PAYNE and Ors v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY FOR PRIMARY INDUSTRIES MANATŪ AHU MATUA and Anor [2025] NZERA 79
This page summarises and embeds an Employment Relations Authority (ERA) determination. It is not legal advice.
At a glance
- Citation: [2025] NZERA 79
- Registry: Auckland
- Parties: PAYNE and Ors v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY FOR PRIMARY INDUSTRIES and Anor
- Authority member: Laurie Newhook
- Investigation meeting: 10 October 2024 (Auckland)
- Determination date: 14 February 2025
- Outcome: Preliminary determination on strike-out/settlement issues (estoppel/record of settlement) and jurisdiction.
Story in plain English
This is a preliminary determination on a strike-out application, including whether earlier settlement arrangements prevent the Authority from hearing the claims.
In summary, The investigation meeting to hear submissions was held on 19 November 2024 in Auckland with some employees attending by audio-visual link. After that, They continue through a restructure proposal and decision by MPI, subsequent PSA legal action and a settlement agreement reached. Later, On 27 May 2020 MPI advises staff by letter of changes to shift conditions for some staff and redeployment to other roles while the border is closed. The determination records that I recognise time and expense was likely also incurred at mediation. 5 The Act, Sch 2, cl 12A(1). 6 FMV v TZB [2021] NZSC 102. • • • Although the negotiation at mediation cannot be examined, MPI recognised before the 2022 proceeding and mediated settlement that the 4 x 4 roster was the substantive roster. The Authority notes that This is stated in an email of 7 July 2021 sent to those identified as permanently located at Auckland Airport working a 4 x 4 roster. Ultimately, PSA Meeting Minutes of 30 June 2021 refer to the legal team's view that MPI can move staff legally under the change process. In the end, In light of both the email and meeting evidence The Authority concluded that the employees were aware in mid-2021 of the PSA advising them of its view that the change process could alter their work location.
Key case markers
- This determination comes from the Auckland registry.
- The parties are PAYNE and Ors (employee) and CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY FOR PRIMARY INDUSTRIES MANATŪ AHU MATUA and Anor (employer).
- Hearing date noted: .
- Authority member: .
Key events described
- The investigation meeting to hear submissions was held on 19 November 2024 in Auckland with some employees attending by audio-visual link.
- They continue through a restructure proposal and decision by MPI, subsequent PSA legal action and a settlement agreement reached.
- On 27 May 2020 MPI advises staff by letter of changes to shift conditions for some staff and redeployment to other roles while the border is closed.
- I recognise time and expense was likely also incurred at mediation. 5 The Act, Sch 2, cl 12A(1). 6 FMV v TZB [2021] NZSC 102. • • • Although the negotiation at mediation cannot be examined, MPI recognised before the 2022 proceeding and mediated settlement that the 4 x 4 roster was the substantive roster.
- This is stated in an email of 7 July 2021 sent to those identified as permanently located at Auckland Airport working a 4 x 4 roster.
- PSA Meeting Minutes of 30 June 2021 refer to the legal team's view that MPI can move staff legally under the change process.
- In light of both the email and meeting evidence The Authority concluded that the employees were aware in mid-2021 of the PSA advising them of its view that the change process could alter their work location.
Decision markers
(No decision markers were extracted automatically.)
Orders and payments mentioned
- Costs: Costs reserved.
Note: figures above are extracted from the orders section (or the final orders wording). Check the PDF for full context and any gross/net directions.
Practical takeaways
- Redundancy determinations usually turn on genuineness and consultation quality.
- Trial-period disputes often come down to strict compliance with s 67B and the written agreement.
- Dismissal justification is assessed through s 103A: what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances.
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.
