The message read "At least I got paid a lot of money to leave even though I was going to quit the next week." Photo / Getty
The message read "At least I got paid a lot of money to leave even though I was going to quit the next week." Photo / Getty
A man who Facebook messaged a former colleague telling him he "got paid a lot of money to leave" a food distribution company has been found to have breached a confidentiality agreement with his former employer.
Graeme Vivian admitted sending the message to the worker, referred to as Mr Y,as well as others in a "tirade of abusive, offensive and abhorrent comments", but said it did not breach the confidentiality clause he signed, because it did not refer to a pay out.
Instead it referred to his holiday pay and staff account credit he had been paid when he left Bidvest New Zealand Ltd in October 2014, he told the Employment Relations Authority (ERA).
The food distribution company lodged a complaint with the authority, saying Mr Vivian breached the agreement not to disclose his terms of settlement.
Four months after he left the company Mr Vivian sent a Facebook message to a former co-worker saying: "At least I got paid a lot of money to leave even though I was going to quit the next week."
In his evidence to the ERA, Mr Vivian apologised for sending the message, and said he had since deleted it and others which contained "derogatory and offensive" comments about Bidvest and the general manager of its Palmerston North branch.
The content of those messages was not disclosed in the ERA's decision, with the authority saying it was "not necessary ... to repeat them", but which Bidvest described as a "tirade of abusive, offensive and abhorrent comments".
The message, which was shown among employees, "immediately spread through the business like wildfire and has been the talking piece of many a lunch and smoko break", Bidvest told the authority.
The breach had the potential to harm the company, it said.
Mr Vivian claimed to have been under pressure since leaving Bidvest, and had been subject to ridicule and harassment during his time at the company.
The reference to "a lot of money" was about his holiday pay and staff account credit, he said. But this was dismissed by the ERA as "highly improbable", as the staff credit amounted to $49.50, and it was "clear" the money Mr Vivian bragged about was a substantial amount.
It concluded he was referring to the $4500 compensation he was paid, and found he had breached the confidentiality agreement.
The ERA ordered Mr Vivian to pay a penalty of $3000, and to comply "with immediate and ongoing effect" to the confidentiality agreement.
