Search Employment Law

Mr Watson challenged a written warning and later alleged he was constructively dismissed after his relationship with Alchemy Builders deteriorated and he was removed from a workplace WhatsApp group. Timeliness affected the earlier disadvantage grievance.

Ms Dwyer brought sexual-harassment, unjustified-disadvantage, constructive-dismissal and good-faith claims arising from her work at Oakvue Bloodstock. The ERA separated the alleged harassment and resignation issues from specific employer actions that actually disadvantaged her employment.

Pulse 2012 dismissed Mr Stewart after alleging he had prepared food for himself at the workplace while recorded as working, in a dispute that also involved allegations of theft. The ERA examined whether the evidence and disciplinary response could justify dismissal.

Brother Coffee closed its cafe and made Ms Stillman redundant. The ERA accepted there were genuine commercial and personal reasons to close but examined when the decision was actually made and whether consultation occurred before the outcome became fixed.

QN was summarily dismissed as a branch manager after FT Limited investigated an alleged undisclosed conflict of interest involving the engagement of a close family member's company. The ERA examined both the underlying conflict and whether the investigation and decision-making process was fair.

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.

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.