Former IRD employee loses ERA claim following comments about free period products
Photo:
RNZ / Richard Tindiller
A former Inland Revenue employee has lost her bid to claim unjustified disadvantage and constructive dismissal after making comments other workers found offensive.
Christine Massof had worked for the department for 14 years.
She was reprimanded after she made a comment on the intranet in response to news that the department would be providing period products in both male and female bathrooms.
She posted: "This is awesome but a shame it took so long coming. And interesting, now that men can menstruate, free period products are available in IR bathrooms."
Massof's manager, Leah Galbraith, became aware when the comment was reported to her by IR's rainbow network, which said some people were offended and upset.
Galbraith met Massof to discuss the comments and set expectations for the future.
She said it was not the first discussion of this type she had had with Massof about her need to be aware of the impact her comments could have on her colleagues. Massof denied that and said earlier incidents were different.
Galbraith said the meeting went smoothly but Massof said she was not given much opportunity to speak.
She was then given a letter headed "expectation of behaviour" which advised her that she should exercise discretion when expressing views, particularly when they could cause offence.
When staff were reorganised, Massof began reporting to a different team leader. But she said the meeting with Galbraith had left her upset and anxious.
She said after she returned from sick leave she was vulnerable and had been ostracised.
She filed a statement of problem with the Employment Relations Authority saying she had been unjustifiably disadvantaged in her employment and Inland Revenue had not acted in good faith.
She then resigned.
Several months later, she raised a claim of unjustifiable constructive dismissal.
She said the letter had disadvantaged her because it was disciplinary in nature, she did not have the opportunity for a support person, it affected her prospects for promotion, it silenced her and that Inland Revenue had imposed a bathroom policy on her without consultation.
Authority member Claire English said the letter was not a disciplinary outcome and did not impose disciplinary consequences on Massof.
"There is also nothing used in the requirements or expectations themselves to support the submission that this was a disciplinary matter. They may be described as requirements to treat colleagues respectfully in the workplace and to bear in mind that colleagues may have different views to yourself."
She said Inland Revenue was entitled to set minimum standards of behaviour.
"Insofar as Ms Massof complains that IR's provision of free sanitary products by IR in the bathrooms was an unjustified disadvantage, this claim cannot be made out. The provision of free product to all staff with no requirement for use or engagement by staff cannot be categorised as a disadvantage, much less an unjustified one."
She said the submission that the department had a new policy of allowing staff to use bathrooms of their choice amounted to unjustified disadvantage was also not borne out by the evidence.
"Ms Massof worked for IR for some 14 years. She was not able to explain when or how this policy was either implemented or changed by IR.
"For a claim of constructive dismissal to succeed, the dismissal must occur at the initiative of the employer. Ms Massof's evidence is that she did not want to continue in the workplace, not due to any breach of obligation by her employer, but because she fundamentally disagreed with workplace changes over a period of many years, and no longer wished to work there as a result. This does not amount to a constructive dismissal."
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Is it worth paying a real estate agent to sell your house?
Three quarters of agent-listed properties in the past 10 years were successfully sold, compared to 65.1 percent of privately listed properties. File photo. Photo: You might pay a real estate agent $30,000 or more to sell your home. But is it worth it? Analysis by property data firm Cotality suggests it might be. Each year, a small number of people opt to sell their homes privately - from a low of 3.1 percent in 2021 to 8 percent in 2016. Last year, it was 7.6 percent. But Cotality head of research Nick Goodall said agents seemed to sell properties more quickly and effectively. "The sales success rate is higher for agent sales - by an average of 11.5 percent over the 10 year period." Roughly 76 percent of agent-listed properties in the past 10 years were successfully sold, compared to 65.1 percent of privately listed properties. Last year 65 percent of agent listed properties sold, compared to 52.8 percent for private sales. Goodall said real estate salespeople would often have an understanding of which buyers might be in the market for a particular property and could target them more effectively than a private seller might. "The typical days on market for agent sales is also most often shorter. In 2021 - the market peak - the median days on market for agent sales was 24, while it was 40 for private sales. Interestingly last year was the one year to buck that trend, with agent sales taking a median of 75 days, compared to 71 days for private." He said the median sales price for properties sold by agents was higher, too, but that could reflect a different mix of properties being sold. "Vendors may be more likely to sell their property privately when it's a lower value property, whereas owners of more expensive property might be more likely to use an agent." He said last year's higher rate of private sales could reflect vendors being aware that prices were not strong and looking to save money where they could. "Nonetheless, for the record, the median sales price of properties sold by agents this year is $740,000, compared to $662,500 for private sales. Last year the respective figures were $735,000 for agents and $704,000 for private." Goodall said the data was not definitive enough to say whether agents were delivering enough extra value to pay their commission. At Barfoot & Thompson, for example, a $750,000 sale would incur $23,978 in commission. A $1 million sale would mean just under $30,000. "The figure for this year is almost $100,000 so I'd say that would justify it if it was like-for-like properties. But the year before was closer so you might be sort of borderline there." Goodall said people selling privately would also need to account for the time they would need to spend on the process. "Having to take time off work or the opportunity cost or what else you could be doing if you have to spend all that time preparing to sell a property on your own, you know that might bring the calculation a little bit closer as well." Real estate agent Brooke Gibson said she could understand why people would sell privately. She did it herself before she entered the industry. But she said she could see that agents would add value for most people, particularly when it came to negotiating. "You could actually easily kill the deal because you know, if someone comes up to you and you're opening up your house to them and they go 'how much do you want?' and you say $1 million and he thinks it's worth $700,000 for example, he's going to be like 'nah not interested." Wellington salesperson Mike Robbers agreed. He said agents would also often present properties a bit better than private sellers would, with professional photography and home staging. "Private sellers often start out with a very high price in mind, then reduce it over time when there's no interest, but by then the listing has gone 'cold'. Agents tend to use their market knowledge to get the pricing strategy right from the outset, so the listing doesn't sit as long on the market." He said some buyers also expected to pay less for a private sale because the seller did not have to cover commission. Real Estate Authority chief executive Belinda Moffat said whether it was better to sell privately or through an agency would depend on the seller's specific circumstances, the property itself and the seller's knowledge and experience. "Licensed real estate professionals are trained and experienced in working on behalf of homeowners to help them navigate property transactions with confidence and are legally required to seek the best outcome for their client." She said all real estate salespeople were required to follow the standards in the Code of Professional Conduct and Client Care and meet their obligations under the Real Estate Agents Act 2008. "If a person works with a licensed real estate professional, and an issue arises with their professional conduct, the person has the option to make a formal complaint to REA and/or to raise the issue with their agency." Agents should provide a current market appraisal (CMA) of what a property might sell for before they signed an agency agreement. "(CMA) of what they think the property might sell for before the seller signs an agency agreement. The CMA must be informed by comparable recent sales in the area and can be helpful in understanding what the property may be worth. They will also prepare a proposed marketing plan which the seller can discuss, amend and agree to. "They also understand and can advise on the important legal disclosure obligations a seller has when selling a property, including in relation to defects and unconsented alterations. If a seller knowingly fails to disclose relevant information to buyers, they could be in breach of the terms of their agreement with any buyer, meaning the sale could fall over or the buyer could seek compensation and take court action." She said vendors might be able to negotiate commission. People choosing to sell privately should research the process so they understood what was require, she said. Moffat said confidence in the industry had lifted from 70 percent in 2021 to 82 percent last year. Goodall said there was demand for property but there remained high numbers of listings. "I think if you're willing to be very, very flexible on that price then it's probably not that difficult to get a sale, but it's all about you know, your expectation, what you want to do, if you're buying in the same market, if you're moving elsewhere..." He said some people were still hung up on the prices being paid at the peak of the market and were finding it hard to adjust their expectations. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Labour leader on State of Auckland report
business education 40 minutes ago Auckland risks being cast into obscurity as "a global city" according to a just released report. Labour leader Chris Hipkins spoke to Ingrid Hipkiss.
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Auckland more dependent on cars, less density than its peers, report finds
Traffic on Rimu Rd, Mangere Bridge, as morning commuters try and find a way to get on the motorway. Photo: RNZ/Nicky Park Auckland's strengths are its quality of life and diversity, a new report has found, but these aren't enough to keep the city competitive. Photo: RNZ / Marika Khabazi Auckland is more dependent on cars and has less housing density than its peers, a new report says. The State of the City report, conducted by Deloitte for the Committee for Auckland, compared Auckland to Vancouver, Portland, Austin, Dublin, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Tel Aviv, Fukuoka and Brisbane. Committee for Auckland director Mark Thomas told Morning Report prosperity had declined the most in the past three years partly due to housing. "The report says that we are much less dense than our peers, now that's not to say we need to be dense everywhere, what it's saying is we don't have the same degree of mixed housing that other cities do. "We also are more car dependent because we don't provide other transport options. So that's an example of one of the big consequences of our inability to solve this land use planning challenge." Thomas said the report mentioned that Brisbane had managed to book hosting the Olympic Games. File in Māngere, Auckland. Photo: RNZ/Nicky Park "We won't have the Olympic Games in Auckland, but a Commonwealth Games for example is an example of a catalytic event that peer cities are doing and we can't even work out where to build a stadium." Interest in hosting the 2034 Commonwealth Games was first floated by the New Zealand Olympic Committee in April 2023. The NZOC says its expression of interest still stands and work around a potential bid is ongoing. At the time, the government said if a bid was to go ahead, the event would be nationwide - not confined to one city. The third annual State of the City benchmarking report identified strengths in sustainability, resilience and culture but also highlights disadvantages in opportunity, experience and location. " Weak economic performance , inadequate skills and innovation development, and disjointed and delayed planning are causing Auckland to lose ground, with the risk of falling further behind," Committee for Auckland director Mark Thomas said in a statement. "We must fix the productivity problem, back high-growth industries and innovation, actually deliver better transport and housing, and rebuild Auckland's reputation." He endorsed an "Auckland deal" under the government's City and Regional Deals programme . Auckland's strengths were its quality of life and diversity, the report found, but these were not enough to keep the city competitive. "This latest report shows Auckland isn't keeping up in key areas, but the green shoots of innovation and growth are a sign of what's possible if the city can drive higher productivity and create business conditions for sustained success," Deloitte chief executive Mike Horne said. "Auckland's productivity sets the pace for the rest of the country , so it has an opportunity - and a responsibility - to be bolder in lifting it." The report recommends the central and local governments address land use, housing, transport and regulatory settings which hindered productivity. It also recommended the council strengthen Auckland's international brand, and "develop a compelling story about Auckland's past, present, and future that communicates its values, culture, and ambitions to the world". Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
