ClickCease

Results for redundancy consultation

Showing 41-48 of 60 results
Prasath Balachandariyar v Civtec Limited [2026] NZERA 302 - redundancy selection unfairly used asthma and wrist injury; compensation and lost wages ordered

Prasath Balachandariyar was selected for redundancy after workplace health issues including asthma and a wrist injury became part of the employer's assessment. He argued the selection process unfairly used his medical circumstances and that the employer had not conducted a fair redundancy process.

Matched passage: He was given two weeks' notice of termination for redundancy.
Wendy Darrell v Canterbury Vehicle [2026] NZERA 35 - redundancy, unjustified disadvantage and dismissal

Wendy Darrell's dispute with Canterbury Vehicle concerned the ending of her employment and associated employment entitlements. The ERA considered whether the employer's conduct met the justification standard and what compensation or payments were required for the breaches established.

Matched passage: Key themes recorded include: [40] Then in a follow up email at 10:49 am on 26 September 2024 CVC confirmed its dismissal of Ms Darrell by serving a notice of redundancy that terminated her employment with immediate effect and advised that no redundancy payment would be made.
HILL v TAMAKI LABOUR HIRE LIMITED [2025] NZERA 100 - personal grievance partly successful; remedies limited to proven breaches

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.

Matched passage: In summary, Tamaki further denies any bullying occurred and says the suspension during the redundancy consultation period was justifiable in all the circumstances.
Andrew McFarlane v Stuff Limited [2026] NZERA 623 - redundancy selection and redeployment failures made dismissal unjustified

Stuff had genuine commercial reasons to restructure, but it failed to properly establish that Andrew McFarlane's existing role was surplus before making him compete for a substantially similar role. The ERA found the dismissal unjustified, criticised the contestable selection and redeployment process, and awarded $25,000 compensation plus $30,840.98 gross lost remuneration and holiday pay.

Matched passage: Selection and consultation were too superficial Stuff had supplied a consultation pack and held consultation meetings, but procedural form was not enough.
Jingsheng Liu v Legend International Holdings Limited, Hongyu Holding Limited and Wang Yu [2025] NZERA 702 - unjustified dismissal by 'no work next week' text; 4 weeks lost wages + notice arrears; $15,000 compensation; penalties and s 142Y leave

Cabinet maker Jingsheng Liu was told by text that there would be no work the following week after the business moved and operations shifted between related companies. There had been no consultation, termination process or reasonable notice.

Matched passage: ... takeaways "No work" messages are risky: a unilateral stoppage of work and pay, without consultation and notice, can be treated as a dismissal. Redundancy still needs process: even where business is slow, consultation and notice are required. A proper redundancy process can ...
Juliet Hull v Sleaktek Limited and Robert Lawrence [2026] NZERA 579 - CEO wins dismissal and disadvantage claims

Sleaktek stopped paying chief executive Juliet Hull, pursued a redundancy process she said was predetermined and later raised serious-misconduct allegations that had not been fairly put to her. The case also concerned director Robert Lawrence's personal involvement.

Matched passage: pdf"; } Juliet Hull v Sleaktek Limited and Robert Lawrence [2026] NZERA 579 Sleaktek stopped paying chief executive Juliet Hull, pursued a predetermined redundancy process and later relied on serious-misconduct accusations that had never been fairly put to her.
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: For redundancy, genuineness and process are separate: consultation and redeployment assessment remain critical.
Emily Grinsted v Bunnings Limited [2026] NZERA 236 - STI bonus claim succeeds; four other disadvantage claims fail

Emily Grinsted, Bunnings' New Zealand People and Culture Manager, brought five unjustified-disadvantage claims while remaining employed. The complaints concerned how criticisms were raised, information and duties, contractual obligations and a short-term incentive bonus.

Matched passage: For redundancy, genuineness and process are separate: consultation and redeployment assessment remain critical.

Browse topics