ClickCease

Results for disciplinary

Showing 105-112 of 155 results
Benjamin Thomas v Matthew Scott and Patricia Scott trading as Infinity Dairy [2025] NZERA 592 - indefinite paid suspension over prescribed medicinal cannabis; employer silence led to constructive dismissal; $33,545.75 awarded plus $4,571.55 costs/fee

Benjamin Thomas was placed on an open-ended paid suspension after issues arose about his prescribed medicinal-cannabis use. The employer then failed to progress a meaningful investigation or communicate a pathway back to work, and Mr Thomas eventually resigned alleging constructive dismissal.

Matched passage: The employment agreement allowed paid suspension only in circumstances of alleged serious misconduct while an investigation was carried out.
BLIGNAUT v WASTE MANAGEMENT NZ LIMITED [2025] NZERA 560 - The personal grievance for unjustified disadvantage was upheld.

Mr Blignaut challenged Waste Management's treatment of him during a workplace conflict, including alleged bullying, suspension and pressure to resign, before he was ultimately dismissed for alleged serious misconduct. The ERA considered both the pre-dismissal disadvantage claims and the termination itself.

Matched passage: The determination records that WMNZ starts a disciplinary process [79] On 14 December 2023 Mr Singh sent an email to Mr Blignaut attaching a letter requesting a meeting on 15 December 2023, for when Mr Blignaut was expected to return to work.
LYONS v ROTORUA LAKES COUNCIL [2025] NZERA 467 - summary dismissal disproportionate; 100% contribution to compensation

Rotorua Lakes Council summarily dismissed recreation planner Richard Lyons after repeated absences and failures to communicate. Its own code classified the conduct as misconduct subject to a progressive warning process, rather than serious misconduct warranting immediate dismissal.

Matched passage: Failing to report by telephone to your supervisor [41] Despite the alleged breaches being listed as misconduct under the code of conduct, the employer decided to summarily dismiss Mr Lyons for serious misconduct based on a breach of trust and confidence.
DA SILVA v DSJ JOINERY LIMITED [2025] NZERA 444 - no express dismissal at meeting, but later conduct ended employment

Mr Da Silva left a meeting with DSJ Joinery believing he had been dismissed, although the employer said the meeting was about health and safety rather than discipline. The ERA examined whether there was an actual dismissal and, if not, whether the employer's conduct nevertheless ended the relationship.

Matched passage: Against this accepted background, The Authority found it implausible and improbable that Mr Milne would escalate a health and safety meeting - which was not even a disciplinary meeting - to a dismissal in the course of minutes.
PINK v POWERNET LIMITED [2025] NZERA 374 - redundancy business case not genuine

PowerNet proposed to disestablish Ms Pink's occupational-health role and replace the service model, but the ERA scrutinised whether the proposal genuinely reflected her whole role, the asserted flexibility rationale and the lack of supporting costings.

Matched passage: There being a finding of a lack of genuine reason to disestablish Ms Pink's role, it follows that because there was no disciplinary process The Authority found that Ms Pink was unjustifiably dismissed.
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.

Browse topics