Sales rep who wouldn't relocate not wrongly dismissed

Photo / Richard Robinson

A Jasons sales rep who would not relocate from Nelson to Auckland to save the company an estimated $10,000 was not wrongly dismissed, the Employment Relations Authority has found.

Reginald Phillips had worked as the travel media company's Pacific Islands sales representative from his home in Nelson until March this year.

The ERA heard the job required him to travel to the Pacific Islands up to seven times a year, as well as to meetings at the company's head office in Epsom.

When Jasons appointed new chief executive Kevin Francis last year, the cost of Mr Phillips working from Nelson came under scrutiny.

The company had been profitable until recently and Mr Francis began scouring the business for possible cost savings and structural changes.

He proposed relocating Mr Phillips because it would be more efficient and reduce the the likelihood of costly errors, of which there had already been two.

It would also be cheaper for Mr Phillips to travel to the Pacific from Auckland, and reduce the cost of travel to Auckland for meetings.

Mr Francis advised of the proposal in an email in January, to which Mr Phillips replied: "My personal circumstances are such that I cannot and will not relocate to Auckland."

Mr Francis said the savings would total $10,000, but Mr Phillips disputed the estimate and calculated the company would save only $1800.

At a meeting in Nelson, Mr Francis confirmed the role was being relocated to Auckland and the company would provide one month's' redundancy notice.

But after further discussions, Mr Francis decided to pause the redundancy process to give Mr Phillips a chance to put his concerns in writing.

The notice period was never put in writing, but Mr Phillips insisted notice had been given and advised he would stop working at the end of the four week notice period, on March 15.

The ERA found Mr Phillips was not dismissed, let alone unjustifiably, and he had left the company of his own volition.

It noted his "blistering, yet unsubstantiated, attacks" on the new chief executive.

"For whatever reason, Mr Phillips wanted out and said so more than once during the investigation. He saw an opportunity with a potential for financial gain ... and took it."

Costs were reserved.