Received a Personal Grievance?
A Personal Grievance can arrive as a formal letter from an advocate, a lawyer's email, a short message from the employee, or even a complaint that does not use perfect legal language. Employers should not assume that a grievance can be ignored because it is badly written or because the employee is angry.
The first employer response is important. It can set the tone, preserve the employer's position, or make the case worse. Many employers damage their own defence by sending a defensive email before they have checked the documents, the timeline, and the legal risk.
Anderson Law helps employers respond to Personal Grievances, prepare for mediation, negotiate settlement, and defend claims in the Employment Relations Authority where required.
What a Personal Grievance response needs to do
A good response is not just a denial. It should identify what is accepted, what is disputed, what further information is needed, what documents support the employer's position, and whether the employer is open to resolving the matter commercially.
The response should also avoid unnecessary admissions. Employers sometimes admit procedural defects without understanding their significance, or they attack the employee in language that later looks unreasonable. That can increase settlement pressure and make the employer look careless.
The response should be written with mediation and the Employment Relations Authority in mind. It may be read months later by a mediator, the Authority, or the other side's representative. It should therefore be controlled, factual, and strategically useful.
Immediate steps for employers
Once a Personal Grievance is received, the employer should move quickly but not recklessly.
- Preserve documents: keep emails, text messages, rosters, wage records, letters, meeting notes, CCTV, investigation material, and medical documents where relevant.
- Stop informal manager commentary: managers should not keep texting, calling, or venting about the employee without advice.
- Build the timeline: identify the key dates, who said what, what decisions were made, and when the employee was told.
- Check time limits: most Personal Grievances must be raised within 90 days, but sexual harassment grievances have a longer notification period.
- Check the employment agreement: notice, trial period, disciplinary, abandonment, restructuring, and dispute clauses may matter.
- Assess the actual risk: the employer needs to know whether the problem is factual, procedural, evidential, or all three.
- Do not retaliate: avoid actions that could create a fresh disadvantage grievance.
Common employer mistakes after receiving a grievance
- sending an emotional denial before checking the documents;
- calling the employee dishonest without evidence;
- creating a new disciplinary issue because the employee raised a grievance;
- assuming a bad attitude means the employer will win;
- ignoring procedural weaknesses because the employer believes the employee deserved the outcome;
- refusing to provide basic documents that the employer should provide;
- attending mediation without a settlement range or evidence plan;
- agreeing to unclear settlement wording; and
- failing to get a settlement signed under section 149 where finality is needed.
The employer's risk is usually both factual and procedural
Employers often focus only on the employee's conduct. That is understandable, but it is not enough. The employer also needs to look at the process used before the action was taken.
In dismissal and disadvantage cases, the question is not simply whether the employer was annoyed or whether the employee did something wrong. The issue is usually whether the employer sufficiently investigated, raised the concerns, gave a reasonable opportunity to respond, and genuinely considered the employee's explanation before acting.
That is why an employer may have strong facts but still face risk. A real problem can be undermined by a rushed process, bad wording, missing documents, or predetermined decision-making.
What we look for when reviewing a Personal Grievance
When reviewing a grievance for an employer, the key questions usually include:
- Was the grievance raised within time?
- What exact Personal Grievance is being alleged?
- Is the claim about dismissal, disadvantage, discrimination, harassment, duress, disadvantage after protected disclosure, or something else?
- What decision did the employer actually make?
- What documents were given to the employee before the decision?
- Was the employee given a real opportunity to respond?
- Did the employer genuinely consider the response?
- Was the outcome proportionate?
- What evidence exists now?
- What remedies could the employee realistically seek?
- Is settlement commercially sensible?
Settlement strategy
Not every Personal Grievance should be fought to the end. Some should be defended hard. Some should be settled quickly because the procedural risk is obvious. Some should be mediated only after the employer has gathered enough evidence to negotiate from a position of strength.
A good settlement strategy looks at legal risk, likely remedies, management time, confidentiality, business disruption, reputational risk, and whether a clean exit is worth more than a long fight.
Where settlement is reached, wording matters. The employer should think about finality, confidentiality, non-disparagement, tax treatment, return of property, reference wording, payment timing, contribution to costs, and whether the agreement should be signed under section 149 of the Employment Relations Act 2000.
Mediation and ERA defence
If the matter goes to mediation, the employer should attend with a clear theory of the case, a document bundle, a settlement range, and an understanding of the weaknesses. Mediation is not just a meeting where everyone talks. It is a negotiation under pressure.
If the employee files in the Employment Relations Authority, the employer will need to respond properly. That may involve a Statement in Reply, documents relied on, witness statements, mediation steps, and preparation for an investigation meeting.
The employer should not treat the Authority process as informal simply because it is not the District Court or High Court. Poor evidence, poor pleadings, and poor preparation can still hurt the employer.
Frequently asked questions
Can an employer reject a Personal Grievance outright?
Yes, if the employer has proper grounds to do so, but the response should be careful. A blunt rejection without analysis can look unreasonable and may make settlement harder.
Does receiving a Personal Grievance mean the employer has done something wrong?
No. It means the employee alleges a grievance. The employer still needs to assess whether the claim has merit and whether the documents support a defence.
Should the employer offer money immediately?
Not necessarily. Sometimes an early commercial offer is sensible. Sometimes it signals weakness. The employer should first understand the risk and likely settlement range.
Can the employer keep managing the employee after a grievance is raised?
Yes, but carefully. The employer must avoid retaliatory action and should make sure any further decisions are properly justified and documented.
Case law examples for Personal Grievance responses
A strong Personal Grievance response should not just deny the claim. It should identify the legal issues, preserve the employer's evidence, test limitation points, and avoid admissions that make later mediation or Authority litigation harder.
The following authorities help explain why employers need a structured response rather than an emotional one.
Employment Relations Act 2000, s 114 - time limits matter
Most Personal Grievances must be raised within 90 days from when the action occurred or came to the employee's notice. Sexual harassment grievances have a longer notification period. Employers should check limitation immediately, but should not rely on limitation alone without checking whether the employee may seek leave to raise the grievance late.
Employment Relations Act 2000, s 103A - the response should answer the statutory test
If the grievance alleges unjustified dismissal or unjustified disadvantage, the employer's response should be organised around s 103A. It should explain what was investigated, what was put to the employee, what opportunity was given to respond, what explanation was considered, and why the outcome was within the fair and reasonable range.
Mulqueen v The Merino Story (NZ) Ltd [2023] NZERA 329 - do not defend a weak process by pretending it was stronger than it was
Mulqueen shows why an employer response must be accurate. If the employer did not verify a complaint, did not disclose historical allegations, or did not hold the meeting required by the employment agreement, the response should deal with that risk intelligently. Overstating the employer's process can damage credibility.
DQJ v Commissioner of Inland Revenue [2025] NZEmpC 10 - medical, incapacity, and frustration arguments require care
Where the grievance concerns incapacity, trauma, stress, medical certificates, inability to attend work, or alleged frustration of contract, the employer needs to show why it had enough information to act and why a delay for medical evidence was not manageable. DQJ illustrates the risk of treating frustration as a shortcut to dismissal.
Richora Group Ltd v Cheng [2018] NZEmpC 113 and Dillon v Tullycrine Ltd [2020] NZEmpC 52 - compensation risk is real
When responding to a grievance, employers should assess remedy exposure early. Richora is often cited for compensation banding principles. Dillon is useful because the Court rejected the idea that an employer's weak financial position automatically reduces compensation for hurt, humiliation, and loss of dignity.
Hines v Eastland Port Ltd [2018] NZEmpC 79 - not every process criticism wins
Hines is useful for employers because the Court did not treat every alleged process defect as fatal. Where the employer has a strong factual foundation, a sufficient investigation, and no real unfairness, the employer can defend the claim. That point matters when deciding whether to settle or fight.
How this should change the employer's first response
The first response should be controlled and evidence-based. It should confirm receipt, reserve rights, ask for clarification where needed, preserve limitation arguments, avoid unnecessary admissions, and set out a fair proposed process. If mediation is likely, the response should also position the employer for settlement without sounding panicked or defensive.
Need help responding to a Personal Grievance?
Complete the employer form and upload the grievance letter, employment agreement, relevant correspondence, and the timeline of what happened.
