ClickCease

Results for disciplinary

Showing 49-56 of 108 results
OAS v JIK Limited [2026] NZERA 474 - employee dismissed after seeking family violence leave

Chef OAS told JIK Limited he needed time away from work after family violence affecting his children, including meetings with victim support and steps toward a protection order. The employer treated his messages as resignation or abandonment and omitted him from the next roster.

Matched passage: JIK argued that the 2026 amendments concerning misconduct, serious misconduct and remedies should apply.
Blue Hunt v Lance Wakelin [2026] NZERA 463 - farm assistant unjustifiably dismissed after cowshed dispute

Farm assistant Blue Hunt's employment ended after a cowshed dispute with Lance Wakelin. The case required the ERA to determine who the employer was, whether Mr Hunt had been dismissed and whether any fair process or substantive reason justified the termination.

Matched passage: A heated exchange does not remove the obligation to run a fair disciplinary process before dismissal.
Steven David Mitchell v Tasman Rugby Union Incorporated [2026] NZERA 435 - CEO returned to payroll on interim reinstatement

Tasman Rugby Union dismissed chief executive Steven Mitchell after an organisational review became intertwined with later misconduct allegations. He sought interim reinstatement, arguing the process appeared predetermined and that his substantive dismissal grievance had real strength.

Matched passage: It found that the review, the later disciplinary process and the material before the Board gave Mr Mitchell a strongly arguable case that adverse and personalised views had formed before the process was completed.
Four Applicants v A Respondent [2026] NZERA 407 - union activity discrimination, duress, and work-from-home disadvantage

Four salaried union members alleged that a senior manager pressured them over strike action and delegate activity and that striking staff were temporarily denied discretionary work-from-home access. The non-publication case tested discrimination and duress protections connected with lawful union activity.

Matched passage: Why this case matters The determination is a significant reminder that protection for union activity applies to more than formal disciplinary decisions or overt dismissal threats.
Rakai Tawhiwhirangi v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [2026] NZERA 402 - unjustified dismissal after self-defence acquittal

Corrections dismissed prison officer Rakai Tawhiwhirangi for alleged unjustified use of force after an incident that also resulted in a criminal prosecution in which he was acquitted on self-defence grounds. The ERA examined the employer's independent investigation, the evidence available and the fairness of the serious-misconduct conclusion.

Matched passage: The Department of Corrections nevertheless conducted its own employment investigation, found the use of force unjustified and unreasonable, treated the matter as serious misconduct, and dismissed him in July 2024.
Jeanette Go v Point Limited [2026] NZERA 369 - genuine redundancy but flawed consultation and undisclosed selection criteria

Point Limited made estimator Jeanette Go redundant after a genuine downturn in estimation work, but did not disclose its selection criteria, interview the other estimators or properly engage with her reduced-hours alternative before preparing the termination outcome.

Matched passage: Because the redundancy situation itself was genuine, the Authority considered lost wages were not usually awarded in the same way they may be after a disciplinary dismissal.
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: A short dismissal meeting and a final email are not a disciplinary process.
Selwyn McDonald v Traffica Roading Services Limited [2026] NZERA 360 - on-the-spot dismissal after heated worksite exchange

Traffica summarily dismissed foreman Selwyn McDonald on site after a heated exchange with a director. The ERA accepted that Mr McDonald made serious disrespectful comments with racial connotations, but he was given no chance to answer before being fired.

Matched passage: However, Traffica did not run a disciplinary process before dismissing him.

Browse topics