Search Employment Law

Daniel Bly was dismissed by FutureCo after Instagram posts and internal Slack messages became the subject of disciplinary allegations. The case tested both the seriousness of the conduct and whether the employer's investigation and dismissal response were proportionate.

Delivery drivers Ziyu Xiao, Youtian Yang and Limei Liu lost access to Fast Horse's app or WhatsApp work channels after raising concerns about their work and pay. The ERA examined whether those digital cut-offs amounted to dismissals and whether the employer had also caused unjustified disadvantage beforehand.

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.

Four workers at Miaodi's Laundromat alleged their employment was ended without a fair process and that significant wage and holiday entitlements had not been paid. The proceeding also involved personal liability and penalties for minimum employment-standard breaches.

Chef Edmundo Marcelo was dismissed by Golden Bulls after a failed food-safety inspection. The employer had substantive concerns about the incident, but the ERA examined whether those concerns were fairly put to him and whether the disciplinary decision was reached through a proper process.

Healthcare assistant Shubanghi Kaushal was suspended and then summarily dismissed after an incident the employer characterised as serious misconduct. The ERA examined the incident in context, an existing final warning and whether dismissal was within the range open to a fair and reasonable employer.

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.

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.