Search New Zealand employment-law guides, ERA determinations, Employment Court decisions and topics.
Results for warnings
![Eric Paul Tillocksingh v Driver Employment Limited [2026] NZERA 663 - resign or be dismissed ultimatum was an unjustified dismissal](/Images/site/EmploymentAdvocatesAucklandCard.jpg)
After a customer complaint, truck driver Eric Tillocksingh was called into meetings without advance written allegations or warning that dismissal was possible. The ERA preferred his evidence that he was told to resign or be dismissed, found the process fundamentally unfair, and awarded $15,000 compensation plus $17,448.75 lost remuneration.
Regional sales manager John Pio was made redundant after Strautmann Hopkins lost the distribution licence underpinning its business. The redundancy had a genuine commercial basis, but Pio was given little warning, very limited time to seek advice and no meaningful opportunity to explore transfer or redeployment.
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.
Silvertime's store manager summoned Yucen Xi to an evening meeting without explaining its purpose, told her to resign or be fired, demanded her key and called security before any allegations had been fairly raised with her.
PR Kahlon had genuine, documented concerns about delivery driver Mandeep Singh's performance and safety, but knew English was a serious barrier and still used English for critical disciplinary communications rather than Punjabi. His suspension and dismissal followed without a clear opportunity to understand and answer the case against him.
EverEdge stopped paying founder and CEO Paul Adams while he continued working from Amsterdam, ignored repeated requests for his salary and later gave inconsistent explanations for the non-payment. Mr Adams ultimately resigned.
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.
Sukhmanpreet Singh's dispute with JIT arose after he was pressed to submit an annual-leave request and a confrontation followed. JIT then cancelled his shifts on claimed mental-stress grounds and later dismissed him for serious misconduct, while the ERA examined the conduct of both sides.
