Search Employment Law

Farm assistant Blue Hunt's employment ended after a cowshed dispute with Lance Wakelin. The case required the ERA to determine who the employer was, whether Mr Hunt had been dismissed and whether any fair process or substantive reason justified the termination.

Rachel Hankins was employed by Huhtamaki Henderson on a fixed-term arrangement. Although the ERA accepted there was a valid basis for the fixed term itself, her employment was ended before the agreed expiry and the employer had to justify that early termination separately.

Aurora Developments disputed when quantity surveyor Junchen Xu became an employee, saying his first month was only unpaid learning and observation, and later made him redundant without a proposal or consultation. He also claimed wages, incentives and holiday entitlements.

Emily Grinsted, Bunnings' New Zealand People and Culture Manager, brought five unjustified-disadvantage claims while remaining employed. The complaints concerned how criticisms were raised, information and duties, contractual obligations and a short-term incentive bonus.

Husband-and-wife chefs working at Buoy Café were dismissed after an escalating conflict with new management. The employer did not properly investigate the allegations or give either employee a genuine opportunity to respond before deciding to terminate them.

Harry Sampson's proceeding against Lyttelton Port Company raised a preliminary 90-day time-limit issue before the merits of his personal grievance could be investigated. The employer argued the grievance was out of time; Mr Sampson relied on the communications by which he said it had been raised.

Before the substantive employment dispute in GXQ v NMK was determined, NMK sought permanent name suppression and a broad non-publication order. The application required the ERA to balance claimed personal consequences against the normal principle that Authority proceedings and determinations are open to the public.

Ms Bell challenged the disestablishment of her role at Hubergroup, arguing that the redundancy lacked a genuine business basis and that she was given an inadequate opportunity to consult on a proposal assembled in haste.