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.

Shaun Graves initially worked through his own contracting company, but later moved onto NZSL's PAYE payroll, worked regular hours under its direction and used its equipment. The ERA found he had become an employee from 23 September 2024 and was unjustifiably dismissed when simply told his services were no longer required.

Minimarc Childcare dismissed ECE teacher Fatima Fahmy for performance after its centre manager remained the principal evaluator despite known relationship and bullying complaints. The ERA found the assessment was not sufficiently objective and ordered reinstatement, lost wages and $25,000 compensation.

Nirali Bhatt moved from India to work for Prishal Limited at Juice Heist and later raised concerns that she was not being paid in full. The case involved disputed hours, deficient wage and time records and whether continuing underpayment after complaint caused a personal grievance as well as arrears.

RMD claimed she had been dismissed by LWQ and also relied on allegations said to amount to protected disclosures. The ERA examined the communications surrounding the end of employment and whether the alleged disclosures met the statutory requirements for protected-disclosure treatment.

Mr Lazaro said Waimea Contract Carriers dismissed him at a 4 December meeting; the employer said he was merely suspended on full pay while training and other options were considered, and that employment ended later after he refused to return.

The Chauhans worked in a business operated by SD & SD Investments, with disputes about hours worked, who knew about that work, and how Mr Chauhan's relationship with the business ended. The ERA preferred documentary roster and time-record evidence on key factual issues.

Mr Wei's claims followed a workplace altercation and the employer's response to it, including the eventual end of his employment and disputed wage-related entitlements. CCTV footage and conflicting accounts of the incident were central to the ERA investigation.