Waiver in spotlight in job breach claim
and without legal advice, and that the ministry should never have given her the waiver as she was a vulnerable employee who was ‘‘very upset, anxious and under significant stress at the time’’.
In her determination, authority member Trish MacKinnon dismissed Ms Ting’s claims, finding she was not unjustifiably disadvantaged and that the ministry had not breached her employment agreement, nor its obligations of good faith.
‘‘Ms Ting fails comprehensively to meet the threshold for duress,’’ Ms MacKinnon found.
‘‘That being so, I find the ministry is entitled to rely on Ms Ting’s acknowledgement that, in not accepting reassignment, she would be deemed to have resigned her employment, and forfeited her right to tion.’’
When contacted by The Dominion Post, Ms Ting said she had been unemployed since her dismissal and was having trouble finding a new job. She would not comment on the findings.
Her lawyer, Barbara Buckett, said: ‘‘It’s a highly appealable decision. It’s wrong in law.’’
Ms Ting was on an individual contract and, although the Public Service Association was not involved, it said it was concerned about the growing use of waivers.
‘‘We would advise members that it is unlawful for employers to require their employees to sign a waiver forfeiting their contractual rights to redundancy,’’ national secretary Richard Wagstaff said.
‘‘Redundancy and terms of condition of employment are negotiated in good faith.
‘‘We are concerned about what appears to be a developing trend in which public service employers are using waivers as a tool to undermine agreed terms and conditions, particularly in restructuring situations when people are especially vulnerable.’’
redundancy
compensa-