ClickCease

Results for unpaid wages

Showing 177-184 of 279 results
CANALES v THERMASHIELD LIMITED [2025] NZERA 522 - employment existed before first day; dismissal by text unjustified

Mr Canales accepted a part-time window-installer job with Thermashield but missed his intended first day because of a migraine. The case turned on whether an employment relationship had already been formed and whether later text messages brought it to an end.

Matched passage: While I have found Thermashield's actions were not justified, for the reasons given above The Authority found Mr Canales' actions contributed to the situation giving rise to his personal grievance, such that it is necessary to reduce the remedies payable to him.
HAI ZHENG v JCD NZ LIMITED [2025] NZERA 453 - constructive dismissal; compensation and penalty

Hai Zheng's employment dispute with JCD concerned whether he had resigned or whether employer breaches caused his departure, together with associated disadvantage and contractual claims. The ERA examined whether the employer's conduct made resignation a reasonably foreseeable consequence.

Matched passage: " In an exchange of messages following that meeting Mr Zheng said Mr Zhang knew he did not (quoted wording omitted) so paying his outstanding wages (quoted wording omitted).
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: ) Orders and payments mentioned Compensation: $35,000 Lost remuneration: $166,153.
MCCANN v WINTON CAPITAL LIMITED [2025] NZERA 171 - constructive dismissal; substantial lost remuneration and compensation

Ms McCann resigned while on sick leave after conflict with Winton Capital, pressure around the employment relationship and removal of access to a senior executive's email and calendar. She alleged the cumulative conduct made continued employment untenable.

Matched passage: ) Orders and payments mentioned Compensation: $25,000 Lost wages: $74,846.
CUC v HUYNH [2025] NZERA 68 - trial-period defence fails; dismissal unjustified

Ms Cuc was dismissed with one week's notice under what the nail-salon employer said was a 90-day trial period. She said the real issue was that she was outspoken about her employment rights, while performance criticisms were advanced later in the ERA proceeding.

Matched passage: The determination records that Ms Huynh has then proceeded to critique Ms Cuc's work performance as a defence against paying her wages at all, paying her contractual rate, and to justify her summary dismissal.
Kevin Whelan v The Board of Trustees of Lindisfarne College [2026] NZERA 558 - justified dismissal but notice breach caused disadvantage

Lindisfarne College dismissed long-serving IT manager Kevin Whelan after a serious comment to students while showing CCTV footage of an accident. Although the misconduct could justify dismissal, the College paid four weeks in lieu rather than complying with the collective agreement's one-month notice mechanism or properly invoking instant dismissal.

Matched passage: Disciplinary process and suspension The College wrote to Mr Whelan setting out its concerns and advising that suspension on pay would be discussed.
Phil Jacklin v Planit Software Testing Limited [2026] NZERA 264 - bonus clause held discretionary; KPI delay breached contract; $10,000 unjustified disadvantage award

Phil Jacklin argued that Planit Software Testing's short-term incentive clause guaranteed him a 25 percent bonus paid quarterly. The employer said the scheme was discretionary, while a separate issue concerned its failure to set KPIs and eligible amounts at the beginning of the financial year as promised.

Matched passage: 2 as creating a contractual entitlement to a 25% bonus (or commission-like payment), and that it would be calculated and paid quarterly.
Ziyu Xiao and Youtian Yang, and Limei Liu v Fast Horse Limited t/a Fast Horse Express [2026] NZERA 222 - delivery drivers cut off via app/WhatsApp after complaints; unjustified dismissals and disadvantage; $54,500 ordered

Delivery drivers Ziyu Xiao, Youtian Yang and Limei Liu lost access to Fast Horse's app or WhatsApp work channels after raising concerns about their work and pay. The ERA examined whether those digital cut-offs amounted to dismissals and whether the employer had also caused unjustified disadvantage beforehand.

Matched passage: Costs (all applicants): $4,500 (inclusive of all filing fees), payable by 11 May 2026.

Browse topics