ClickCease

Painter Cameron Wong was told to pack his belongings and leave after a workplace confrontation, then received only part of his final entitlements. Obers Brothers Construction, already in liquidation, did not participate in the ERA investigation.

The short answer

The ERA found an unjustified dismissal and ordered $5,355 holiday entitlements, $2,800 notice pay, $12,242 lost wages and $17,500 compensation.


Cameron Wong v Obers Brothers Construction Limited (in liquidation) [2025] NZERA 713

Painter Cameron Wong said he was confronted at work, told to pack his belongings and leave, and later received only part of his final pay. Obers Brothers Construction Limited did not participate in the Authority's investigation. The ERA found the dismissal unjustified and made awards for unpaid holiday entitlements, notice, lost wages and hurt and humiliation.

At a glance

  • Authority member: Geoff O'Sullivan
  • Investigation: 8 July 2025 by audiovisual link
  • Determination: 7 November 2025
  • Outcome: unjustified dismissal
  • Total ordered: $37,897
  • Costs: reserved

What happened

Mr Wong had worked as a painter for just over eleven months. He said he repeatedly asked for a written employment agreement but was not provided one. On 5 August 2024, following a dispute about a comment he had allegedly made to a builder, he was told to leave and pack his belongings. He later submitted a resignation letter because he believed that was necessary to protect his notice entitlement.

The Authority accepted Mr Wong's evidence, including evidence from supporting witnesses. The employer did not attend the investigation meeting or otherwise justify its actions. The Authority therefore found that Mr Wong had been unjustifiably dismissed.

Orders

  • Unpaid holiday entitlements: $5,355
  • Two weeks' notice: $2,800
  • Lost wages: $12,242
  • Compensation: $17,500 for humiliation, injury to feelings and loss of dignity
Practical point: an employee's later use of the word "resignation" does not necessarily determine what happened if the employer had already ended the employment relationship in substance. The surrounding communications and conduct matter.

Read the determination

Open [2025] NZERA 713 (PDF)


Source: Employment Relations Authority determination hosted on determinations.era.govt.nz. This summary is general information, not legal advice.

0800 WIN KIWI

Search
Search cases, guides and topics.
Tip: press / to search

Related articles

Browse all articles
Based on: Unfair Dismissal Cases
David Turner v Big B Cartage Limited [2026] NZERA 581 - seven-minute disciplinary meeting led to unjustified dismissal

Big B Cartage dismissed truck driver David Turner for serious misconduct after a seven-minute meeting without identifying the allegations or disclosing the text message relied on. The ERA found the dismissal unjustified and awarded $9,750 compensation after a 25 percent contribution reduction.

Fatima Fahmy v Minimarc Childcare Centre Inc [2026] NZERA 585 - performance dismissal lacked objective assessment

Minimarc Childcare dismissed ECE teacher Fatima Fahmy for performance after its centre manager remained the principal evaluator despite known relationship and bullying complaints. The ERA found the assessment was not sufficiently objective and ordered reinstatement, lost wages and $25,000 compensation.

Juliet Hull v Sleaktek Limited and Robert Lawrence [2026] NZERA 579 - CEO wins dismissal and disadvantage claims

Sleaktek stopped paying chief executive Juliet Hull, pursued a redundancy process she said was predetermined and later raised serious-misconduct allegations that had not been fairly put to her. The case also concerned director Robert Lawrence's personal involvement.

Browse topics