ClickCease

Results for serious misconduct

Showing 9-16 of 75 results
David Turner v Big B Cartage Limited [2026] NZERA 581 - seven-minute disciplinary meeting led to unjustified dismissal

Big B Cartage dismissed truck driver David Turner for serious misconduct after a seven-minute meeting without identifying the allegations or disclosing the text message relied on. The ERA found the dismissal unjustified and awarded $9,750 compensation after a 25 percent contribution reduction.

Matched passage: pdf"; } David Turner v Big B Cartage Limited [2026] NZERA 581 Big B Cartage called truck driver David Turner to a disciplinary meeting without first identifying the allegations or disclosing the text message on which it relied.
Juliet Hull v Sleaktek Limited and Robert Lawrence [2026] NZERA 579 - CEO wins dismissal and disadvantage claims

Sleaktek stopped paying chief executive Juliet Hull, pursued a redundancy process she said was predetermined and later raised serious-misconduct allegations that had not been fairly put to her. The case also concerned director Robert Lawrence's personal involvement.

Matched passage: Misconduct allegations did not rescue the dismissal Sleaktek's correspondence mixed redundancy with allegations of serious misconduct.
The Board of Trustees v LGY [2026] NZEmpC 46 - interim reinstatement upheld on de novo challenge

A school Board challenged an ERA order temporarily reinstating LGY while the employee's substantive dismissal grievance remained unresolved. The employer relied on alleged serious misconduct, loss of trust and workplace relationship concerns to resist reinstatement.

Matched passage: Why interim reinstatement was maintained The Board relied on alleged serious misconduct involving school funds and on the effect a return might have on workplace relationships and third parties.
Sukhmanpreet Singh v JIT Limited, Davinder Pal and Harmanpreet Kaur Sandhu [2026] NZERA 453 - forced leave request, unjustified suspension and dismissal

Sukhmanpreet Singh's dispute with JIT arose after he was pressed to submit an annual-leave request and a confrontation followed. JIT then cancelled his shifts on claimed mental-stress grounds and later dismissed him for serious misconduct, while the ERA examined the conduct of both sides.

Matched passage: One-sided discipline problem: a fair employer could not decide serious misconduct by weighing only the employee's reaction while ignoring the manager/director conduct that formed part of the same incident and helped create the situation.
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.
Rakai Tawhiwhirangi v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [2026] NZERA 402 - unjustified dismissal after self-defence acquittal

Corrections dismissed prison officer Rakai Tawhiwhirangi for alleged unjustified use of force after an incident that also resulted in a criminal prosecution in which he was acquitted on self-defence grounds. The ERA examined the employer's independent investigation, the evidence available and the fairness of the serious-misconduct conclusion.

Matched passage: It did not explain whether each separate issue was capable of amounting to serious misconduct, nor why dismissal was the appropriate outcome for those issues alone.
Sinclair-Walker v Alert Monitoring Otago (1994) Limited [2026] NZERA 29 - unjustified dismissal; $25,000 compensation and $16,900 lost remuneration

Alert Monitoring dismissed Carl Sinclair-Walker for alleged serious misconduct after raising three concerns about his work performance. The ERA examined whether those concerns and the process used could justify immediate termination.

Matched passage: Story in plain English Mr Sinclair-Walker was dismissed for alleged serious misconduct after performance concerns were raised.
LYONS v ROTORUA LAKES COUNCIL [2025] NZERA 467 - summary dismissal disproportionate; 100% contribution to compensation

Rotorua Lakes Council summarily dismissed recreation planner Richard Lyons after repeated absences and failures to communicate. Its own code classified the conduct as misconduct subject to a progressive warning process, rather than serious misconduct warranting immediate dismissal.

Matched passage: Failing to report by telephone to your supervisor [41] Despite the alleged breaches being listed as misconduct under the code of conduct, the employer decided to summarily dismiss Mr Lyons for serious misconduct based on a breach of trust and confidence.

Browse topics