ClickCease

Results for dismissal process

Showing 17-24 of 204 results
Brent Colyer v New Zealand Aluminium Smelters Limited [2026] NZERA 444 - flawed disciplinary process, written warning and unjustified disadvantage

Electrician Brent Colyer was investigated and given a written warning by New Zealand Aluminium Smelters after a gantry-crane incident involving another employee. He later resigned, alleging both unjustified disadvantage from the disciplinary process and constructive dismissal.

Matched passage: ... (ERA) determination concerns a long-serving electrician, Brent Colyer, and a disciplinary process run by New Zealand Aluminium Smelters Limited after an isolation breach involving a gantry crane and a related 35-tonne crane. Mr Colyer resigned after receiving a written ...
Duane April v Coatrite Fire Limited [2026] NZERA 466 - visa worker underpaid, racialised comments, unlawful deductions and unjustified dismissal

Duane April, a migrant worker, alleged Coatrite Fire underpaid his agreed hourly rate, made unlawful deductions, subjected him to racialised comments and later dismissed him after a defective disciplinary process. The decision maker did not attend the disciplinary meeting and important allegations were not fairly tested.

Matched passage: pdf"; } Duane April v Coatrite Fire Limited [2026] NZERA 466 This Employment Relations Authority (ERA) determination concerns Duane April, an industrial/intumescent spray painter who came to New Zealand to work for Coatrite Fire Limited on an accredited employer work visa.
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: The decision by the employer to summarily dismiss Mr Lyons on 23 January 2024 on the grounds of serious misconduct was out of proportion to the allegations made and did not follow the documented the employer process.
James Honotapu v Atlas Fibrous Plaster Company Limited [2026] NZERA 587 - absenteeism dismissal followed an unfair process

Atlas had legitimate concerns about James Honotapu's persistent absenteeism, but did not warn him that a meeting could end in dismissal. The ERA found the dismissal unjustified and ordered $8,574 after reducing lost wages and compensation by 50 percent for contribution.

Matched passage: But it invited him to a meeting without warning that dismissal was possible, then decided during the meeting to end his employment.
Deborah Eyles v Bottlers Limited [2026] NZERA 300 - no redundancy process, unexplained stand down and dismissal; $20,000 compensation ordered

Deborah Eyles was stood down from her supervised-contact work and later dismissed in circumstances the employer characterised as redundancy. She challenged both the unexplained removal from work and the absence of any genuine consultation or fair redundancy process.

Matched passage: The unjustified dismissal finding The ERA found that Mrs Eyles' dismissal was unjustified on both procedural and substantive grounds.
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: Election processes need safeguards: if voting is meant to be confidential, the process must be designed and communicated so confidentiality is actually protected.
MON v ALLIED AUTO PARTS LIMITED [2025] NZERA 590 - dismissal by text unjustified; no contribution

Allied Auto Parts dismissed Mr Mon by text message and required him to work out two weeks' notice. The employer later relied on concerns about working from home and other matters, but no proper disciplinary or dismissal process had been carried out.

Matched passage: At a glance Citation: [2025] NZERA 590 Registry: Wellington Parties: MON v ALLIED AUTO PARTS LIMITED Authority member: Claire English Hearing date: 4 February 2025 Outcome: The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues (partly successful).
RYDER v LEOPARD LIME LIMITED [2025] NZERA 266 - employer ended employment; dismissal unjustified

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.

Matched passage: At a glance Citation: [2025] NZERA 266 Registry: Wellington Parties: RYDER v LEOPARD LIME LIMITED Authority member: Shane Kinley Hearing date: 18 March 2025 Determination date: 13 May 2025 Outcome: The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues.

Browse topics