Search Employment Law

Mr Chand said Rohits Civil & Infrastructure dismissed him during a telephone conversation; the company disputed that account. The ERA had to decide whether the words and surrounding circumstances objectively brought the employment relationship to an end.

Mr Blignaut challenged Waste Management's treatment of him during a workplace conflict, including alleged bullying, suspension and pressure to resign, before he was ultimately dismissed for alleged serious misconduct. The ERA considered both the pre-dismissal disadvantage claims and the termination itself.

Infosys dismissed Mr Jayalath for failing to complete mandatory online business modules after a disciplinary process run partly by overseas management. He challenged both the substantive basis for treating the failure as dismissible conduct and the fairness of the procedure.

A truck driver said Transport (Waimate) had effectively sent him away after a difficult meeting and then prevented a normal return to work. The employer maintained that he had resigned, making the central issue whether its actions objectively amounted to dismissal.

Architectural technician Ms Xu was told her role was redundant during a downturn in work. The employer had genuine commercial reasons to reduce staffing, but the decision was communicated without meaningful consultation beforehand.

Mr Da Silva left a meeting with DSJ Joinery believing he had been dismissed, although the employer said the meeting was about health and safety rather than discipline. The ERA examined whether there was an actual dismissal and, if not, whether the employer's conduct nevertheless ended the relationship.

MOVE Freight dismissed Mr Putaanga for medical incapacity after a workplace accident and a lengthy period assessing his prospects of returning to full-time work. He also alleged the employer had failed to provide a safe workplace and that this caused unjustified disadvantage.

PowerNet proposed to disestablish Ms Pink's occupational-health role and replace the service model, but the ERA scrutinised whether the proposal genuinely reflected her whole role, the asserted flexibility rationale and the lack of supporting costings.