Millbrook Resort has been ordered to pay $2000 in "distress compensation" by the Employment Relations Authority as a result of the dismissal of Joanne Douglas in 2008.
Ms Douglas, who was employed as the human resources (HR) co-ordinator, claimed Millbrook had unjustifiably dismissed her; it acted in a "deceptive manner" and failed to consider and offer her any other alternative position, or the usual redundancy support. The claims were denied by Millbrook.
Ms Douglas worked for the resort from June 2000 until November 2008, before her position was terminated for redundancy, as a result of the economic downturn.
Authority member Philip Cheyne said he accepted the evidence of Millbrook's general manager David Onions that during the first quarter of the 2008-09 financial year, Millbrook "felt the effects" of the worldwide economic recession, resulting in a "significant forecast reduction" in visitor numbers.
The projected fall in revenue required cost-cutting measures including staffing reductions. That led to a total of nine redundancies across several departments at the same time as Ms Douglas' redundancy.
HR manager Brian Howie, who began working at the resort in October 2008, proposed moving the payroll function from the finance department to the HR department to achieve better management control and consistency over pay rates and recruitments, which could also result in a reduction in staff numbers.
At a meeting with finance department staff on November 18, 2008 Mr Onions advised of a restructuring proposal, which included making the position of finance controller redundant and moving the payroll officer to the HR department.
Ms Douglas was not at work that day and received phone calls from two people that night apparently telling her the payroll officer was moving to the HR office and would sit at Ms Douglas' desk.
That was "the seed" of her contention Millbrook predetermined her dismissal.
The next day, Mr Howie met Ms Douglas, told her about the redundancy of the financial controller, the payroll officer's move to HR and the decision to keep the number of staff in HR at two. Ms Douglas was told her position was at risk of redundancy because she did not have payroll experience.
On November 21, Mr Onions and Mr Howie outlined the rationale for the proposed redundancy with Ms Douglas, who "declined to comment, on the basis that they had already made up their minds".
Another meeting was held on November 24, before Ms Douglas' redundancy was confirmed the next day in a letter from Mr Howie.
In the letter, he said Ms Douglas had said she felt the decision had been "predetermined" and the process was "unfair".
"I did emphasise to you ... that we were in a consultation process and that we were looking for you to comment on the proposal we have made.
"Unfortunately, you have not raised anything that has made us reconsider this proposal and therefore you will regrettably be made redundant with effect from today."
Mr Cheyne found Millbrook's dismissal of Ms Douglas was "a genuine redundancy situation"; the allegation of discrimination was unfounded; and Millbrook met its contractual and statutory obligations to consult Ms Douglas about the restructuring.
Mr Cheyne found Millbrook did fall below the standard of a fair and reasonable employer in a redundancy situation, "especially given Ms Douglas' long service", by not offering her a reference, support with searching for alternative employment; constructing a CV; and access to counselling or similar support to help with losing her job.
"I find that Millbrook's failure to attend to any of this gives rise to a personal grievance which could be categorised as either unjustified dismissal or unjustified action causing disadvantage.
"This is the only grievance established by Ms Douglas."
Claims for lost remuneration; penalties for alleged breaches of the Employment Relations Act; and an alleged breach of the employment agreement were declined.
