ClickCease

Results for trial period dismissal

Showing 33-40 of 169 results
Duane April v Coatrite Fire Limited [2026] NZERA 466 - visa worker underpaid, racialised comments, unlawful deductions and unjustified dismissal

Duane April, a migrant worker, alleged Coatrite Fire underpaid his agreed hourly rate, made unlawful deductions, subjected him to racialised comments and later dismissed him after a defective disciplinary process. The decision maker did not attend the disciplinary meeting and important allegations were not fairly tested.

Matched passage: pdf"; } Duane April v Coatrite Fire Limited [2026] NZERA 466 This Employment Relations Authority (ERA) determination concerns Duane April, an industrial/intumescent spray painter who came to New Zealand to work for Coatrite Fire Limited on an accredited employer work visa.
Nata Venceslau Dos Santos v Nresh Group Limited [2026] NZERA 363 - hostile workplace, visa pressure, unjustified dismissal, wage arrears and penalties

Nata Venceslau Dos Santos described a hostile workplace in which visa-related pressure, pay issues and deteriorating treatment preceded the end of employment. The ERA considered dismissal alongside wage arrears and minimum employment-standard breaches.

Matched passage: Nresh argued that the dismissal was on notice and that Mr Dos Santos was later encouraged to correct his behaviour and remain employed.
Angus Jowitt v Gokula Music Limited [2026] NZERA 297 - music shop worker dismissed by text after coffee dispute; wage arrears, holidays, compensation and penalties ordered

Angus Jowitt worked in a music shop under a disputed contractor-or-employee arrangement and was paid cash below the rate the employer accepted had been agreed. After a conflict over work and coffee, the employer later relied on resignation rather than dismissal.

Matched passage: Mr Masson also referred to the arrangement as a kind of trial period.
Kyle Horsefield v Eurocars Limited [2026] NZERA 293 - car salesperson labelled casual was a permanent employee; dismissal by text message unjustified; $12,345 ordered

Kyle Horsefield sold cars for Eurocars under an arrangement labelled casual, but his work had the characteristics of ongoing employment. The employer later ended the relationship by text, raising both employment-status and dismissal-justification issues.

Matched passage: Mr Horsefield also said he suggested that Eurocars use a 90-day trial period clause instead if the employer wanted time to assess suitability.
LI v MASTER Z FOOD LIMITED [2025] NZERA 335 - WeChat evidence showed employer ended employment

Master Z Food said Ms Li resigned during an April 2023 meeting; Li said she was told the decision had already been made to dismiss her and she could merely work out the week. Contemporary WeChat messages were central to resolving who ended the employment.

Matched passage: Trial-period disputes often come down to strict compliance with s 67B and the written agreement.
Jonathan Rhodes v Barfoot & Thompson Limited [2026] NZERA 543 - medical incapacity dismissal before a genuine opportunity to recover

Barfoot & Thompson dismissed senior property manager Jonathan Rhodes for medical incapacity while he was recovering from concussion and further head injuries. An imminent neurological assessment had not been obtained and the proposed alternative role did not fit clinical advice for a graduated return on reduced hours.

Matched passage: The dismissal was not one a fair and reasonable employer could have made.
Sidney Yu and Jing Tham v Queenstown Nursery Limited [2026] NZERA 446 - casual employment, fixed assignment and unjustified dismissal

Sidney Yu and Jing Tham were engaged by Queenstown Nursery for temporary plant work and were later selected to stop working, with the employer relying on weather and alleged comparative inefficiency. The case concerned whether the casual or short-assignment characterisation justified ending their work without a fair process.

Matched passage: The Authority also noted the employer had built in a paid trial day at the beginning of the arrangement.
Craig (Andrew) Campbell v Qube Ports NZ Limited [2026] NZERA 174 - interim reinstatement ordered after medical incapacity dismissal; asthma/dust exposure dispute

A Port of Tauranga stevedore was dismissed for medical incapacity after an asthma flare during dusty palm-kernel work. He sought interim reinstatement, arguing there was a serious dispute about the actual exposure risk, his capacity for modified duties and the employer's consideration of alternatives.

Matched passage: Mr Campbell said the material dusty environments were bulk work in ship holds and beneath the hopper, and his experience during the exemption period supported that narrower assessment.

Browse topics