ClickCease

Results for unfair dismissal

Showing 257-264 of 266 results
Four Applicants v A Respondent [2026] NZERA 407 - union activity discrimination, duress, and work-from-home disadvantage

Four salaried union members alleged that a senior manager pressured them over strike action and delegate activity and that striking staff were temporarily denied discretionary work-from-home access. The non-publication case tested discrimination and duress protections connected with lawful union activity.

Matched passage: Employee Unfair Dismissal Case Form Read the full ERA determination (embedded) If the embedded PDF does not load on your device, use the button below to open it in a new tab.
Todd Dormer v Rhino-Rack New Zealand Limited [2026] NZERA 353 - ambiguous commission clause, Sales Commission Scheme, and unjustified disadvantage

Rhino-Rack recorded Todd Dormer's commission entitlement only as '10% paid quarterly'. He argued this meant 10 percent of sales or gross margin, while the company said a broader Sales Commission Scheme with individual, regional and company targets applied.

Matched passage: Important distinction: this was not a dismissal case.
Ben Devine v Health New Zealand - Te Whatu Ora [2025] NZERA 206 - nurse's 'casual' status rejected; unpaid stand-down unjustified disadvantage; reinstatement ordered; $15,000 compensation plus lost wages

Ben Devine had historically held permanent nursing hours but Health New Zealand later relied on documents describing part of his work as casual and left him on an unpaid stand-down. The case concerned the real nature of the employment relationship and whether the employer could remove work and pay without a proper process.

Matched passage: Unjustified dismissal was not made out Mr Devine also advanced an unjustified dismissal claim (including constructive dismissal), based on the way the employer handled the unpaid suspension and the breakdown in communications.
Arnold Putt v George Weston Foods [2026] NZERA 179 - misconduct, performance; what the ERA decided and what was ordered

Packaging operator Arnold Putt challenged disciplinary action by George Weston Foods after a confrontation with his production manager about task priorities. The ERA examined both the basis for a final written warning and whether shortcomings in the way the process was communicated caused a separate disadvantage.

Matched passage: Here, Mr Putt received compensation only, with no leave reimbursement and no finding that the warning or dismissal allegations succeeded.
Shania Mackey v Shearing NZ Limited [2026] NZERA 146 - employer withheld s 149 settlement payments after alleged confidentiality breach; compliance ordered; penalties adjourned

Shania Mackey and Shearing NZ settled a personal grievance at mediation under s 149, requiring compensation, payment of representative fees and a certificate of service. The employer later withheld those obligations after hearing that Mackey had allegedly breached confidentiality.

Matched passage: Employee Unfair Dismissal Case Form Read the full ERA determination (embedded) If the embedded PDF does not load on your device, use the button below to open it in a new tab.
Nicholas Fry v Fire and Emergency New Zealand [2026] NZERA 116 - FENZ identity-promise breach caused disadvantage; $13,000 compensation

Nicholas Fry's dispute with Fire and Emergency New Zealand arose from FireSuper membership and a promise about protecting the identity of another person, TEP, whose eligibility he had raised. Mr Fry alleged FENZ broke that promise and that the resulting use of TEP's identity damaged his employment relationship.

Matched passage: Employee Unfair Dismissal Case Form Read the full ERA determination (embedded) If the embedded PDF does not load on your device, use the button below to open it in a new tab.
Jacob Maarschalk v West Auckland Trust Services Limited [2024] NZERA 333 - Unjustified disadvantage found over rostering changes and flawed final written warning; $8,500 ordered

Jacob Maarschalk was contracted for 25 hours a week but was regularly rostered for substantially more at West Auckland Trust Services. The dispute concerned later roster changes and a final written warning, including whether he was given a fair opportunity to comment before those decisions affected his employment.

Matched passage: Employee Unfair Dismissal Case Form Read the full ERA determination (embedded) If the embedded PDF does not load on your device, use the button below to open it in a new tab.
Wenpeng Yu v Golden Rooster NZ Trading Ltd [2026] NZERA 699 - one week employee was dismissed, not an abandonment

Golden Rooster said chef Wenpeng Yu abandoned his job after only one week, but WeChat messages supported his evidence that the employer had dismissed him because it was unhappy with his productivity. The ERA found no fair process had been followed and awarded $7,500 compensation, $3,559.20 lost wages and annual holiday pay.

Matched passage: The Authority looks at the parties' conduct and contemporaneous communications, and performance concerns still have to be fairly raised and answered before dismissal.

Browse topics