ClickCease

Results for unjustified dismissal

Showing 169-176 of 325 results
VAN HEERDEN v LONGEVITY CONSTRUCTION LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 217 - redundancy substantively and procedurally unjustified

Mr van Heerden was told at a 30 January 2024 meeting that his position had been disestablished and his employment was ending for redundancy. The decision had effectively been made before he was told his job was at risk, and the process mixed redundancy with irrelevant performance and conduct concerns.

Matched passage: ... Determination date: 16 April 2025 Outcome: The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues. Story in plain English The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues. In summary, Mr and Mrs van Heerden were both advised their ...
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: ... Determination date: 27 February 2025 Outcome: The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues. Story in plain English The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues. In summary, TTH relied on an incident that had happened ...
UERATA v EXPERT MOVING GROUP LIMITED [2025] NZERA 34 - dismissal failed substantive and procedural justification

Expert Moving dismissed Mr Uerata without meeting the minimum procedural requirements in s 103A or its good-faith consultation obligations. The dispute also involved unpaid amounts and the hours he had been working before termination.

Matched passage: ... November 2024 (by telephone) (3 days) Outcome: The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues. Story in plain English The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues. In summary, On the morning of the investigation meeting ...
Bridget Addy v Auckland Steam 'N' Dry Limited and Graeme Stephens [2022] NZERA 657 - constructive dismissal after a 'trial period' threat by text; $8,000 compensation, $3,600 reimbursement, $2,000 penalty

Auckland Steam 'N' Dry raised performance concerns with Bridget Addy by text and threatened that she would not make it through a supposed three-month trial, although her agreement contained no trial clause. She resigned in response.

Matched passage: Constructive dismissal was established: the Authority found the resignation was caused by the employer's breach of duty, and resignation was reasonably foreseeable.
Shubanghi Kaushal v Ambridge Rose Manor [2025] NZERA 818 - misconduct, medical/incapacity; what the ERA decided and what was ordered

Healthcare assistant Shubanghi Kaushal was suspended and then summarily dismissed after an incident the employer characterised as serious misconduct. The ERA examined the incident in context, an existing final warning and whether dismissal was within the range open to a fair and reasonable employer.

Matched passage: ARML failed to adequately consider alternatives to dismissal because it had closed its mind to options short of dismissal.
Eun Joo Kim v Sage & Umber Limited and Pei Su [2026] NZERA 555 - public attack caused constructive dismissal

Café owner Pei Su loudly questioned chef Eun Joo Kim's competence and honesty in front of staff and told her she could go if she could not do the job. Ms Kim left immediately after the confrontation.

Matched passage: If the employer's repudiatory conduct causes the employee to leave and resignation is reasonably foreseeable, it can amount to constructive dismissal even after only a brief period of employment.
Qi Sun v Keene Construction Limited [2026] NZERA 465 - builder dismissed by text after querying apprenticeship costs

Qi Sun was an apprentice builder with Keene Construction when he queried an unpaid $300 apprenticeship-cost payment. The director then texted that there would not be a company and told him not to bother coming to work, creating a dispute about whether those messages amounted to dismissal.

Matched passage: The dismissal was both procedurally and substantively unjustified.
Yusong Du v Sly House Limited [2025] NZERA 765 - WeChat dismissal and 50% contribution reduction

Sly House sent migrant construction worker Yusong Du a WeChat message saying he was unsuitable because he was too slow and lacked strength, then argued he had abandoned the job. The ERA also considered evidence that he had overstated his prior work experience.

Matched passage: The ERA rejected that account, found the message was a dismissal, and held the dismissal unjustified because no disciplinary or contractual termination process had been followed.

Browse topics