ClickCease

Results for trial period dismissal

Showing 17-24 of 169 results
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: A probationary period is supposed to be set up so both parties can succeed, not fail.
Valerie Leech v Electrical Importing Co Limited [2026] NZERA 553 - employment was agreed before the 90-day trial was signed

Electrical Importing Co agreed Valerie Leech's core job terms and told her when to start before presenting a written employment agreement containing a 90-day trial clause. It later relied on that clause to dismiss her.

Matched passage: pdf"; } Valerie Leech v Electrical Importing Co Limited [2026] NZERA 553 Electrical Importing Co Limited agreed the core terms of Valerie Leech's job and directed her when to start before giving her a written employment agreement containing a 90-day trial.
Brad Capper v CJS Construction [2023] NZERA 314 - unjustified dismissal; 50% contribution; no lost wages

Brad Capper's short employment with CJS Construction ended in a dismissal that the employer did not attempt to justify under a 90-day trial clause. The case turned on dismissal fairness, his own contribution and whether he had proved efforts to mitigate lost wages.

Matched passage: CJS accepted that, if a dismissal was found, it could not be justified because no proper process had been followed.
BRENNAN v STELLA 2020 LIMITED and Ors [2025] NZERA 449 - dismissal without fair process; compensation and lost wages

Ms Brennan's employment with Stella 2020 ended on 30 July 2024 without a fair disciplinary or dismissal process. The employer did not participate effectively in the ERA investigation, which proceeded on the evidence available to the Authority.

Matched passage: The determination records that The Authority found that the dismissal was both procedurally and substantively unjustified.
THING v SOUTH POLE IP HOLDING (NZ) LIMITED [2025] NZERA 142 - dismissal theory fails in part but disadvantage grievance succeeds

Ms Thing's dispute with South Pole IP Holding concerned whether the end of her employment was a dismissal or resignation and whether the employer's earlier conduct had unjustifiably disadvantaged her. The case required the ERA to distinguish direct or constructive dismissal from separate disadvantage grievances.

Matched passage: Practical takeaways Constructive dismissal turns on whether the employer's conduct forced resignation in substance.
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: ... 9-12 September 2024 (Wellington) Determination date: 14 February 2025 Outcome: Unjustified dismissal found; 90-day trial defence rejected; remedies ordered. Story in plain English This decision deals with a dismissal during what the employer said was a 90-day trial period, and ...
CHASE-PONA v COIN TOTAL WELLINGTON LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 428 - dismissed during notice period; constructive dismissal in alternative

Mr Chase-Pona resigned after workplace disputes including a theft allegation, but Coin Total terminated his employment before his notice period expired. The ERA had to determine whether the employment ended by resignation, dismissal or constructive dismissal.

Matched passage: At a glance Citation: [2025] NZERA 428 Registry: Wellington Parties: CHASE-PONA v COIN TOTAL WELLINGTON LIMITED and Anor Authority member: Geoff O'Sullivan Hearing date: 23 April 2025 Outcome: The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues.
FVG v YJN [2026] NZERA 242 - suspension and dismissal unjustified; remedies reduced 30% for contribution

FVG, a structural engineer, challenged her suspension, the handling of bullying and performance concerns, and her eventual dismissal by YJN. The case required the ERA to separate several disadvantage allegations from the fairness of the final dismissal process.

Matched passage: Practical takeaways ERA dismissal cases are assessed using s 103A (what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances).

Browse topics