Emily Barr v Brooker Travel Limited [2026] NZERA 651

Brooker Travel Limited did commission an independent investigation after Emily Barr complained about repeated belittling and dismissive treatment by her manager. But the Employment Relations Authority found what happened after the complaint was inadequate: Ms Barr was not properly protected during the process, the final report was withheld, findings were minimised and there was no workable plan to restore the employment relationship. Her eventual resignation was an unjustified constructive dismissal.

Repeated concerns about the branch manager

Ms Barr worked 26 hours per week in a small Canterbury travel branch. She described ongoing dismissive, belittling and contemptuous behaviour by her manager and formally complained to a company director on 26 February 2025. Brooker then instructed an independent employment specialist to investigate.

An external investigation was a reasonable step, but the Authority considered the employer's wider response and what it did with the investigation once commissioned. Those surrounding actions ultimately became central to both the disadvantage and constructive-dismissal claims.

Failure to separate the parties or provide a workable interim arrangement

Ms Barr was not separated from the manager at the outset and later went on unpaid leave while the investigation continued. The Authority found the employer did not adequately engage with alternatives that could have protected Ms Barr and preserved the relationship, including paid leave or other workable arrangements.

The employer's obligations were not limited to investigating whether particular allegations could be substantiated. It also had to respond to the employment relationship problem in a way that was active, constructive and consistent with good faith.

The final investigation report was not disclosed

Brooker did not provide Ms Barr with the final investigation report. Instead, the director communicated a summary of the outcome. The Authority found important information was withheld and Ms Barr was not given an adequate opportunity to comment on the employer's conclusions before it acted on them.

The Authority also considered that the findings had been minimised and that the manager continued to exert influence over the situation without sufficient challenge from the employer. These matters contributed to a breach of the implied duty of trust and confidence and of the employer's statutory good-faith obligations.

No meaningful return-to-work plan

By April 2025 Ms Barr's representative had raised a personal grievance and sought steps including a return-to-work plan and restoration of lost pay. The Authority found Brooker did not develop a constructive pathway for Ms Barr to return to work and rejected proposed measures without putting forward a sufficient alternative.

The cumulative effect of the employer's acts and omissions was serious enough that resignation was reasonably foreseeable. Ms Barr resigned in response to those circumstances, satisfying the constructive-dismissal test.

Six months' lost wages awarded

The Authority awarded $20,000 compensation for the humiliation, loss of dignity, anxiety, loss of confidence and other harm caused by the grievances. It also made a global lost-wages award covering the period of unjustified disadvantage and the subsequent constructive dismissal.

The award was 24 weeks at $687.44 per week, producing $16,498.56 gross lost wages, plus $1,319.56 holiday pay, employer KiwiSaver contributions and interest. No reduction was made for contribution.

Why this case matters

Barr v Brooker Travel is important because the failure was not simply a refusal to investigate bullying. An investigation was obtained. The case shows that employers must also manage the period during the investigation, disclose and respond fairly to the findings, and take genuine steps to restore a workable employment relationship.

Employees considering resignation should be cautious: constructive dismissal is fact-specific and resignation can make a case harder rather than easier. Where possible, obtain advice before resigning and preserve the complaint, investigation material, medical evidence, proposed return-to-work arrangements and the employer's responses. See Workplace bullying and Constructive dismissal.

Read the full ERA determination (embedded)

If the embedded PDF does not load on your device, use the button below to open it in a new tab.

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.