ClickCease

Results for disciplinary

Showing 81-88 of 108 results
Lekeisha Ramsay v National Storage Ltd [2025] NZERA 269 - Probationary period dismissal held unjustified; $9,000 compensation + $14,040.40 lost wages; penalties dismissed

Lekeisha Ramsay was dismissed by National Storage just over three months into employment under a probationary arrangement. The ERA examined attendance and performance concerns, the adequacy of warnings and whether the employer had given her a fair opportunity to improve and respond before termination.

Matched passage: Related topics Employment Relations Authority (ERA) Unjustified dismissal Disciplinary process Good faith obligations
Hao v South Pole IP Holding (NZ) Limited [2025] NZERA 245 - pressure to resign caused constructive dismissal

South Pole treated Xinhua Hao as having agreed to resign, despite his repeated denials, then withheld work and continued pressing the resignation dispute. The ERA found those actions caused an unjustified constructive dismissal.

Matched passage: Correspondence from its lawyer continued treating the supposed resignation as the central dispute and raised the prospect of disciplinary action if no suitable outcome was reached.
SWENSON v AKITIO TRUCKING LIMITED [2025] NZERA 214 - unjustified dismissal with contribution reduction

Akitio Trucking dismissed Mr Swenson after concluding he punched another driver. He argued the employer had failed to deal with earlier theft allegations and that its investigation and dismissal process were unjustified.

Matched passage: Later, Mr Swenson was suspended on pay and invited to a disciplinary meeting.
CALLEN v ALARON PRODUCTS LIMITED [2025] NZERA 165 - dismissal grievance allowed; compensation and lost wages awarded

Mr Callen's unjustified-dismissal grievance against Alaron Products was not formally filed in the Authority until after the ordinary 90-day raising period had become an issue. The case addressed whether the grievance could nevertheless proceed and what remedies followed from the dismissal claim.

Matched passage: Mr Gray advised Mr Evans would represent the company at the meeting and if no suitable explanation was given by Mr Callen, he was facing potential disciplinary action up to and including his dismissal.
KINZETT v FIRE AND EMERGENCY NEW ZEALAND [2025] NZERA 132 - dismissal unjustified; investigation disadvantages justified

Fire and Emergency New Zealand investigated complaints involving firefighter Russell Kinzett and two other firefighters before summarily dismissing him. Mr Kinzett challenged both the investigation process and the dismissal, and was later interim-reinstated.

Matched passage: The report led to disciplinary action against Mr Kinzett, ultimately resulting in his summary dismissal on 6 May 2024.
QN v FT LIMITED [2025] NZERA 99 - unjustified dismissal

QN was summarily dismissed as a branch manager after FT Limited investigated an alleged undisclosed conflict of interest involving the engagement of a close family member's company. The ERA examined both the underlying conflict and whether the investigation and decision-making process was fair.

Matched passage: Ultimately, The letter then drew attention to examples of serious misconduct in QN's employment agreement and a company disciplinary and dismissal policy relating to a conflict-of-interest activity and failure to disclose.
RAY YU v SYNERGY NUTRITION LIMITED [2025] NZERA 64 - Unjustified dismissal and unjustified disadvantage (warning)

Synergy Nutrition issued Ray Yu a written warning and later dismissed him amid concerns including phone use and his ability to work night shifts. The ERA separately assessed the fairness of the warning, dismissal and Yu's own conduct under the contribution provisions.

Matched passage: The Authority notes that The written warning issued to Mr Yu was disciplinary in nature following an inquiry into his conduct - the letter states Mr Yu's employment may be terminated if he continues not to follow SNL's policies and procedures.
O'BRIEN v THE PLATFORM MEDIA NZ LIMITED [2025] NZERA 56 - disadvantage claims decided; later dismissal claims left separate

Ms O'Brien's proceeding against The Platform concerned employment grievances arising before her later dismissal. After the investigation meeting she sought to add dismissal-related claims, creating a procedural dispute about whether those new matters belonged in the determination already under way.

Matched passage: Ultimately, The letter sought a meeting with Ms O'Brien to obtain her response to the allegations and recorded that disciplinary action up to and including summary dismissal was a possibility.

Browse topics