ClickCease

Results for personal grievance

Showing 321-328 of 363 results
MOKE v RAUKURA HAUORA O TAINUI TRUST [2025] NZERA 48 - external investigation and disciplinary process partly unjustified

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.

Matched passage: If you are considering raising a Personal Grievance (PG), the 90 day notification time limit can be critical.
UERATA v EXPERT MOVING GROUP LIMITED [2025] NZERA 34 - dismissal failed substantive and procedural justification

Expert Moving dismissed Mr Uerata without meeting the minimum procedural requirements in s 103A or its good-faith consultation obligations. The dispute also involved unpaid amounts and the hours he had been working before termination.

Matched passage: Mr Uerata has established a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal.
PIACUN v COOPER NO 1 LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 32 - business sale did not avoid notice; dismissal unjustified

Cooper No 1 sold its business and told Ms Piacun her employment was ending, without paying a notice period. The ERA considered whether the sale itself ended employment or whether Cooper had taken the initiative to terminate her contract.

Matched passage: If you are considering raising a Personal Grievance (PG), the 90 day notification time limit can be critical.
NAIR v MODERN AUTO REPAIR CENTRE LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 28 - dismissal and wage claims upheld after conflicting accounts

Modern Auto Repair said Mr Nair resigned after a heated argument; Nair alleged he was dismissed and also pursued wage and holiday-pay issues. The ERA had to resolve conflicting evidence about how the employment ended and what money remained owing.

Matched passage: The Authority notes that On 22 September 2022, Mr Nair's representative, Mr Morgan, raised a personal grievance with Mr Sharma for wage arrears, loss of income, unjustified disadvantage and unjustified dismissal.
CHEN v CONSTRUST LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 20 - unjustified dismissal; compensation, wages and penalty

Mr Chen worked in a construction arrangement where the identity of the employer and the true nature of the relationship were disputed. Evidence at the ERA included inconsistent accounts about when Construst was first mentioned and the parties agreed the amount of lost remuneration if employment was established.

Matched passage: If you are considering raising a Personal Grievance (PG), the 90 day notification time limit can be critical.
JOHNSTONE v ZXY [2025] NZERA 11 - care worker's summary dismissal unjustified; hindsight undermined the process

A care worker with 21 years' service was summarily dismissed after a resident incident, principally for not calling an ambulance. The ERA examined whether the employer judged her conduct with hindsight and fairly considered what she actually knew, her explanations and gaps in workplace policies and practice.

Matched passage: If you are considering raising a Personal Grievance (PG), the 90 day notification time limit can be critical.
JURY v BUCI LIMITED [2025] NZERA 7 - permanent part-time status, unjustified disadvantage and constructive dismissal

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.

Matched passage: If you are considering raising a Personal Grievance (PG), the 90 day notification time limit can be critical.
KNOX v RECRUIT IT GROUP LIMITED [2025] NZERA 4 - redundancy rationale and consultation failed scrutiny

Recruit IT Group made Mr Knox's consultant role redundant shortly before another staff member was promoted into a consultant position. Mr Knox argued the redundancy rationale, consultation timeframe and claimed lack of redeployment options did not withstand scrutiny.

Matched passage: If you are considering raising a Personal Grievance (PG), the 90 day notification time limit can be critical.

Browse topics