ClickCease

ZHANG v PENG and ANOR [2026] NZERA 16 - Constructive dismissal upheld; $18,000 compensation; $62,831 wage arrears; $3,730 premium repaid.

Constructive dismissal upheld. Orders included $18,000 compensation, $62,831 gross wage arrears, repayment of a $3,730 unlawful premium, and $2,250 costs.


ZHANG v PENG and ANOR [2026] NZERA 16

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

At a glance

  • Citation: [2026] NZERA 16
  • Registry: Auckland
  • Parties: ZHANG v PENG and ANOR
  • Outcome: Constructive dismissal found and the personal grievance for unjustified dismissal was upheld.

Story in plain English

Mr Zhang paid a "premium" to obtain employment, then worked at a restaurant run by the respondents. The Authority found the premium was unlawful and that Mr Zhang was owed substantial wage arrears. Mr Zhang later resigned. The Authority held the resignation amounted to a constructive dismissal and found the dismissal was unjustified. The Authority ordered repayment of the premium, wage arrears, compensation for hurt and humiliation, and costs.

Key case markers

  • Authority member: Peter van Keulen.
  • This determination comes from the Christchurch registry.
  • The parties are ZHANG (employee) and PENG and ANOR (employer).
  • Personal grievance type: unjustified dismissal (constructive dismissal).
  • Hearing date noted: 25 September 2025 by AVL.

Key events described (as described by the Authority)

  • I investigated Mr Zhang's employment relationship problem with Mr Noodles by receiving written evidence and documents from him and holding an investigation meeting on 25 September 2025.
  • On 15 August 2023 Mr Zhang was instructed to pay 15,000 RMB (NZD $3,730) to Ms Peng's sister, for his employment.
  • In this case Mr Zhang was not dismissed by Mr Noodles, rather, he resigned.
  • Mr Zhang argues that because he resigned in response to breaches of duty by Mr Noodles, his resignation should be treated as a dismissal - a constructive dismissal.
  • Mr Zhang's resignation amounts to a dismissal by Mr Noodles.
  • The current rate of the daily tariff is $4,500 for the first day of the investigation meeting and $3,500 for any subsequent days. 6 For further information about the factors considered in assessing costs, see: www.era.govt.nz/determinations/awarding-costs-remedies/#awarding-and-paying-costs-1.

Decision markers (as described by the Authority)

  • The premium payment was found to be unlawful and was ordered to be repaid.
  • Wage arrears were found and ordered to be paid.
  • Constructive dismissal was found, and the dismissal was held to be unjustified.

Orders and payments mentioned

  • Repayment of unlawful premium: $3,730 (payable within 28 days).
  • Wage arrears: $62,831 gross (payable within 28 days).
  • Compensation (hurt and humiliation): $18,000 (payable within 28 days; without deductions).
  • Costs: $2,250 (payable within 28 days).
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 articles and guides.
Tip: press / to search

Related articles

Browse all articles
Based on: Unfair Dismissal Cases, Constructive Dismissal
Layth Abu-Laban v Everest Corporation Limited [2026] NZERA 292 - permanent automotive technician dismissed after employer tried to treat employment as an unrenewed one-year contract; unjustified dismissal upheld; employer counterclaim failed

Everest Corporation Limited told an automotive technician his employment was ending because it would not renew what it said was a one-year contract. The ERA found the agreement was permanent, the dismissal process was non-existent, and the employer's later allegations of poor workmanship, customer solicitation, misuse of property and theft were not substantiated...

Kyle Horsefield v Eurocars Limited [2026] NZERA 293 - car salesperson labelled casual was a permanent employee; dismissal by text message unjustified; $12,345 ordered

Eurocars labelled a new car salesperson as casual and then texted him that his casual employment was terminated because he was busy with a lawyer and physio. The ERA found the real relationship was permanent on an as-required basis, the text was a summary dismissal, and the employer had no fair process or substantive justification...

Lyon Kawhaaru v The Deck Tahuna Limited [2026] NZERA 288 - cafe worker told by email he was 'instant dismissed' after customer incident; unjustified dismissal upheld; remedies reduced 25% for contribution

After a customer incident captured on CCTV, the employer emailed that the matter was serious misconduct and 'will result in instant dismissal effective from 4 June'. The ERA held that was an unequivocal sending away: the worker was dismissed without any fair process and did not abandon...

Nicholas Gordon Pilcher v Brandt Tractor Limited [2026] NZERA 273 - dismissal for untested bullying complaints held unjustified; de facto suspension unjustified; $19,360 compensation + 4 months' lost pay

A sales manager was put on 'special leave' while four bullying/harassment complaints were being investigated, but his phone and laptop were taken and he was removed from the workplace without prior consultation. Five days later he was dismissed for serious misconduct without being given the...

Browse topics