Fired for bringing iPad to work

The iPad was not switched on at the time. Photo / Getty

A fast-food employee who believed she was fired after bringing her iPad to work because the owner felt "threatened" she would take photos of recipes has been awarded $4000 in lost wages and compensation.

Christina Jemmett was employed part-time at a takeaway bar in Waikari in 2014 and was praised by owner Robin Saunders as "one of his best workers".

But the relationship broke down on December 12 when there was an altercation about Ms Jemmett having her iPad out and open in the workplace.

She has since taken an unjustified dismissal case to the Employment Relations Authority (ERA), which released its findings into a series of disputes at the workplace this month.

ERA member James Crichton said Mr Saunders' objection to the iPad was "not so much that Ms Jemmett was more interested in the iPad than she was in working but rather that he thought Ms Jemmett might use the iPad for some improper purpose like photographing his recipes".

Mr Saunders said he "felt threatened by the iPad" but his reasons why were not clear, Mr Crichton said.

The iPad was not switched on at the time.

Ms Jemmett said she felt very uncomfortable after the altercation and told Mr Saunders she would not come in to work the next day - but was then told not to bother coming in for the weekend either.

She took the statement to mean she had been dismissed and did not go in to work at the weekend.

Mr Saunders later told Ms Jemmett she had not been dismissed and she returned to work - only to have another misunderstanding over leave on Boxing Day.

She called Mr Saunders multiple times throughout the day about not working but had no response, returning to work on December 27 when she was allegedly "fired on the spot".

Mr Saunders said she "badgered" him three times about her status as an employee while he was dealing with a customer, and he eventually replied that she was dismissed.

He told the ERA he had health issues and, as a result of several strokes, his short-term memory was compromised.

Ms Jemmett had never received an employment agreement at the takeaway bar.

Mr Crichton said he had "no hesitation in concluding that Ms Jemmett was unjustifiably dismissed" but that she had contributed to the circumstances around her personal grievance by asking Mr Saunders repeatedly whether she was still employed.

"However, I have to accept that given the difficulties Ms Jemmett had had in engaging with Mr Saunders, difficulties which I think can be attributed to his significant ill health, it is understandable that she would want to get her position clear."

He said the lost wages and compensation Ms Jemmett was entitled to would be challenging for Mr Saunders who "operates a very small business in a very small town".

Ms Jemmett was awarded $4000 to be paid by Mr Saunders over time.