ClickCease

Results for ERA

Showing 97-104 of 288 results
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: era.
O'BRIEN v THE PLATFORM MEDIA NZ LIMITED [2025] NZERA 57 - NDA disadvantage and redundancy dismissal unjustified

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.

Matched passage: era.
PIACUN v COOPER NO 1 LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 32 - business sale did not avoid notice; dismissal unjustified

Cooper No 1 sold its business and told Ms Piacun her employment was ending, without paying a notice period. The ERA considered whether the sale itself ended employment or whether Cooper had taken the initiative to terminate her contract.

Matched passage: era.
NAIR v MODERN AUTO REPAIR CENTRE LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 28 - dismissal and wage claims upheld after conflicting accounts

Modern Auto Repair said Mr Nair resigned after a heated argument; Nair alleged he was dismissed and also pursued wage and holiday-pay issues. The ERA had to resolve conflicting evidence about how the employment ended and what money remained owing.

Matched passage: era.
CHEN v CONSTRUST LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 20 - unjustified dismissal; compensation, wages and penalty

Mr Chen worked in a construction arrangement where the identity of the employer and the true nature of the relationship were disputed. Evidence at the ERA included inconsistent accounts about when Construst was first mentioned and the parties agreed the amount of lost remuneration if employment was established.

Matched passage: era.
JOHNSTONE v ZXY [2025] NZERA 11 - care worker's summary dismissal unjustified; hindsight undermined the process

A care worker with 21 years' service was summarily dismissed after a resident incident, principally for not calling an ambulance. The ERA examined whether the employer judged her conduct with hindsight and fairly considered what she actually knew, her explanations and gaps in workplace policies and practice.

Matched passage: era.
ADO v JOAN FERNIE CHARITABLE TRUST BOARD [2025] NZERA 3 - redundancy found to be a pretext for conduct concerns

ADO was selected for redundancy by the Joan Fernie Charitable Trust Board after workplace conduct concerns and an argument had arisen. The ERA examined whether redundancy was genuinely driven by commercial considerations and whether redeployment, including a proposed trial in the Stock Manager role, was fairly considered.

Matched passage: era.

Browse topics