ClickCease

Results for unjustified dismissal

Showing 129-136 of 325 results
Olliver & Taylor v Te Araroa [2025] NZERA 312 - fixed-term dismissals unjustified; $37,500 and $27,500 compensation

Community Connectors Daynah Olliver and Sheena Taylor were employed on fixed-term agreements that did not properly record the statutory reasons for the fixed terms. Te Araroa then tried to end both employments early without a fair process.

Matched passage: ... Sheena Taylor Investigation meeting: 29-30 January 2025 Determination: 4 June 2025 Outcome: Unjustified dismissal and disadvantage claims succeeded; Ms Olliver also succeeded on family-status discrimination. Fixed-term agreements did not justify the dismissals Both applicants ...
Thuy v Huynh [2025] NZERA 74 - 90-day trial failed; dismissal for seeking employment advice unjustified

A nail technician was dismissed during a purported 90-day trial after seeking advice about her employment rights. The employer had not complied with the notice requirement in its own trial clause.

Matched passage: The ERA then found the dismissal itself unjustified, including because the employee was entitled to seek advice about her employment rights.
Mereana Kennedy v Remarkable People Limited [2026] NZERA 296 - account manager constructively dismissed after employer failed to properly respond to safety concerns about candidate; $20,000 compensation ordered

Mereana Kennedy resigned from Remarkable People after repeated unwanted communications from a candidate created safety concerns and the employer's protective arrangements failed to resolve the problem. She alleged the employer did not properly investigate or respond when the safety plan proved ineffective.

Matched passage: ... Key issues: 90 day personal grievance notification; casual employment label; constructive dismissal; safe workplace; good faith; contribution; remedies Outcome: personal grievance raised in time for the core safety and sanction issues; constructive dismissal established; ...
CHUNG v HUYNH [2025] NZERA 69 - trial-period defence fails; dismissal unjustified

Ms Chung was dismissed by email late on Boxing Day after about 100 days of work, with the employer purporting to rely on a 90-day trial period. General performance criticisms were raised later but had not formed a fair dismissal process at the time.

Matched passage: ... meeting: 9-12 September 2024 (Wellington) Determination date: 14 February 2025 Outcome: Unjustified dismissal found; 90-day trial defence rejected; remedies ordered. Story in plain English This decision deals with a dismissal during what the employer said was a 90-day trial ...
Adarsh Chand v Professional Stylish Barber Shop Limited [2026] NZERA 244 - unjustified constructive dismissal after unjustified warnings; $12,000 compensation + $14,560 reimbursement

Adarsh Chand resigned from Professional Stylish Barber Shop after disciplinary warnings and employment treatment he said had destroyed the relationship. The ERA examined whether the warning was substantively and procedurally justified and whether the resulting resignation was caused by the employer's breaches.

Matched passage: ... that sick leave was refused whenever he could not afford a certificate. Constructive dismissal: why the resignation was treated as an unjustified dismissal The Authority applied the constructive dismissal principles from Auckland Shop Employees Union v Woolworths (NZ) ...
Colin Bradshaw v Ocean To Alps Removal & Storage Limited [2025] NZERA 636 - dismissal claim failed, but unjustified disadvantage upheld; $15,000 compensation and wage arrears

Colin Bradshaw claimed he was dismissed after a confrontation during a removal job and a related pay dispute with Ocean To Alps. The ERA had to separate the alleged termination from the employer's subsequent handling of the incident, communications and unpaid hours.

Matched passage: As a result, Mr Bradshaw cannot establish a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal.
GILLARD v SOUTHSHORE MARINE LIMITED [2025] NZERA 454 - 90-day trial reliance fails; dismissal unjustified

Southshore Marine attempted to rely on a 90-day trial when dismissing Mr Gillard after concerns about his work. The timing of when employment actually commenced and the complete absence of a fair performance, conduct or capacity process were central issues.

Matched passage: At a glance Citation: [2025] NZERA 454 Registry: Christchurch Parties: GILLARD v SOUTHSHORE MARINE LIMITED Authority member: Antoinette Baker Hearing date: 18 March 2025 Outcome: The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues.
Xuefeng Yang v ERA Home Limited [2026] NZERA 695 - migrant worker was an employee despite employer denying relationship

ERA Home denied that Xuefeng Yang had ever become its employee, despite a signed employment agreement, an approved work visa and evidence that he worked at its construction site. The ERA found an employment relationship existed, upheld unjustified dismissal and disadvantage claims, awarded $23,000 compensation and $8,008.20 lost wages plus holiday pay, and imposed a $3,000 penalty on the company.

Matched passage: 66 per hour for a minimum 30 hours per week Outcome: employment relationship established; unjustified dismissal and disadvantage upheld Compensation: $23,000 Lost wages: $8,008.

Browse topics