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
Lita Beattie v Matthew Roberts [2026] NZERA 450 - employee status, unpaid wages and constructive dismissal

Lita Beattie worked long hours as head chef for Matthew Roberts at Matt's Kitchen but was paid sporadically, sometimes in cash, and often not at all. Mr Roberts argued the arrangement was a contracting or business-support arrangement, partly connected with an alleged debt. The ERA found Ms Beattie was an employee. The Flexi Wage subsidy discussions, the intended employment agreement, her integration into the business, the absence of invoices, and the fact she worked under Mr Roberts' direction all pointed to employment. The failure to pay wages was a serious breach that foreseeably compelled her resignation, so the resignation was a constructive dismissal. Mr Roberts was ordered to pay $18,000 compensation, $14,040 lost wages, $23,050 gross wage arrears, $1,844 annual holiday arrears, PAYE and KiwiSaver accounting, and interest on wage and holiday arrears...

Sidney Yu and Jing Tham v Queenstown Nursery Limited [2026] NZERA 446 - casual employment, fixed assignment and unjustified dismissal

Sidney Yu and Jing Tham were working holiday visa holders engaged by Queenstown Nursery Limited as casual nursery assistants. The employer argued their work was offered only day by day and could simply stop being offered. The ERA disagreed. An email promising Monday to Wednesday work for at least the next three weeks created an assignment extending to 23 April 2025. When QNL ended the work on 15 April, it said the reason was weather, but later acknowledged the applicants had been selected because they were considered less efficient. The Authority found no fair process, no evidence of substantive justification, and a breach of good faith. Each applicant was awarded $848 gross for four lost working days, including Easter Monday as an otherwise working day, and $2,000 compensation...

Sukhmanpreet Singh v JIT Limited, Davinder Pal and Harmanpreet Kaur Sandhu [2026] NZERA 453 - forced leave request, unjustified suspension and dismissal

JIT Limited dismissed Sukhmanpreet Singh after an argument with a director about annual leave. The ERA found the employer had unlawfully pressured him to write an annual-leave request, then suspended him by cancelling shifts without proper process, and later dismissed him without a fair investigation or fair opportunity to answer the full allegations. A pushing allegation was not established. The Authority also found wage and public-holiday arrears, record-keeping failures, and Wages Protection Act breaches. After a 15 percent contribution reduction, JITL was ordered to pay $9,019.44 lost remuneration and $15,300 compensation, plus $5,176.80 arrears and interest, and penalties including $2,500 payable to Mr Singh and $4,500 payable to the Crown...

Steven David Mitchell v Tasman Rugby Union Incorporated [2026] NZERA 435 - CEO returned to payroll on interim reinstatement

Tasman Rugby Union summarily dismissed its CEO, Steven David Mitchell, for alleged serious misconduct. In this interim decision, the ERA did not finally determine the allegations. It found, however, that Mr Mitchell had a strongly arguable unjustified-dismissal case, including an arguable predetermination concern arising from a review process, how that review later fed into the disciplinary process, and Board communications that could indicate adverse and personalised views had formed before the decision. The Authority held that the new 2026 remedies amendments applied, but could not make definitive contribution or serious-misconduct findings at the interim stage. It ordered immediate reinstatement to payroll only, backdated to 21 March 2026, while reserving the substantive merits hearing...

Browse topics