A former Queenstown woman has won a battle with the Airways Corporation of New Zealand, after the Employment Relations Authority found she was unjustifiably dismissed for "serious misconduct" last year.
The authority awarded former air traffic controller Pamela Adams $12,500, to be reduced by one-third, leaving a total of $8333.
Mrs Adams, who had almost 30 years' experience as an air traffic controller in New Zealand, was the senior operations air traffic controller based at Queenstown Airport for seven years.
ERA member Philip Cheyne said on March 2, 2009, Mrs Adams was working with fellow air traffic controller Mike Bishop, who was "relatively inexperienced", having gained his rating in December 2008.
While they had separate responsibilities, it was accepted an operator should be "alert" to other operators' work "to help guard against unsafe flight operations", Mr Cheyne said.
Mrs Adams thought Mr Bishop had "lost separation" between two aircraft and "raised that with him".
A subsequent investigation found he had met all his control obligations.
However, Mr Bishop felt Mrs Adams was "very aggressive" and "challenging him" to justify his instructions, Mr Cheyne said.
In a formal complaint to Airways Queenstown-Milford Sound operations manager Bruce Rosie, Mr Bishop said she had an "angry and demanding demeanour".
"He also complained her demeanour towards him over the course of his training was `at best passive-aggressive and at worst confrontational and bullying'."
Mrs Adams was stood down, at her own request, on March 13 and on April 1 she was dismissed.
She took the matter to the authority on the grounds she should have first been warned and given an opportunity to remedy complaints; and Airways knew of her communication style issue, but elected not to take disciplinary action, Mr Cheyne said.
Airways Regional Services manager Grant Rawstorn carried out the investigation.
In a preliminary report Mr Rawstorn said her communication manner and treatment of Mr Bishop "and other employees" appeared to "potentially be inappropriate".
Mrs Adams accepted she could be "blunt, direct, confrontational and at times brutally honest" but denied bullying or harassing anyone.
Airways rejected a proposal by her solicitor she receive a written warning, take a period of sick leave, return to work as a controller rather than a senior controller and undertake courses or counselling as directed.
Mr Cheyne said at issue was Airways' reliance on information about Mrs Adams' conduct on earlier occasions, which was never formally acknowledged, but used as justification in her dismissal. Performance reviews in 2007 and 2008 addressed her communication style, which was perceived, at times, to be "implacable and uncompromising".
Mrs Adams' conduct had never previously led to disciplinary action.
Mr Rosie told the authority the March 2 incident was "the straw that broke the camel's back" and Mr Bishop's complaint was "a catalyst to solve an ongoing problem".
However, the authority did not accept Airways was fair and reasonable in concluding Mrs Adams had exhibited serious misconduct when the incident was considered in isolation.
The situation called for "corrective action" .
"The essential unfairness" was that disclosures in the interviews "were not new information to Airways", Mr Cheyne said.
Airways was not able to revisit previous incidents, which had been "noted", and include them as misconduct, or serious misconduct, to help justify its decision to dismiss Mrs Adams.
"A fair and reasonable employer would not have reached a conclusion that Mrs Adams had seriously misconducted herself . . . nor would they have revisited the historical matters already dealt with as part of the performance appraisal process," he said.
However, the authority found Mrs Adams contributed to the circumstances, due to knowing she "needed to reflect on the effect of her manner of communication".
Mrs Adams told the Otago Daily Times the decision was "a great personal victory" but "no surprise".
