Waiariki sackings 'unjustified' | Rotorua News | Local News in Rotorua

Two Waiariki Institute of Technology managers sacked for serious misconduct over allegedly dishonest expense claims have this week had their dismissals ruled unjustified by the Employment Relations Authority.

The authority also said the institute's chief executive officer, Dr Pim Borren, was in contempt of the authority's investigation after instructing staff not to give character references to one of the managers as part of the personal grievance case.

The authority has ruled Helen Manoharan and Ann Robinson were unjustifiably dismissed from their roles with the institute's School of Nursing and Health Studies by Dr Borren.

Ms Manoharan was the school's director and Ms Robinson was operations manager. Their employment was terminated on June 15 because Dr Borren felt they had engaged in serious misconduct by failing to follow proper procedure when claiming expenses. He also alleged they had been dishonest when giving him explanations about the expense claims.

Dr Borren told The Daily Post yesterday that he was "surprised and disappointed" by the authority's ruling and was still to decide whether to appeal.

He said the ruling determined the process was at fault, not that the staff were not guilty of misconduct.

"We followed a thorough process leading up to the dismissal which took over one month. We were confident that dismissal was the appropriate response given the seriousness of our findings. My governing body was kept informed throughout and were supportive."

The authority heard the personal grievance claims between August 24 and 26, and the finding was released on Monday.

The women have sought urgent reinstatement, reimbursement of wages lost and compensation for hurt feelings, humiliation and distress. The authority has instructed the parties to go back to mediation to resolve grievance claims (including reinstatement) and it has reserved its decision until after mediation on damages payments and penalties for Dr Borren for contempt.

Ms Manoharan put her signature or initials on six expense claim forms that were claims by Ms Robinson for expenses Ms Manoharan had incurred. Ms Manoharan failed to follow Waiariki's procedure requiring claims be approved by someone more senior.

Dr Borren first investigated three of the expense forms (amounts of which were not disclosed in the finding) in a disciplinary meeting with Ms Manoharan on June 9. Ms Robinson was a witness in this procedure. Three more expense forms, of amounts $380, $636 and $112, then came to light and disciplinary meetings were held with Ms Manoharan and Ms Robinson separately on June 15.

Dr Borren concluded "quickly" he had not been told the truth when they said the first claims were a "once-only mistake".

He dismissed Ms Manoharan immediately, then advised Ms Robinson he had a prepared letter terminating her employment but would give her the chance to resign and receive two months' salary in lieu of notice. She requested time to consider this but Dr Borren declined and she signed her resignation which was regarded by the authority as a dismissal.

Authority member Alastair Dumbleton said in his finding that both women were senior managers of long experience and knew very well the importance of correctly following process.

The authority found Dr Borren acted "unfairly and unreasonably" in conducting a disciplinary investigation and during the inquiry, he didn't ask the women for an explanation to his conclusion they had acted in partnership. Therefore their dismissals were not considered to be justified.

The authority also found Dr Borren breached the dispute resolution provisions of their employment agreement by instructing his staff not to support Ms Manoharan in her personal grievance case.

On July 11, Dr Borren sent an email to staff saying "It should go without saying that you are not to provide any support at all to Helen (or anyone working on her behalf) and I'm instructing you on this as your employer. I do not take kindly to being sued by anyone let alone an ex-staff member who has seriously let Waiariki down."

Ms Manoharan's lawyer, Catherine Stewart, applied to the authority for action to be taken against Dr Borren for contempt as the grievance process was still in place. Dr Borren was ordered by the authority to retract his instruction to staff, which he did in an email to staff on July 27.

The authority ruled Dr Borren's actions "obstructed" the investigation and were a "blatant attempt to disable any opposition to him".

"I consider, from the evidence, that his retraction, some two weeks later, did little to reassure those who felt intimidated by his action that they could, if they wished, assist Ms Manoharan without suffering adverse consequences to their employment."

The authority ruled both women should be compensated and Dr Borren should be penalised to send a message the authority could carry out investigations without delay or obstructions.

Both women, through their lawyer Ms Stewart, declined to comment to The Daily Post on the finding as the matter was still before the authority.

Dr Borren told The Daily Post it was the first time a personal grievance had been taken against him in his six years at Waiariki.

He informed staff on Monday about the ruling. The email said the proceedings had been "quite protracted and difficult for a number of staff" and any appeal decision would take into consideration what was best for staff and students.

"Our School of Nursing & Health Studies continues to perform well and this is a credit to the professionalism of staff through this period of 'limbo'... Clearly there is a need for some healing, given that this process has been stressful and quite bruising."

The email ended with the comment "it has also been a learning experience for us all".