ERA says university failed to exhaust alternatives prior to termination
An unvaccinated employee of Otago University has won over $50,000 after the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) ruled that her dismissal was unjustified.
Louisa Baillie worked as an anatomical model fabricator at the university from November 2017 until her dismissal on March 2022 due to the university's move to mandate COVID-19 vaccinations to all employees starting January 2022.
Baillie, however, argued that her dismissal was done in haste, did not consider her personal circumstances, and did not exhaust all possible options.
According to Baillie, she proposed working from home to the university's management, citing that her previous experience with it during the lock down in March 2020.
"I already have workshop space at home, so there are some tasks I can readily achieve, as was evidenced in the first lockdown late March onwards last year," she told the university's management, as quoted in the ERA's court document.
Dismissal confirmed
The university, however, decided to preliminary dismiss her in January "in light of the very small number of activities" that she can accomplish working from home.
Her dismissal was confirmed in February after they failed to find "reasonable alternatives" that will allow her employment to continue, declaring that her employment would end on March 9.
"The nature of the work makes it impractical for you to work from home in the university's view, and given the vaccine mandate is campus wide, it has not proved possible to identify a suitable alternative position," her dismissal letter said.
Baillie's submission to the ERA argued that the university failed to "meaningfully consult" her prior to issuing a preliminary decision to dismiss her and then confirming it later.
According to Baillie's counsel, the outcome was "pre-determined and the process was tainted" due to the failure to exhaust alternatives to dismissal.
ERA's decision on dismissal
The ERA ruled in favour of Baillie and confirmed that the dismissal was unjustified.
However, it ruled that there was no predetermination to end Baillie's employment, stressing that it was only a "muddled and sometimes confused process, enacted by an organisation under huge process."
According to the ERA, the university's approach to Baillie had "too many parties involved at various times and poor communication evident."
It added the university did not look at leave options, as a combination of work from home and paid leave would keep Baillie employed until the end of May 2022.
"The above, without considering further potential issues, leads to a sufficient finding that the University has failed to properly engage and discharge the statutory duty... to ensure all reasonable alternatives to termination of Ms Baillie's employment, had been exhausted," the ERA said in its decision.
"The University, despite giving assurances to Ms Baillie about prior consultation, did not fully engage with her proposal to work from home. Instead they communicated a premature and ill-informed view that this was not practical and then expected Ms Baillie to respond to a proposal to dismiss."
The university has been ordered to pay Baillie a sum of $20,000 as compensation, as well as $33,023.50 of lost remuneration.