Kaytlin Pinder v S & O Bayliss Ltd [2022] NZERA 646 - 90-day trial invalid before start, unjustified dismissal, penalties

What happened

Ms Pinder applied for a dairy farm role in Tokoroa. The key timeline point is the text message job offer and acceptance. The Authority found she accepted the offer on 4 June 2021, which meant she became an "employee" (as a person intending to work) at that time. The written employment agreement (a Federated Farmers template) was not presented and signed until 11 June 2021.

Why the 90 day trial clause failed

Section 67A requires the trial provision to be agreed with an employee who has not previously been employed by the employer. Because the Authority found Ms Pinder was already employed from 4 June 2021 (offer accepted), the later trial clause could not validly apply.

Dismissal events

Ms Pinder was injured on the job when a cow stood on her wrist on 5 August 2021. She attended A&E and later advised the employer of the diagnosis and treatment. The next morning (6 August 2021) she was told her employment would be ending and she was given a short timeframe to vacate the farm house.

Key findings

• Trial period invalid: the 90 day trial provision could not apply because employment had already been accepted before the agreement was signed.
• Unjustified dismissal: the employer had concerns about suitability but did not raise them, support improvement, or give Ms Pinder a proper opportunity to respond.
• No contributory conduct reduction: the Authority found no blameworthy conduct that required a reduction in remedies.
• Employment records / agreement breach: penalties were imposed for failing to provide the employment agreement and wage and time record on request.

Orders and remedies