![Yu Chunyan, Sun Tingting, Liu Danhua, Zhang Shijie v Miaodi's Laundromat Ltd t/a Mr Suds and Yang Yang [2026] NZERA 31 - Unjustified dismissal, wage arrears, compensation and penalty](/Images/site/EmploymentAdvocatesAucklandCard.jpg)
Unjustified dismissal and unjustified disadvantage found for four migrant laundry workers. The Authority ordered arrears, lost remuneration, $18,000 compensation each (after contribution), and a $10,000 penalty.
New Zealand unfair dismissal (unjustified dismissal) case summaries from the Employment Relations Authority (ERA), explaining key facts, outcomes, and lessons for employees and employers.
These unfair dismissal (unjustified dismissal) case summaries cover Employment Relations Authority (ERA) decisions from across New Zealand. Each case highlights the facts, the Authority's reasoning, and the outcome, so you can see what tends to help or hurt a dismissal justification.
If you are dealing with a dismissal dispute, these examples can help you understand common errors in process, the standard of reasonableness applied, and typical remedies where a dismissal is found to be unjustified.
Unjustified dismissal and unjustified disadvantage found for four migrant laundry workers. The Authority ordered arrears, lost remuneration, $18,000 compensation each (after contribution), and a $10,000 penalty.
The Authority found the dismissal was unjustified. On 22 December 2024 Mr Maiorenko sent an email to Mr Astashkin requesting payment of wages and requesting details about his next job.
Outcome: see the Authority's findings and orders in the embedded determination. After outlining three concerns about Mr Sinclair-Walker's work performance, Ms Buckingham told Mr Sinclair-Walker that he was dismissed for serious misconduct.
Unjustified dismissal upheld. Orders included $9,500 compensation, one week's wages (net, based on 40 hours), and a $500 penalty payable to the Crown.
A practical summary of Payal v JB Hospitality Ltd [2026] NZERA 18. The ERA found constructive dismissal and ordered compensation, lost wages, wage and holiday arrears, and repayment of an unlawful premium payment.
Preliminary determination on time limits: the Authority held the grievance was raised within 90 days and the proceeding was within three years, and directed the parties to mediation.
Constructive dismissal upheld. Orders included $18,000 compensation, $62,831 gross wage arrears, repayment of a $3,730 unlawful premium, and $2,250 costs.
In George King v Off the Wall Construction Ltd [2026] NZERA 14, the ERA held the 90-day trial was invalid because the employee had already worked (and been paid) before signing. The dismissal was unjustified and the Authority awarded lost wages and compensation.