David Turner v Big B Cartage Limited [2026] NZERA 581

Big B Cartage called truck driver David Turner to a disciplinary meeting without first identifying the allegations or disclosing the text message on which it relied. The seven-minute meeting ended with immediate dismissal for serious misconduct. The Employment Relations Authority found the dismissal unjustified.

A bullying allegation and an abusive text

Mr Turner began work for Big B Cartage, which trades as Transflora, in October 2024. The small business transports plants to nurseries throughout New Zealand. The employment problem arose after Mr Turner sent a colleague an abusive text message in January 2025.

The message accused the colleague of lying, used highly offensive insults and said Mr Turner would no longer help load the colleague's units. Director Andrew Sims regarded it as workplace bullying and ultimately relied on it as the principal reason for summary dismissal.

No allegations or evidence disclosed in advance

Big B Cartage invited Mr Turner to a disciplinary meeting on 11 March 2025. Before the meeting it did not identify the specific allegations, provide supporting information or disclose the text message said to establish bullying.

The meeting lasted only seven minutes. Mr Turner responded “no comment” to the matters raised. The Authority found that this did not cure the employer's earlier failure to tell him what case he had to answer and give him time to prepare.

Dismissed before the proposed response period

After the meeting, Mr Sims emailed Mr Turner saying his employment had been terminated immediately for serious misconduct and asking him to return company property. The same email purported to give him 24 hours to provide mitigating circumstances. A later email asked whether he would provide information that might lead the employer to “downgrading” his dismissal.

The Authority held that this was not a fair opportunity to respond. The dismissal had already been communicated and implemented. A proper investigation must be prompt but unhurried, include disclosure of relevant material and allow a considered response before conclusions are reached.

Big B Cartage did not satisfy any of the procedural requirements in s 103A(3) of the Employment Relations Act 2000. Its limited size did not excuse the deficiencies; conducting a proper disciplinary process remained an essential management responsibility.

Records breach, compensation and contribution

The company also failed to provide Mr Turner's wages and time record after his representative requested it. That breached s 130(2), but the Authority declined a penalty because the breach was inadvertent and no particular loss was shown.

The dismissal damaged Mr Turner's confidence and caused significant stress about supporting his young family. Compensation was assessed at $13,000 before contribution.

The abusive text was culpable and contributed to the situation giving rise to dismissal. The Authority reduced the remedy by 25 percent, while recognising that Mr Turner was not responsible for the employer's serious procedural deficiencies.

Why this case matters

Turner v Big B Cartage shows that potentially serious employee conduct does not eliminate the need for a fair process. The employer must disclose the allegation and supporting material, allow time to prepare and genuinely consider the response before deciding whether dismissal is justified. A post-dismissal invitation to provide mitigation is too late.

Read the full ERA determination (embedded)

If the embedded PDF does not load, use the button below.

Mobile / tablet tip: Some browsers do not display embedded PDFs reliably. Use the Open button above.

Source: Employment Relations Authority determination hosted on determinations.era.govt.nz.