It was a bit of claimed “banter” and “boys' argy-bargy” that saw orderly Lionel Caffell suspended and then eventually fired from his job at Christchurch Hospital.
But what blew any chance of reinstatement to his role was that Caffell later went into the hospital drunk and threatened to burn his former boss’s house down.
After losing his job and facing financial hardship, Caffell turned to the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) in an attempt to get his job back.
A recently-released decision by the ERA detailed how a young orderly at Christchurch Hospital was asked to cover another worker’s shifts for a few weeks in the Interventional Radiology (IR) department, where Caffell was permanently based and had worked for 20 years.
While working together in that department, there were two alleged incidents between the pair, leading to complaints about Caffell and his dismissal.
The first was that he forcefully stabbed the young orderly in the chest with a pen while warning, “don’t you ever talk to my girls like that - only I can say things like that”, referring to their female colleagues.
The second was later that same day, Caffell punched and pushed him during what Caffell described as “banter”, “boys argy bargy”, and “playfighting”.
During the alleged latter incident, Caffell was said to have told the young orderly, “don’t you ever f***ing talk to me like that in front of people again”, and threatened to take him outside and beat him up.
Days later, the young orderly provided digital photos of bruises allegedly resulting from both incidents.
His complaints were investigated by Evan Calder, Caffell’s overall manager at Christchurch and Burwood Hospitals, who ultimately decided on summary dismissal.
Caffell told the ERA that Calder allegedly disliked him because of past workplace disagreements. Calder denied any personal animosity but said that Caffell could be “very confrontational”.
According to the decision, after Health NZ Te Whatu Ora (HNZ) suspended Caffell on pay, he was invited to an investigation meeting, which he attended with a union representative.
At the meeting, Caffell was shown silent security footage of the incidents.
Caffell and his union representative gave verbal feedback at the meeting, and he later provided written feedback, maintaining that the interactions were banter, that he did not intend harm, and that any punches were soft and without force.
He also questioned whether the bruising could have been caused by the pen.
Calder had identified three other employees visible in the footage and spoke with them, but what they told him – including in two written statements – was not disclosed to Caffell before his dismissal.
The witnesses’ accounts suggest they viewed the interaction as playfighting or did not see anything requiring intervention, though one mentioned events occurring behind them and another recalled laughter between the complainant and Caffell.
Caffell had no prior disciplinary history during his long tenure. Affidavits from three IR employees, including a team leader, supported his performance and described him as an effective and valued orderly, noting that efficiency in the department had declined since his dismissal.
The final decision to summarily dismiss Caffell came via a letter on October 6, 2025, stating he was in breach of his employment obligations.
After his dismissal, he attended his “leaving drinks” at a nearby bar.
Following the party, he went to the hospital and spoke to his orderly colleagues while drunk.
However, when turning to the ERA, Caffell expressed a desire to return to his job, making an application for interim reinstatement.
Caffell told the authority that when he made the comments about his former manager, he was very drunk and upset and would never say those things sober.
Authority member Antoinette Baker said in her ruling that Caffell had an arguable case that HNZ’s decision to end his employment was unjustified.
“Caffell has a serious case that he was unjustifiably dismissed with a focus on the sufficiency of the investigation and in particular the non-disclosure of what witnesses said to the investigator,” she said.
But HNZ submitted there were problems with reintegrating Caffell, given his behaviour post-dismissal which included him strongly disparaging his former manager, to others in the orderly team when drunk.
Baker found it was reasonable for HNZ to be concerned about the comments and Caffell’s behaviour.
“On balance, I am persuaded that there is more detriment to HNZ in relation to its concerns about Mr Caffell’s ongoing obligation of loyalty to his employer, particularly based on his post-dismissal conduct.”
The application for interim reinstatement was unsuccessful.
Caffell declined to comment, and an HNZ spokesperson said they could not comment on individual employment matters.
