ClickCease

Results for performance dismissal

Showing 17-24 of 86 results
RISELEY v HUNTLY JOINERY 2000 LIMITED [2025] NZERA 342 - employer breaches caused constructive dismissal

Mr Riseley resigned from Huntly Joinery after a series of employer actions that he said destroyed the employment relationship. The ERA had to decide whether those breaches were sufficiently serious and causative to turn the resignation into a constructive dismissal.

Matched passage: However, the list of specific jobs provided in the email after the phone call and the plan of supervised visits puts Mr Curran's concerns about Mr Riseley into a category that is something more than general upskilling and more akin to performance concerns.
Lekeisha Ramsay v National Storage Ltd [2025] NZERA 269 - Probationary period dismissal held unjustified; $9,000 compensation + $14,040.40 lost wages; penalties dismissed

Lekeisha Ramsay was dismissed by National Storage just over three months into employment under a probationary arrangement. The ERA examined attendance and performance concerns, the adequacy of warnings and whether the employer had given her a fair opportunity to improve and respond before termination.

Matched passage: The handwritten notes recorded that the outcome to be delivered that day could include a warning, a performance improvement step, a first and final warning, or dismissal - and ultimately dismissal occurred that day.
Hao v South Pole IP Holding (NZ) Limited [2025] NZERA 245 - pressure to resign caused constructive dismissal

South Pole treated Xinhua Hao as having agreed to resign, despite his repeated denials, then withheld work and continued pressing the resignation dispute. The ERA found those actions caused an unjustified constructive dismissal.

Matched passage: Why this case matters Hao v South Pole is a practical example of a disputed resignation becoming constructive dismissal.
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: 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.
DUN TRAN v HUYNH [2025] NZERA 73 - dismissal and employment-entitlement claims partly successful

Dun Tran's employment dispute with Huynh involved the ending of the employment relationship together with claims about pay and workplace treatment. The ERA had to separate the dismissal issue from the employment-standard claims and determine which alleged breaches were actually established.

Matched passage: After that, Although Ms Huynh has raised allegations of poor performance by Ms Dung Tran, and said generally that she (quoted wording omitted), neither of these issues were raised with Ms Dung Tran at the time either, and so cannot be relied on to justify her dismissal.
KCY v XSH [2026] NZERA 516 - bullying complaint failures, forced transfer and dismissal over promotional gifts

Retail employee KCY complained of bullying linked to her Russian ethnicity, was placed on paid leave without proper consultation and directed to transfer stores immediately. She was later summarily dismissed over expired promotional gifts and disclosure of a back-office code.

Matched passage: The dismissal was unjustified.
Jia Jia v TBS Trading Limited and Helen Han [2026] NZERA 478 - no employment agreement, late wages and radio-silent dismissal

Jia Jia began work for TBS Trading without a written employment agreement, experienced late wage payments and then found the employer stopped communicating and providing work. The case concerned whether that silence and withdrawal of work amounted to dismissal as well as separate pay and documentation breaches.

Matched passage: If Ms Han could no longer afford to provide full-time work because of poor business performance, TBS needed to engage in a process and provide Ms Jia with information relevant to the continuation of her employment.
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: The disciplinary allegations leading to dismissal In early May 2024, Coatrite invited Mr April to a disciplinary meeting concerning alleged serious misconduct.

Browse topics