ClickCease

Results for final pay

Showing 145-152 of 223 results
CALLEN v ALARON PRODUCTS LIMITED [2025] NZERA 165 - dismissal grievance allowed; compensation and lost wages awarded

Mr Callen's unjustified-dismissal grievance against Alaron Products was not formally filed in the Authority until after the ordinary 90-day raising period had become an issue. The case addressed whether the grievance could nevertheless proceed and what remedies followed from the dismissal claim.

Matched passage: Orders and payments mentioned Compensation: $20,000 Lost wages / arrears: $14,820 Costs: Costs reserved.
THING v SOUTH POLE IP HOLDING (NZ) LIMITED [2025] NZERA 142 - dismissal theory fails in part but disadvantage grievance succeeds

Ms Thing's dispute with South Pole IP Holding concerned whether the end of her employment was a dismissal or resignation and whether the employer's earlier conduct had unjustifiably disadvantaged her. The case required the ERA to distinguish direct or constructive dismissal from separate disadvantage grievances.

Matched passage: Orders and payments mentioned Compensation: $15, 000 Lost wages: $8,000 8 weeks' lost wages Holiday pay: $23.
YAQUB v NEILSONS LAWYERS LIMITED [2025] NZERA 139 - suspension disadvantage and constructive dismissal upheld

Neilsons Lawyers suspended Mr Yaqub during an investigation into alleged conduct. He later resigned, alleging that the continuing suspension and the way the investigation was handled had made continued employment untenable.

Matched passage: Orders and payments mentioned Compensation: $40,000 Lost wages: 3 months Note: figures above are extracted from the orders section (or the final orders wording).
BROWN v TIMBER TOWN HARVESTING LIMITED [2025] NZERA 117 - real dismissal reasons were not fairly put to the employee

Timber Town Harvesting summarily dismissed Mr Brown after relying on an earlier workplace incident and disputed warnings. The case examined whether the reasons actually relied on were properly put to him and whether he had been given a meaningful opportunity to understand and correct the employer's concerns.

Matched passage: Orders and payments mentioned Compensation: $15,000 Lost wages: $10,017 Note: figures above are extracted from the orders section (or the final orders wording).
QN v FT LIMITED [2025] NZERA 99 - unjustified dismissal

QN was summarily dismissed as a branch manager after FT Limited investigated an alleged undisclosed conflict of interest involving the engagement of a close family member's company. The ERA examined both the underlying conflict and whether the investigation and decision-making process was fair.

Matched passage: Orders and payments mentioned Costs: Costs reserved.
HILL v TAMAKI LABOUR HIRE LIMITED [2025] NZERA 100 - personal grievance partly successful; remedies limited to proven breaches

Mr Hill challenged the ending of his employment with Tamaki Labour Hire and associated treatment during the employment relationship. The case required the ERA to separate the parts of his grievance that were established from claims for which the evidence did not justify relief.

Matched passage: Orders and payments mentioned Compensation: $23,000 Lost wages: One weeks' pay Costs: Costs reserved.
DRUMMOND v THE VICE-CHANCELLOR OF MASSEY UNIVERSITY [2025] NZERA 82 - 90-day limit: warning grievance in time, earlier claims out

Jackson Drummond sought to pursue a series of disadvantage, discrimination and good-faith complaints against Massey University, some dating back many months before his December 2023 grievance letter. The preliminary issue was which claims had actually been raised within the statutory 90-day period.

Matched passage: In summary, The final meeting in relation to the allegations regarding the Ball occurred on 3 November 2023.
DUN TRAN v HUYNH [2025] NZERA 73 - dismissal and employment-entitlement claims partly successful

Dun Tran's employment dispute with Huynh involved the ending of the employment relationship together with claims about pay and workplace treatment. The ERA had to separate the dismissal issue from the employment-standard claims and determine which alleged breaches were actually established.

Matched passage: Decision markers The Authority found that the failure to pay wages in full and when due was unjustified and disadvantaged Ms Dung Tran in the terms and conditions of her employment.

Browse topics