The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues. She was dismissed from her employment as of 15 June 2023 following the implementation of a restructuring proposal.
Redundancy is defined at common law as a situation where an employee's position becomes surplus to the needs of the employer. A redundancy is treated by the Courts as a dismissal, therefore it must be genuine and carried out in a procedurally fair way.
Redundancy is a form of dismissal where the employer says your position is no longer needed. Even if the business decision is genuine, the employer must follow a fair process and the outcome must be one a fair and reasonable employer could have reached (section 103A - test of justification).
A "genuine redundancy" is not about whether you are a good employee - it is about whether the employer genuinely no longer needs the job to be done in the same way. If redundancy is used as a pretext to remove a person, it can be an unjustified dismissal.
There is no automatic statutory redundancy compensation. Entitlement usually depends on your employment agreement (or sometimes a workplace policy or established practice).
If you are facing redundancy (or have already been made redundant), we can assess whether the redundancy was genuine and whether the employer followed a fair process under
section 103A, and if not, raise a Personal Grievance (PG) and pursue appropriate remedies.
Employee Case Form
The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues. She was dismissed from her employment as of 15 June 2023 following the implementation of a restructuring proposal.
The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues. She says that Cooper terminated her employment on 15 June 2023 without paid notice.
The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues. Mr Knox was asked to provide feedback by 1pm on 29 September 2023 and was provided the proposal document after the meeting at approximately 11:45AM.
A penalty determination was made. ADO was given notice of termination on the grounds of redundancy, with his employment to cease on 15 January 2024.
In Tihei Kereopa-Rerekura v Cruz Bar Ltd [2023] NZERA 376, the ERA found the employer unjustifiably dismissed a security guard while he was isolating due to Covid-19. The claimed redundancy was not genuine and there was no fair process. The Authority awarded $15,000 compensation, $1,893.86 lost earnings, and $1,458.00 for notice.
In Leo Waters v S.T.L Linehaul Ltd [2021] NZERA 304, the ERA held the redundancy dismissal was unjustified due to a lack of consultation, lack of relevant information, and failure to properly explore alternatives and redeployment. The Authority awarded $17,000 compensation and reserved costs.