threats in Messick’s missive were blameworthy, they did not contribute to causing his dismissal, the member said.

Messick had become unwell in September 2012 and tried to resign soon after. His manager, Professor Lewis Bizo, refused to accept that resignation and instead recommended Messick seek support through the university’s employee assisted programme (EAP).

Messick had three EAP sessions in late 2012 and was diagnosed with depression. When he returned to work in January, his request for further EAP sessions was refused.

That year, Messick was supervising a year-long course in which psychology students were given placements in a local school to observe students with behavioural issues. Those students were required to undergo police checks.

Messick then took 10 weeks leave, returning on April 9, 2013. Numbers on the course had swelled from seven to 19, and not all had police checks.

He experienced difficulty with his increased workload, and suggested the university employ another supervisor.

Messick said he told the students of his concerns and advised he would ‘‘refrain from any activity that can be considered supervision for the course until the situation was remedied’’.

The university requested he attend a disciplinary meeting. An HR adviser alleged he had undermined his colleagues, failed to carry out his duties competently, over-represented his position and changed course content without following the appropriate guidelines.

Messick declined to attend, saying the allegations were unfounded. The meeting was held in his absence and it was determined that he had breached the university’s code of conduct and was issued with a final written warning.

In her ruling, Tetitaha said despite having knowledge of Messick’s concerns with his situation and his state of mind, the university had accepted Messick’s alleged resignation within an hour of its receipt.

‘‘The university’s actions appear opportunistic in the circumstances,’’ she said.