Search Employment Law

MOVE Freight dismissed Mr Putaanga for medical incapacity after a workplace accident and a lengthy period assessing his prospects of returning to full-time work. He also alleged the employer had failed to provide a safe workplace and that this caused unjustified disadvantage.

UBP dismissed Mr Rapana after a prolonged period of absence and communication difficulties. The case examined the medical information available to the employer, inconsistencies in the reasons later given for dismissal and whether the investigation fairly addressed the real circumstances.

Master Z Food said Ms Li resigned during an April 2023 meeting; Li said she was told the decision had already been made to dismiss her and she could merely work out the week. Contemporary WeChat messages were central to resolving who ended the employment.

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.

Henry Penny was selected for redundancy from Frello's software-development team after a restructure intended to reduce headcount. He argued resignations had already reduced staff numbers, the selection outcome was predetermined, and consultation and redeployment were not genuine.

Community Connectors Daynah Olliver and Sheena Taylor were employed on fixed-term agreements that did not properly record the statutory reasons for the fixed terms. Te Araroa then tried to end both employments early without a fair process.

Ms Udumullaga was presented with an employer-prepared resignation letter and was later told her job had already been disestablished. The dispute concerned redundancy, periods when she said she was fit and available to work, unpaid entitlements, and whether the employer's process was genuine and fair.

Mr Ryder's employment with Leopard Lime ended after an exchange in early November 2022 in which the employer maintained that he had not been dismissed. The case turned on what the communications objectively meant and whether any fair dismissal process had occurred.