A nail technician was dismissed during a purported 90-day trial after seeking advice about her employment rights. The employer had not complied with the notice requirement in its own trial clause.
Search Employment Law
Search New Zealand employment-law guides, ERA determinations, Employment Court decisions and topics.
Search tips
- Use quotes for exact phrases, eg "unfair dismissal".
- Use +word to require, -word to exclude, eg +redundancy -trial.
- Use OR to broaden, eg dismissal OR redundancy.
Results for ERA
DUNG PHAM v HUYNH [2025] NZERA 75 - dismissal proved; lost remuneration and compensation awarded
CaseMs Dung Pham disputed the way her employment at a nail salon ended and sought remedies for dismissal. The Authority had to resolve conflicting accounts of whether and when the employer brought the employment relationship to an end.
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 Lien was dismissed from a nail salon after allegations about outside work and later criticism of her performance. The employer also relied on a 90-day trial defence and disputed wages, although the alleged performance concerns had not been properly raised during employment.
Ms O'Brien's proceeding against The Platform concerned employment grievances arising before her later dismissal. After the investigation meeting she sought to add dismissal-related claims, creating a procedural dispute about whether those new matters belonged in the determination already under way.
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.
BlueLagoon ended Mr Ormsby's employment by Messenger after the employer said it could no longer afford to pay him. The case also involved unpaid wages, holiday pay and KiwiSaver obligations alongside the dismissal grievance.
Buci described Ms Jury as casual despite a long pattern of regular shifts. When her hours were cut and the restaurant later insisted she sign a casual agreement before continuing to work, she claimed unjustified disadvantage and constructive dismissal.
