ClickCease

Results for disciplinary process

Showing 33-40 of 97 results
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: The Trusts moved from an 'informal' meeting to a formal disciplinary meeting and then issued a first and final written warning on 3 April 2023.
Eric Paul Tillocksingh v Driver Employment Limited [2026] NZERA 663 - resign or be dismissed ultimatum was an unjustified dismissal

After a customer complaint, truck driver Eric Tillocksingh was called into meetings without advance written allegations or warning that dismissal was possible. The ERA preferred his evidence that he was told to resign or be dismissed, found the process fundamentally unfair, and awarded $15,000 compensation plus $17,448.75 lost remuneration.

Matched passage: A fair disciplinary process requires clear allegations, notice of the possible consequences and a genuine opportunity to respond before a decision is made.
Auto John Huntley-Byrne v Dallison 2021 Limited [2026] NZERA 354 - unjustified café dismissal by text message

Dallison 2021 dismissed café worker Auto John Huntley-Byrne by text after end-of-shift tasks were left incomplete. Although the employer had legitimate concerns, it did not hold a proper disciplinary meeting or provide the support-person and response rights required by its own documents.

Matched passage: The ERA accepted that Dallison had workplace concerns, but found the dismissal unjustified because it did not run a fair disciplinary process before ending his employment.
Fiona Scott v Ritchies Transport Holdings Limited [2026] NZERA 342 - casual bus driver found to be permanent and unjustifiably dismissed

Fiona Scott signed a casual agreement with Ritchies but in practice regularly drove urban bus routes. After disciplinary issues arose, the employer relied on the casual characterisation and later ended her work, raising questions about her real status and the justification for dismissal.

Matched passage: The first written warning was upheld Ms Scott attended the disciplinary meeting with her union representative and responded to the allegations.
Regina Rasheed v Commissioner of Zayed College for Girls [2026] NZERA 326 - school principal reinstated after unjustified dismissal

Long-serving school principal Regina Rasheed was suspended and dismissed after a series of complaints and governance interventions at Zayed College for Girls. The ERA examined the factual basis for the allegations, the fairness of the investigation and a second suspension imposed during the process.

Matched passage: The delay was significant and inconsistent with the collective agreement provisions requiring disciplinary processes to seek to maintain the dignity and mana of the principal.
Daniel Bly v FutureCo Limited [2026] NZERA 269 - dismissal for Instagram posts and Slack messages held unjustified; $15,000 compensation; 6 months' pay less 50% contribution

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.

Matched passage: ... it deals with (1) extreme additional hours being demanded from a salaried employee, (2) a disciplinary process driven by social media posts and internal messages, and (3) remedies including compensation, leave arrears, and lost remuneration with a significant contribution ...
Adarsh Chand v Professional Stylish Barber Shop Limited [2026] NZERA 244 - unjustified constructive dismissal after unjustified warnings; $12,000 compensation + $14,560 reimbursement

Adarsh Chand resigned from Professional Stylish Barber Shop after disciplinary warnings and employment treatment he said had destroyed the relationship. The ERA examined whether the warning was substantively and procedurally justified and whether the resulting resignation was caused by the employer's breaches.

Matched passage: The Authority found there was effectively no disciplinary process before this warning was issued: the allegations were not fairly put to Mr Chand, there was no investigation, and there was no opportunity for him to respond or have representation.
FVG v YJN [2026] NZERA 242 - suspension and dismissal unjustified; remedies reduced 30% for contribution

FVG, a structural engineer, challenged her suspension, the handling of bullying and performance concerns, and her eventual dismissal by YJN. The case required the ERA to separate several disadvantage allegations from the fairness of the final dismissal process.

Matched passage: Suspension grievance As FVG is found to be unjustifiably dismissed, the unjustified disadvantage grievance regarding the investigation and disciplinary process leading to dismissal have already been covered.

Browse topics