Search employment law articles and guides

ERA found the employee was constructively and unjustifiably dismissed after the employer raised performance concerns by text and threatened she would not make it out of a '3-month trial' when no trial clause existed.

In Kaytlin Pinder v S & O Bayliss Ltd [2022] NZERA 646 the ERA held the 90-day trial clause was invalid because employment had already been accepted before the agreement was signed.

L Linehaul Ltd [2021] NZERA 304, the ERA held the redundancy dismissal was unjustified due to a lack of consultation, lack of relevant information, and failure to properly explore alternatives and redeployment.

At a later meeting the employer gave her the option to resign or be dismissed; the ERA held the resignation was strongly induced and the termination.

In Neil Armstrong v Surplus Brokers Ltd [2019] NZERA 235, the ERA found a casual employee was unjustifiably dismissed during a period of engagement.

... in this area. Related materials Mackey v Shearing NZ Ltd [2026] NZERA 146 150A payment on resolution of problem and advocates GST invoices 2023-NZERA-50 2023-NZERA-72 Employment Relations Law Reform Bill 2003 ...

Nine recurring arguments and tactics we see in Employment Relations Authority investigations, and why they should carry little weight.

era.