Search Employment Law

Mr Cully resigned from The Work Shop Limited and alleged the employer's breaches were serious enough to amount to constructive dismissal. He also sought unpaid wages and compensation, requiring the ERA to determine whether his resignation was legally attributable to the employer's conduct.

WRW resigned after McCarthy Enterprises proposed changes to her work and the relationship deteriorated. The ERA had to decide whether the employer's conduct was sufficiently serious and causative to convert that resignation into a constructive dismissal and whether any wage loss was proved.

Mr Kumar resigned from JK Hospitality after alleging he was repeatedly denied proper breaks and practical support at work. The ERA considered whether those breaches were sufficiently serious that resignation was a reasonably foreseeable response.

Mr Chase-Pona resigned after workplace disputes including a theft allegation, but Coin Total terminated his employment before his notice period expired. The ERA had to determine whether the employment ended by resignation, dismissal or constructive dismissal.

Mr Riseley resigned from Huntly Joinery after a series of employer actions that he said destroyed the employment relationship. The ERA had to decide whether those breaches were sufficiently serious and causative to turn the resignation into a constructive dismissal.

Mr Paetz resigned from Solly's Freight after disputes about excessive hours and the employer's failure to conduct a required pay review. He argued those ongoing breaches caused his resignation and also independently disadvantaged him while employed.

Ms Dwyer brought sexual-harassment, unjustified-disadvantage, constructive-dismissal and good-faith claims arising from her work at Oakvue Bloodstock. The ERA separated the alleged harassment and resignation issues from specific employer actions that actually disadvantaged her employment.

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.