ClickCease

Results for dismissal process

Showing 113-120 of 270 results
Robert Tunnicliffe v Solly's Freight (1978) Limited [2026] NZERA 91 - dismissed over limited-licence application; dismissal unjustified

Robert Tunnicliffe could not perform his ordinary driving duties and Solly's Freight placed him on alternative work while a limited-licence issue was being worked through. The relationship deteriorated over who should progress and pay for the licence application, and Solly's dismissed him on 24 April 2024.

Matched passage: It was therefore an impromptu dismissal without any process.
Yifu Jiang v Smartrade Limited [2026] NZERA 56 - fixed-term clause held unlawful; unjustified dismissal; $15,600 lost wages and $12,000 compensation

Smartrade treated Yifu Jiang's employment as ending under a one-year fixed-term clause, but the agreement did not record genuine reasons satisfying s 66. Mr Jiang was also given no meaningful chance to comment before the employer ended the relationship.

Matched passage: Because the fixed term was not lawful, ending the employment by notice was a dismissal, and the employer was required to run a fair process.
CAMERON ROWETH v MT OUTDOORS LIMITED [2026] NZERA 50 - redundancy dismissal held unjustified due to no consultation on selection; $15,000 compensation, $5,400 lost remuneration, $1,800 notice

Mt Outdoors terminated seasonal retail worker Cameron Roweth's fixed-term role early when winter trading was weaker than expected. The business had a genuine need to reduce labour costs, but selected him for redundancy without consulting him about the selection decision.

Matched passage: Outcome: Unjustified dismissal upheld (selection for redundancy not justified due to lack of consultation).
Fuyu Zhuo v BNS Co Limited and BNS Group Limited [2026] NZERA 45 - unjustified summary dismissal over till cash allegations; employer fidelity claim fails; $15,000 compensation and $3,000 penalty

Fuyu Zhuo was summarily dismissed and trespassed from a hospitality business after allegations that he had taken cash from the till. The employer's case also included a fidelity claim, while Mr Zhuo challenged the lack of a fair investigation and sought wage and holiday entitlements.

Matched passage: Why this case matters Process still matters, even for serious allegations: summary dismissal for suspected theft without investigation and a proper opportunity to respond is high risk.
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

Four workers at Miaodi's Laundromat alleged their employment was ended without a fair process and that significant wage and holiday entitlements had not been paid. The proceeding also involved personal liability and penalties for minimum employment-standard breaches.

Matched passage: Key findings (what the Authority decided) Unjustified dismissal: Upheld.
Haochen Guo v Su's Investment Limited [2025] NZERA 805 - suspension without process, bullying, and redundancy while on ACC leave; $25,000 compensation plus arrears and penalty

Haochen Guo was suspended, complained of bullying and was later made redundant while absent on ACC leave. The ERA examined the fairness of the suspension and workplace treatment as well as whether the purported redundancy was genuine and properly consulted on.

Matched passage: 4) Redundancy dismissal: unjustified dismissal The Authority found SIL terminated Mr Guo on redundancy grounds without providing information, without consultation, and without any form of process, including while Mr Guo was on ACC related sick leave.
HIRST v AL ENTERPRISES LIMITED [2025] NZERA 474 - bakery worker dismissed without fair process

Hailee-Anne Hirst said a bakery effectively dismissed her after calling her in on a day off and confronting her about allegedly missing market takings. The employer denied dismissing her but did not participate in the investigation meeting.

Matched passage: Based on the above The Authority found Ms Hirst was dismissed and there being no fair process that could have allowed a substantive finding to support, The Authority found the dismissal was unjustified.
Wang v Steel Master Co Ltd [2025] NZERA 457 - dismissal, not resignation; $11,000 compensation and 8 weeks lost wages

Steel Master said Mr Wang had resigned, but he had been given a choice between finding another job and being unilaterally dismissed. The ERA examined the objective effect of that ultimatum rather than the employer's description of the ending.

Matched passage: The ERA disagreed, finding the employment ended by the employer's action and that the dismissal was unjustified.

Browse topics