Ross McCullum v RidgeAir Limited [2026] NZERA 658 - long-serving Chief Pilot was unjustifiably dismissed

Ross McCullum had worked for RidgeAir Limited for about 15 years. After his work phone was disconnected and his laptop was removed without notice, he attended a meeting and was told the business was closing. RidgeAir later characterised his departure as voluntary severance. The Employment Relations Authority found that, viewed objectively, he had been sent away and dismissed, and that the dismissal was unjustified.

Fifteen years as Chief Pilot

Mr McCullum was a career pilot who had worked as RidgeAir's Chief Pilot for approximately 15 years. In late 2024 there were discussions about a new employment agreement and the possibility of redundancy. Those discussions did not result in a fair or completed redundancy process.

Phone disconnected and laptop removed

In April 2025 RidgeAir disconnected Mr McCullum's work phone and removed his work laptop without prior notice. At a meeting on 8 April he was told, in substance, that the business was closing and that there would be no redundancy payment. He left the meeting and the employment relationship ended.

RidgeAir later maintained that Mr McCullum's departure amounted to voluntary severance rather than dismissal. The Authority rejected that characterisation. The removal of work tools, combined with the way the employer addressed him, objectively amounted to a sending away from employment.

The dismissal process was not fair

Once the Authority found that RidgeAir had dismissed Mr McCullum, the employer had to justify both its reason and the way it acted under section 103A of the Employment Relations Act 2000. The process did not meet that standard.

There had been no proper investigation, Mr McCullum had not been given a meaningful opportunity to respond before employment ended, and consultation was minimal. Whatever financial or operational difficulties RidgeAir may have been facing, those circumstances did not remove the obligation to deal with the employee fairly and in good faith.

Substantial holiday-pay arrears

The case was also significant because of long-running annual-holiday issues. The Authority ordered payment of $26,236.80 in unpaid annual holiday pay, representing eight weeks' entitlement. It also ordered $3,541.96 for unpaid final wages and holiday pay.

A separate $1,000 penalty was imposed for failures relating to holiday and leave records. The holiday-pay aspect is a useful reminder that dismissal disputes often expose separate minimum-entitlement and record-keeping issues.

Lost wages and compensation

Mr McCullum was awarded three months' lost remuneration of $21,317.40 gross. He was also awarded $15,000 compensation for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to feelings. The remedies reflected both the unjustified ending of a long employment relationship and the financial consequences of losing work.

Why this case matters

The case is useful where an employer says an employee resigned, abandoned employment or voluntarily severed the relationship when the surrounding conduct points the other way. The legal characterisation depends on the objective substance of what happened. It also shows why wage, leave and record-keeping claims should be checked alongside a dismissal grievance.

Read more Employment Relations Authority unfair dismissal cases.

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.