ClickCease

Mr Watson challenged a written warning and later alleged he was constructively dismissed after his relationship with Alchemy Builders deteriorated and he was removed from a workplace WhatsApp group. Timeliness affected the earlier disadvantage grievance.

The short answer

The ERA held the disadvantage claim could not proceed but upheld Watson's unjustified-dismissal grievance because the employer's later actions and process did not meet the justification standard. It awarded $15,000 compensation, with costs reserved.


WATSON v ALCHEMY BUILDERS LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 265

This page summarises and embeds an Employment Relations Authority (ERA) determination. It is not legal advice.

At a glance

  • Citation: [2025] NZERA 265
  • Registry: Auckland
  • Parties: WATSON v ALCHEMY BUILDERS LIMITED and Anor
  • Authority member: Andrew Gane
  • Hearing date: 29 January 2025
  • Determination date: 13 May 2025
  • Outcome: The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues.

Story in plain English

The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues.

In summary, Second, he alleged he was unjustifiably dismissed on 21 December 2023. After that, On 1 December 2023 Mr Watson's representative sent a personal grievance letter to ABL alleging unjustified disadvantage caused by the written warning ABL had issued him on 22 August 2023. Later, He stated that ABL was now on notice of a personal grievance for constructive dismissal if such a breach was not rectified, [22] On 16 December 2023 Mr Watson noticed that he had been removed from the ABL WhatsApp platform. The determination records that On Thursday 21 December 2023 Mr Watson's representative e-mailed ABL's representative raising a second personal grievance claim for Mr Watson's constructive dismissal. The Authority notes that On 22 August 2023 Mr McKelvie emailed Mr Watson a written warning. Ultimately, On 1 December 2023 Mr Watson's representative sent a personal grievance letter respect of the unjustified disadvantage caused by the written warning issued to Mr McKelvie on 22 August 2023. In the end, Because of these various failures, it follows the dismissal was unjustified.7 [47] The Authority found Mr Watson's personal grievance for unjustifiable dismissal succeeds.8 6 Simpsons Farms Ltd v Aberhart [2006] ERNZ 825 [65]. 7 Employment Relations Act , s 103A.

Key case markers

  • This determination comes from the Auckland registry.
  • The parties are WATSON (employee) and ALCHEMY BUILDERS LIMITED and Anor (employer).
  • Hearing date noted: 29 January 2025.
  • Authority member: Andrew Gane.

Key events described

  • Second, he alleged he was unjustifiably dismissed on 21 December 2023.
  • On 1 December 2023 Mr Watson's representative sent a personal grievance letter to ABL alleging unjustified disadvantage caused by the written warning ABL had issued him on 22 August 2023.
  • He stated that ABL was now on notice of a personal grievance for constructive dismissal if such a breach was not rectified, [22] On 16 December 2023 Mr Watson noticed that he had been removed from the ABL WhatsApp platform.
  • On Thursday 21 December 2023 Mr Watson's representative e-mailed ABL's representative raising a second personal grievance claim for Mr Watson's constructive dismissal.
  • On 22 August 2023 Mr McKelvie emailed Mr Watson a written warning.
  • On 1 December 2023 Mr Watson's representative sent a personal grievance letter respect of the unjustified disadvantage caused by the written warning issued to Mr McKelvie on 22 August 2023.
  • Mr Watson is entitled to 3 months' pay totalling $19,230.64. (gross) Compensation for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to feelings [51] Mr Watson gave evidence about the effects on him of ABL's decision to dismiss him and the process leading up to that decision.

Decision markers

  • The Authority found Mr Watson's personal grievance claim for unjustified disadvantage cannot proceed. 3 Employment Relations Act, s 114(7).
  • Because of these various failures, it follows the dismissal was unjustified.7 [47] The Authority found Mr Watson's personal grievance for unjustifiable dismissal succeeds.8 6 Simpsons Farms Ltd v Aberhart [2006] ERNZ 825 [65]. 7 Employment Relations Act , s 103A.

Orders and payments mentioned

  • Compensation: $15,000
  • 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.

If you have an active employment problem and deadlines, get advice early. If you are considering raising a Personal Grievance (PG), the 90 day notification time limit can be critical.

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.

0800 WIN KIWI

Search
Search cases, guides and topics.
Tip: press / to search

Related articles

Browse all articles
Based on: Unfair Dismissal Cases
Shaun Graves v NZSL Employment Limited [2026] NZERA 669 - contractor became an employee before summary dismissal

Shaun Graves initially worked through his own contracting company, but later moved onto NZSL's PAYE payroll, worked regular hours under its direction and used its equipment. The ERA found he had become an employee from 23 September 2024 and was unjustifiably dismissed when simply told his services were no longer required.

Eric Paul Tillocksingh v Driver Employment Limited [2026] NZERA 663 - resign or be dismissed ultimatum was an unjustified dismissal

After a customer complaint, truck driver Eric Tillocksingh was called into meetings without advance written allegations or warning that dismissal was possible. The ERA preferred his evidence that he was told to resign or be dismissed, found the process fundamentally unfair, and awarded $15,000 compensation plus $17,448.75 lost remuneration.

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

After 15 years as RidgeAir's Chief Pilot, Ross McCullum had his work phone disconnected and laptop removed before a meeting at which he was told the business was closing. The ERA found the employer had dismissed him, rejected the later characterisation of his departure as voluntary, and awarded lost wages, compensation and substantial holiday-pay arrears.

Wenpeng Yu v Golden Rooster NZ Trading Ltd [2026] NZERA 699 - one week employee was dismissed, not an abandonment

Golden Rooster said chef Wenpeng Yu abandoned his job after only one week, but WeChat messages supported his evidence that the employer had dismissed him because it was unhappy with his productivity. The ERA found no fair process had been followed and awarded $7,500 compensation, $3,559.20 lost wages and annual holiday pay.

Xuefeng Yang v ERA Home Limited [2026] NZERA 695 - migrant worker was an employee despite employer denying relationship

ERA Home denied that Xuefeng Yang had ever become its employee, despite a signed employment agreement, an approved work visa and evidence that he worked at its construction site. The ERA found an employment relationship existed, upheld unjustified dismissal and disadvantage claims, awarded $23,000 compensation and $8,008.20 lost wages plus holiday pay, and imposed a $3,000 penalty on the company.

Herewini Dickson v Ballance Agri-Nutrients Limited [2026] NZERA 693 - serious safety breach but dismissal and suspension unjustified

Ballance established that long-serving employee Herewini Dickson breached a safety SOP and that the conduct was capable of serious misconduct, but its process was still unfair. The ERA found both his suspension and dismissal unjustified because critical evidence was not disclosed, the HiPo classification was not fairly put to him and alternatives to dismissal were not adequately considered. Remedies were reduced 30 percent for contribution.

Browse topics