ClickCease

Results for dismissal process

Showing 49-56 of 270 results
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: Instead, it considered whether Mr Mitchell had a sufficiently serious and arguable unjustified-dismissal case, whether permanent reinstatement remained arguable, where the balance of convenience lay, and what overall justice required pending the substantive hearing.
Philip Powell v OH and N Contracting Limited and Bradley Mooney [2026] NZERA 481 - genuine redundancy reason but no consultation, notice-pay breach and director recovery

Philip Powell was made redundant from OH and N Contracting as forestry work reduced and no replacement contract had been secured. The ERA accepted there was a genuine business reason to reduce staff but examined whether the employer had consulted, disclosed information, considered alternatives and paid notice correctly.

Matched passage: The Authority considered that a more thorough process would probably not have kept Mr Powell employed indefinitely, because the logging work was ending and the business had no new work coming in.
WATSON v ALCHEMY BUILDERS LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 265 - disadvantage claim fails but dismissal grievance succeeds

Mr Watson challenged a written warning and later alleged he was constructively dismissed after his relationship with Alchemy Builders deteriorated and he was removed from a workplace WhatsApp group. Timeliness affected the earlier disadvantage grievance.

Matched passage: ... date: 13 May 2025 Outcome: The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues. Story in plain English The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues. In summary, Second, he alleged he was unjustifiably dismissed on 21 ...
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: The Authority found that the manager gave Mr Tillocksingh a choice between resignation and dismissal.
Herewini Dickson v Ballance Agri-Nutrients Limited [2026] NZERA 693 - serious safety breach but dismissal and suspension unjustified

Ballance established that long-serving employee Herewini Dickson breached a safety SOP and that the conduct was capable of serious misconduct, but its process was still unfair. The ERA found both his suspension and dismissal unjustified because critical evidence was not disclosed, the HiPo classification was not fairly put to him and alternatives to dismissal were not adequately considered. Remedies were reduced 30 percent for contribution.

Matched passage: But the Employment Relations Authority still found his suspension and dismissal unjustified because the process used to assess the seriousness of the incident was materially unfair.
FHE v Auckland Transport [2026] NZERA 552 - justified dismissal but unjustified initial suspension

Auckland Transport investigated FHE over serious conduct involving a former employee with whom he had been in a relationship. Before completing a fair consultation process over suspension, AT had already effectively removed him from work for two days.

Matched passage: But it had already effectively suspended him for two days following a surprise meeting without first completing a fair consultation process.
George Ngatai, Whanau Ora and the Broughton ERA decision [2023] NZERA 52

Mere Broughton was dismissed by The Whanau Ora Community Clinic after 106 days of employment under an agreement containing a probation provision. The case concerned whether the employer could treat probation as permitting dismissal without the ordinary justification and fair-process requirements.

Matched passage: The Authority found that the employer had wrongly treated the probation arrangements as continuing and that the dismissal was unjustified.
Limei Wang v Serenity Float Clinic Limited [2025] NZERA 599 - redundancy without consultation despite insolvency

Limei Wang was made redundant by Serenity Float Clinic while the business was in serious financial difficulty. The issue was not whether insolvency pressures were real, but whether those pressures excused the employer from consulting with her before deciding that her employment would end.

Matched passage: ... and two director respondents (Charl Eksteen and Jodi Eksteen) Main issues: redundancy dismissal process (s 103A and s 4); unpaid wages and holiday pay (employment standards); notice; compensation; whether directors were "involved in the breach" (ss 142W and 142Y) Outcome: ...

Browse topics