ClickCease

Results for disciplinary

Showing 9-16 of 155 results
MOKE v RAUKURA HAUORA O TAINUI TRUST [2025] NZERA 48 - external investigation and disciplinary process partly unjustified

Ms Moke faced complaints and an external investigation while employed by Raukura Hauora O Tainui Trust. The case examined the fairness of the investigation, disciplinary steps and the Trust's eventual preliminary and final conclusions, including whether tikanga and kaupapa-based processes altered the statutory fairness requirements.

Matched passage: Later, It continued (bold emphasis added): Depending on the seriousness of the performance concern, or degree of misconduct alleged, the (quoted wording omitted) may be as simple as holding some fact- finding meetings.
Aaron Potter v Talley's Limited [2026] NZERA 412 - flawed HSR election disciplinary process and unjustified dismissal

Aaron Potter was disciplined and dismissed by Talley's after disputes surrounding a health and safety representative election and communications involving other employees. The case focused on whether Talley's properly investigated the competing accounts and relevant messages before deciding serious misconduct was established.

Matched passage: Good faith breach The Authority separately found that Talley's failure to carry out a fair disciplinary process breached the duty of good faith.
Deborah Coley v Bupa Care Services NZ Limited [2026] NZERA 530 - redundancy threat used to force variation of guaranteed hours

Deborah Coley's agreement guaranteed at least 32 hours each week, but Bupa sought to vary that guarantee by averaging hours across a six-week roster and presented redundancy as the alternative if she refused. A later disciplinary investigation and written warning added a second strand to the disadvantage claim.

Matched passage: A later disciplinary investigation and written warning also caused unjustified disadvantage.
Arnold Putt v George Weston Foods [2026] NZERA 179 - misconduct, performance; what the ERA decided and what was ordered

Packaging operator Arnold Putt challenged disciplinary action by George Weston Foods after a confrontation with his production manager about task priorities. The ERA examined both the basis for a final written warning and whether shortcomings in the way the process was communicated caused a separate disadvantage.

Matched passage: Context mattered: Mr Heyes had no authority to summarily dismiss staff, and Mr Putt knew disciplinary matters at GWF were normally dealt with through a formal process rather than an instant on-the-spot firing.
JAYALATH v INFOSYS LIMITED [2025] NZERA 539 - dismissal over mandatory training modules unjustified

Infosys dismissed Mr Jayalath for failing to complete mandatory online business modules after a disciplinary process run partly by overseas management. He challenged both the substantive basis for treating the failure as dismissible conduct and the fairness of the procedure.

Matched passage: After that, Disciplinary meetings [16] On 27 March 2024 Mr Jayalath received a call from Infosys management based in Australia to attend a meeting on the following day to discuss an allegation of breach of conduct.
Gumbeze v Chief Executive of Oranga Tamariki [2024] NZEmpC 133 - serious misconduct finding overturned

Oranga Tamariki summarily dismissed social worker Bigson Gumbeze after an external investigation into complaints about his supervision, dealings with managers and aspects of his practice. The ERA upheld the dismissal, but he challenged that result afresh in the Employment Court.

Matched passage: UrlEncode(judgmentUrl); } Gumbeze v Chief Executive of Oranga Tamariki [2024] NZEmpC 133 - serious misconduct finding overturned Bigson Gumbeze lost his unjustified-dismissal claim in the Employment Relations Authority but succeeded on a de novo challenge.
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: The letter said he was suspended from work without pay from 29 May 2025 pending disciplinary action.

Browse topics