A former account manager for a recruitment company still becomes emotional thinking about the harassment she endured from a colleague.

One year on, Mereana Kennedy has now taken her former employer, Remarkable People Limited (RPL), to the Employment Relations Authority (ERA), claiming it failed to provide a safe workplace, resulting in her resignation.

She told the authority that late-night calls, emails, texts and unannounced office visits from the colleague had left her fearful and scared.

Among the inappropriate emails, he called her a “hot boss”, said she could “win” his “soul”, and that he did not want her to be afraid of him.

On one occasion, he attempted to get into Kennedy’s office, which she had locked, demanding that she let him in.

ERA member Sarah Kennedy-Martin said in a recent decision that RPL’s actions “fell short” of what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in the circumstances, and awarded Kennedy $20,000 in compensation.

“These failures breached the duty of good faith in an employment relationship and the duty to provide a safe workplace.”

The late night texts, emails and calls

According to the decision, Kennedy worked at the recruitment agency as an account manager.

Known as a candidate, the colleague, who was in Kennedy’s caseload, was employed by RPL and given work placements.

It was Kennedy’s role to be available to candidates and to communicate with them about their placements with RPL clients.

When she began to get inappropriate comments from the candidate in person, by phone, and by text message, she initially thought it was harmless.

But he then began contacting her late at night and appearing at her office unannounced.

In April 2024, Kennedy met the national key accounts manager, Paddy O’Regan.

The Employment Relations Authority ordered RPL to pay $20,00 in compensation. Photo / Stock

She told the authority that by that stage, she had stopped responding to the candidate because she could no longer cope with his behaviour.

While in the office, Kennedy said she heard another colleague take a call from the candidate.

She said she heard him say; “I don’t want to work with that b**** she’s not answering my phone calls”, or words to that effect.

O’Regan then told Kennedy, without hearing her explanation, that it was her job to communicate with him.

When O’Regan next visited the office, Kennedy told him about her experiences with the candidate.

She said O’Regan was alarmed and told her to terminate the candidate’s placements.

The candidate later texted Kennedy that evening, calling her a “nark”.

But management then concluded it did not have grounds to dismiss the candidate or take disciplinary action, as most of the communication was verbal.

Safety measures were later put in place, so Kennedy felt safe at work.

Those included having the office door locked when there were no scheduled visits from candidates and having O’Regan manage the candidate in question.

Despite the late-night calls stopping, the candidate continued to email and text Kennedy during work hours.

He sent her an email with “embarrassed” in the subject field.

It said he was sorry for the texts.

“I didn’t mean to scare ya, I was just letting you know how much you have the ability to win my soul. I went to a funeral on Monday, I feel dumb because I failed you.

“But anyways I’m missing something good which was our friendship. I know it’s not going to be the same but at least once we’ve had a good laugh it will be more fun. I miss the fun of having a hot boss. So will let you get back to work.”

The candidate was again told to stop contacting Kennedy. But later that day, he turned up at her office while she was alone.

She told the authority that he stood at the locked door and asked her to let him in so he could speak with her.

Kennedy responded by saying she could not let him in, which he had already been told, and that she was not working with him.

The following day, he sent her another message saying he’d told his girlfriend to leave because he was having fun every time he met with Kennedy.

It also made reference to her driving safely home, apologised for “being an egg” and said he did not want Kennedy to be afraid of him.

She then asked O’Regan if she could work from home as she no longer felt safe.

Kennedy said she would return to the office once they’d filled a vacant role, which meant another person would be in the office with her.

She said she told O’Regan that if she could not work from home, she would have no option but to resign because she did not feel safe.

O’Regan said they could “call it a day,” meaning the employment relationship was at an end, she told the ERA.

O’Regan drove her home and she left her laptop, work phone and all work-related items at the office.

In an email to the company following her resignation, Kennedy said she’d “never felt bullied or harassed or unappreciated or to feel second class, uncared for and worthless in any of my workplaces until now”.

Still emotional over the incident

Kennedy attempted to engage in mediation with the company for compensation for constructive dismissal, but was unsuccessful.

She told the authority that even now, when she thought about the candidate coming to the office and trying to open the locked door, she became emotional.

ERA’s Kennedy-Martin said it was clear Kennedy resigned because she felt unsafe in the workplace.

“This was particularly so because she formed the view that RPL had not taken her concerns about the candidate seriously.”

In RPL’s submissions, it said it could not have known how serious the matter was because Kennedy failed to notify it of all her concerns.

It was accepted that Kennedy did not provide all communications to management after the plan was put in place.

However, RPL accepted there were communications it knew about that were inappropriate, crossed boundaries and at least one previous comment that was unacceptable.

“A fair and reasonable employer could be expected not to discount anything said verbally from its consideration of the matter when the concerns were first raised with it,” Kennedy-Martin found.

“This is particularly so given it was accepted by RPL that at least some of the text message communication was inappropriate and stepped over a line but any inquiry beyond that stopped at that point.”

Kennedy-Martin was satisfied that the resignation was caused by RPL’s breach of its duties to provide a safe workplace and the duty of good faith.

“The situation Ms Kennedy found herself in was serious, given the initial decision about the seriousness of her concerns was based on partial information and was not fully investigated.

“With the plan breached and no alternatives other than locking the door which was not sustainable long term, it was reasonably foreseeable Ms Kennedy would resign.”

In addition to the compensation, RPL was ordered to pay Kennedy 5.5 weeks of lost wages.

Brianna McIlraith is a Queenstown-based reporter for Open Justice covering courts in the lower South Island. She has been a journalist since 2018 and has had a strong interest in business and financial journalism.