ClickCease

Payal v JB Hospitality Ltd [2026] NZERA 18 - Constructive dismissal, wage arrears, and premium payments

A practical summary of Payal v JB Hospitality Ltd [2026] NZERA 18. The ERA found constructive dismissal and ordered compensation, lost wages, wage and holiday arrears, and repayment of an unlawful premium payment.


This page summarises and displays the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) determination Payal v JB Hospitality Ltd [2026] NZERA 18. The Authority found the employee was constructively dismissed after serious wage and employment standards failures.

Case summary

  • Citation: Payal v JB Hospitality Ltd [2026] NZERA 18
  • Determination date: 13 January 2026
  • Member: Sarah Kennedy-Martin
  • Location: Wellington (investigation meeting held 5 December 2024, Palmerston North)
  • Employer: JB Hospitality Limited (Stunned Mullet Bar, Palmerston North)
  • Director / second respondent: Manpreet Singh

Full determination (PDF): https://determinations.era.govt.nz/assets/elawpdf/2026/2026-NZERA-18.pdf

What the case was about

The applicant travelled to New Zealand on an Accredited Employer Work Visa to work as a duty manager. She alleged that she was not paid wages for the first month, was underpaid for the hours worked after wage payments started, was required to pay wages to another employee, and faced working conditions (including long hours and lack of breaks) that made continuing employment untenable.

Key findings (plain English)

  • Constructive dismissal: The Authority was satisfied the employer's breaches were serious enough that resignation was reasonably foreseeable.
  • Wage and holiday arrears: In the absence of reliable wage and time records, the Authority relied on the evidence available and found arrears were owed.
  • Premium payment: A payment directed to be made to another employee was treated as an unlawful premium payment and ordered to be repaid.
  • Director involvement: Leave was granted for recovery from the director if the company defaults, under the employment standards "person involved" provisions.
  • Penalties: The Authority recorded that penalties were not able to be ordered because the penalty application was out of time.

Orders made (amounts)

  • $22,000.00 compensation for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to feelings (Employment Relations Act 2000, s 123(1)(c))
  • $23,938.20 lost wages (Employment Relations Act 2000, s 123(1)(b))
  • $17,303.07 wage and holiday arrears (Employment Relations Act 2000, s 131)
  • $1,300.00 repayment of premium payment (Wages Protection Act 1983, s 12A)
  • $71.55 filing fee contribution

Director liability note: The determination records that Manpreet Singh was a "person involved" and may be liable if the company defaults on payment.

Practical lessons for employers

  • Pay correctly and on time. Non-payment is treated as a fundamental breach and can support a constructive dismissal finding.
  • Keep wage and time records. Missing or unreliable records usually harms the employer's ability to defend arrears claims.
  • Do not route wages through third parties. Directing an employee to pay wages to someone else can create serious legal risk (including unlawful premium payment issues).
  • Breaks and minimum standards matter. Rest and meal break failures and minimum wage issues can compound liability and the seriousness of the breach.
  • Penalty timing matters. If penalties are sought, the limitation period must be met.

Read the full determination

This is a public document hosted on the ERA determinations database. If the embedded document does not load on your device, use the button below to open it in a new tab.

Open [2026] NZERA 18 (PDF)

Mobile / tablet tip: Some browsers do not display embedded PDFs reliably. Use the "Open" button above.
Need help with an ERA matter? If you are dealing with wage arrears, a constructive dismissal risk, or an ERA claim, we can assist with strategy, settlement, and representation.
0800 WIN KIWI

Search
Search articles and guides.
Tip: press / to search

Related articles

Browse all articles
Based on: Unfair Dismissal Cases, Constructive Dismissal, Unjustified Disadvantage
Adam Gifford v Uma Broadcasting Limited [2026] NZERA 96 - redundancy unjustified for consultation failures and no redeployment discussion; $24,230 lost wages, $19,000 compensation, $1,500 penalty

A senior journalist/editor with 18 years at Radio Waatea was made redundant after a restructure merging English and Maori newsroom functions. The ERA accepted the restructure had genuine business reasons, but held the redundancy dismissal unjustified because key proposal information was not fairly shared, the employee was not clearly told his role was at risk until the termination day, and redeployment options were not consulted on. Orders: $24,230.77 lost wages (plus interest and KiwiSaver), $19,000 compensation, and a $1,500 Wages Protection Act penalty (half to the employee).

LJB v EBD [2026] NZERA 78 - resigned employee sent home mid-notice with no process; dismissal unjustified; $16,500 compensation plus $9,000 penalties for withheld wages and missing time records

A marketing and events assistant resigned with one month's notice, but was called into a surprise meeting and told to clear her desk and leave immediately. The ERA held this was a dismissal at the employer's initiative (a 'sending away'), not an agreed early finish, and the employer could not...

Jack Wills v Complex Forme Limited [2026] NZERA 76 - health centre worker dismissed by silence after no contract and no pay; $25,526.80 ordered plus penalties

A part-time pool receptionist/manager at a Hastings health and wellness centre was never given a written employment agreement and was never paid for 32 hours worked. After he asked for clarity about his pay and roster, the employer stopped responding, removed his staff access, and asked for his...

Browse topics