Ruling says Feltex had right to change duties

Press, 24 September 1987, Page 34

Ruling says Feltex had right to change duties

The Arbitration Court has ruled that Feltex Woven Carpets had a right in a redundancy situation to re-allocate duties among the remainder of the work force. Judge Hom, in the judgment, said Feltex Woven Carpets, had sought a compliance order against the Woollen Workers’ Union. This would mean the union’s members would have to follow the direction of the court on whether the company had the right to direct certain employees to undertake additional duties as required. He said the problem had arisen because of redundancies at the Feltex plant in Riccarton where, because of a downturn in business, the company was re-organised and some employees were made redundant.

The remaining employees had refused to undertake the additional duties. Judge Hom said the specific clauses in the award covering the workers and lira voluntary collective agreement, supported the employers’ claim (to change work practices). He said 41 of the workers involved in the dispute about the re-allo-cation of duties had signed a new employee notice which stated the workers’ “hours and duties may be varied according to circumstances.” A strike by Woollen Workers’ Union workers at the Riccarton plant and other Feltex sites around the country over , the redundancy payments, and th& changes in duties introduced by the company, ended on Monday. \

COMPENSATION A woman who was dismissed from Peter’s Food Bar, Victoria Street, Christchurch, for .allegedly ...taking money from the company safe in August last year has been awarded $lOOO compensation; The Canterbury Hotel, Hospital, Restaurant and Related Trades Union had brought a , personal grievance action alleging the dismissal of Miss Bonny Hamilton, who was a part-time worker engaged as a cook at the food-bar from April until her dismissal on August 5. Judge Horn said Miss Hamilton had denied all knowledge of the theft of $549 from the safe, and investigation by the police failed to find sufficient evidence to charge any person.