According to authority member Peter van Keulen, from the time Piacun first worked for Raukura as a contractor and later as a personal assistant to the chief executive in 2018, she raised concerns about the trust’s finances, organisational structure, operations generally and various management decisions and actions.
“Ms Piacun’s ongoing disclosure of her concerns created an awkward work dynamic for her,” van Keulen said.
“I have no doubt she was seen by many employees as efficient and effective at her role and a credible and commendable team player, particularly because she exposed wrongdoings as she saw them.
“But in doing this Ms Piacun also created some resentment and tension amongst other employees and probably some board members.”
Piacun gave the authority detailed accounts from contemporaneous notes of her claims against the first chief executive officer, the HR manager who was briefly acting CEO in September 2018, and a board member who was CEO from October 2018 until February 2019.
Van Keulen said he accepted Piacun’s account which was a lengthy narrative of what occurred while Raukura presented limited evidence to contradict or challenge the credibility of Piacun’s version of events.
“The first CEO was rude to Ms Piacun which included swearing at her and ridiculing her in front of others.
“He made unreasonable and unnecessary demands of her. He undermined her work to her directly and to others and behaved erratically.”
Van Keulen said the HR manager complained about Piacun to other employees, spoke about her in derogatory terms, spread rumours about her at Raukura, undermined her work generally to others and specifically to the CEO, excluded her from work meetings, and was rude in many different ways both directly to Piacun and behind her back.
The board member turned CEO “behaved sensitively” toward Piacun, made inaccurate accusations and derogatory remarks about her, unnecessarily interfered with Piacun’s work, changed work requirements without reason, was overly critical of her work, and did not support Piacun.
Van Keulen said this behaviour was bullying because it was repeated, unreasonable, directed at Piacun and led to psychological harm.
“She was undermined and lost confidence and she became anxious and stressed to the point she was unable to work and had to take time off.”
The personal grievance was raised in July 2019 and Piacun resigned in February 2020 following two investigations and mediation.
The authority member said he did not accept Raukura’s claim it did not know Piacun was being bullied until an investigation in 2019 and found Piacun told Raukura of her concerns about bullying when she:
- Confided to the first CEO about the HR manager’s behaviour;
- Confided to the board chair on numerous occasions including in meetings, text and via email referring to the behaviour as bullying and describing the effect on her;
- Explained her concerns to the independent investigator in two investigations;
- Formally raised her concerns through her lawyer.
Van Keulen found Raukura was told about the bullying so most of it was foreseeable and it did not do enough to protect Piacun from harm, failing to provide a safe workplace.
Raukura argued Piacun breached her duty of good faith by failing to engage properly after formally raising the personal grievance and it sought penalty against her but van Keulen said the delay was not deliberate, serious, sustained or intended to undermine the employment relationship and did not award a penalty.
He awarded Piacun $36,000 for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to feelings because she suffered anxiety, felt unheard, victimised, vulnerable and depressed and had become withdrawn and suicidal.
NZME has approached Ruakura and Piacun for comment.
Piacun’s advocate Allan Halse said his client was a “tremendous loss to the workforce” and the ERA finding validated her grievance.
However, he said while Piacun was grateful to the authority member for recognising she did not contribute to the situation, she was still considering whether to challenge aspects of his determination including the decision not to award lost earnings.
Natalie Akoorie is a senior reporter based in Waikato and covering crime and justice nationally. Natalie first joined the Herald in 2011 and has been a journalist in New Zealand and overseas for 28 years, more recently covering health, social issues, local government, and the regions.
