Search Employment Law

Ms Cuc was dismissed with one week's notice under what the nail-salon employer said was a 90-day trial period. She said the real issue was that she was outspoken about her employment rights, while performance criticisms were advanced later in the ERA proceeding.

The Platform Media made Ms O'Brien redundant after a period of absence and a dispute that also involved a proposed NDA. The ERA examined whether redundancy was the true predominant reason, whether alternatives and redeployment were genuinely considered, and whether the NDA process caused disadvantage.

Gary Cotton's case required the ERA to identify who his employer actually was after work performed through Gosling Solutions and dealings involving Darcee Gosling and Rob Ralston. The case also concerned a summary termination and claims for unpaid employment entitlements.

Sukhmanpreet Singh's dispute with JIT arose after he was pressed to submit an annual-leave request and a confrontation followed. JIT then cancelled his shifts on claimed mental-stress grounds and later dismissed him for serious misconduct, while the ERA examined the conduct of both sides.

A practical guide to New Zealand 90-day trial dismissals: when the clause is valid, the start date and notice requirements, and the mistakes that can leave an employer exposed to a personal grievance.

Jia Jia began work for TBS Trading without a written employment agreement, experienced late wage payments and then found the employer stopped communicating and providing work. The case concerned whether that silence and withdrawal of work amounted to dismissal as well as separate pay and documentation breaches.

Senior quarantine officer Mujahid Khan, an 18-year MPI employee, sought interim reinstatement after dismissal while his substantive grievance remained unresolved. The ERA considered the strength of the arguable dismissal case, the possibility of permanent reinstatement and the balance of convenience.

LGY sought interim reinstatement after being dismissed by a school board while the substantive personal grievance remained unresolved. The Board relied on serious allegations and workplace concerns, while LGY argued there was a strong arguable dismissal case and that reinstatement could operate pending a final hearing.