ClickCease

Results for 90 day trial

Showing 145-152 of 255 results
Fiona Scott v Ritchies Transport Holdings Limited [2026] NZERA 342 - casual bus driver found to be permanent and unjustifiably dismissed

Fiona Scott signed a casual agreement with Ritchies but in practice regularly drove urban bus routes. After disciplinary issues arose, the employer relied on the casual characterisation and later ended her work, raising questions about her real status and the justification for dismissal.

Matched passage: The Authority recorded that about 90 percent of her shifts were urban work.
Natalie Butler-Smith v David and Dale Cavey t/a DG and DV Cavey Partnership [2026] NZERA 324 - farm assistant dismissed before returning from parental leave

Part-time farm assistant Natalie Butler-Smith was dismissed in February 2024 around the end of parental leave, with the employers raising health-and-safety concerns and disputing aspects of work performed during leave. The respondents did not appear at the investigation meeting.

Matched passage: If you are considering raising a Personal Grievance (PG), the 90 day notification time limit can be critical.
Philip Moller v Cardinal Logistics Limited [2026] NZERA 318 - drug test refusal, unjustified dismissal, unjustified suspension

Philip Moller was dismissed by Cardinal Logistics after refusing a drug and alcohol test said to arise from a safety complaint. The case turned on whether Cardinal had genuine and reasonable grounds to require the test and whether it fairly verified the allegation before suspending and dismissing him.

Matched passage: He had already clocked out and finished work for the day.
Anna Murgatroyd v Xero (NZ) Limited [2026] NZERA 305 - redundancy procedurally unfair but no sham; compensation and lost wages ordered

Anna Murgatroyd was selected for redundancy from Xero's education team after a restructure. She alleged the process was predetermined, relying on an earlier Miro board, and also challenged the use of performance-related comments by a selection panel that included her manager.

Matched passage: Later that day, she shared concerns about how Ms Ruffino had treated her during the roadshow.
Deborah Eyles v Bottlers Limited [2026] NZERA 300 - no redundancy process, unexplained stand down and dismissal; $20,000 compensation ordered

Deborah Eyles was stood down from her supervised-contact work and later dismissed in circumstances the employer characterised as redundancy. She challenged both the unexplained removal from work and the absence of any genuine consultation or fair redundancy process.

Matched passage: ... Total ordered: $20,000 compensation, plus $1,560 gross wage reimbursement and 8% holiday pay on that amount Costs: reserved Background Bottlers Limited was an authorised provider for the Ministry of Justice. Its work included providing supervised contact sessions between ...
Prasath Balachandariyar v Civtec Limited [2026] NZERA 302 - redundancy selection unfairly used asthma and wrist injury; compensation and lost wages ordered

Prasath Balachandariyar was selected for redundancy after workplace health issues including asthma and a wrist injury became part of the employer's assessment. He argued the selection process unfairly used his medical circumstances and that the employer had not conducted a fair redundancy process.

Matched passage: Mr Balachandariyar had taken three days' unpaid sick leave beyond his statutory entitlement.
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: The 90 day personal grievance issue RPL argued that Ms Kennedy had not raised a personal grievance within the required 90 day timeframe.
Layth Abu-Laban v Everest Corporation Limited [2026] NZERA 292 - permanent automotive technician dismissed after employer tried to treat employment as an unrenewed one-year contract; unjustified dismissal upheld; employer counterclaim failed

Everest Corporation told automotive technician Layth Abu-Laban that his employment would end because an alleged one-year contract would not be renewed. His agreement was actually permanent, and the employer later relied on allegations of poor workmanship, customer solicitation, misuse of property and theft.

Matched passage: It was a small business, with Abdullah Khan as a director and the person managing day-to-day operations.

Browse topics