Search Employment Law

Mr Hill challenged the ending of his employment with Tamaki Labour Hire and associated treatment during the employment relationship. The case required the ERA to separate the parts of his grievance that were established from claims for which the evidence did not justify relief.

Jackson Drummond sought to pursue a series of disadvantage, discrimination and good-faith complaints against Massey University, some dating back many months before his December 2023 grievance letter. The preliminary issue was which claims had actually been raised within the statutory 90-day period.

A group of MPI employees sought to pursue claims arising from roster and restructure changes despite earlier litigation and a mediated settlement. The preliminary determination addressed whether the claims were barred by the certified settlement, estoppel or the Authority's jurisdiction.

Ms Moke faced complaints and an external investigation while employed by Raukura Hauora O Tainui Trust. The case examined the fairness of the investigation, disciplinary steps and the Trust's eventual preliminary and final conclusions, including whether tikanga and kaupapa-based processes altered the statutory fairness requirements.

Recruit IT Group made Mr Knox's consultant role redundant shortly before another staff member was promoted into a consultant position. Mr Knox argued the redundancy rationale, consultation timeframe and claimed lack of redeployment options did not withstand scrutiny.

How to identify the true employer where companies, trading names, directors, labour-hire entities or informal arrangements make the contracting party unclear.

BAZ had genuine commercial reasons to make Luo's role redundant, but the employee was not given a fair opportunity to engage with the proposal or meaningful redeployment possibilities before the decision was made.

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.