An insurance brokerage has paid almost $84,000 to a former migrant worker who was unjustly fired.
The Employment Relations Authority decided that Angela Churchill, director of Independent Prosperity Limited, unjustly fired Qishan Huang after forcing her to repay $22,108 and forgo 14 weeks of salary because she was not able to meet her sales target.
Huang, who worked for the company from August 2016 until her dismissal in August 2018, was initially hired under a full-time contract after two months of unpaid specialised training.
Churchill claimed that a second employment agreement was signed in April 2017, which indicated a trial period during which time the company must pay $50,000 “annual compensation” to Huang as long as she meets an annual sales target of $90,000.
However, Huang claimed that she had never seen or signed the agreement.
Huang provided a third agreement dated from May 2017 that stated a salary increase of $50,000. Both women’s signatures were on the document, but Churchill claimed that her signature had been forged.
Huang also claimed that she worked unpaid as Churchill’s personal assistant, which made it harder for her to reach sales targets. She then paid $22,108 to the company and went 14 weeks without salary to pay back overpayments out of fear of losing her work visa.
Churchill said she was entitled to require the repayments because Huang was unable to generate enough income to cover her salary.
However, the authority decided that Churchill’s evidence was unreliable and her actions unlawful.
“I do not accept Ms Churchill's evidence that the May and July [employment] agreements are not authentic, she had never seen them, and it is not her signature on those agreements,” Anna Fitzgibbon, member of the Employment Relations Authority, told NZ Herald.
“Ms Churchill attempted to persuade the Authority, without any basis for doing so, that the signatures on the May and July agreements were not hers and that her signature had been forged. This is one of a number of occasions in which I find Ms Churchill's evidence to be unreliable."
