ClickCease

Results for dismissal process

Showing 49-56 of 204 results
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.
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: ...
Conner Powell v OH and N Contracting Limited and Bradley Mooney [2026] NZERA 480 - genuine redundancy reason but no consultation, notice-pay breach and director recovery

Conner Powell was made redundant by OH and N Contracting as forestry work wound down and no replacement work had been secured. The ERA accepted that business pressure was genuine but examined whether the employer consulted before deciding the redundancy and complied with notice and record obligations.

Matched passage: The employer still has to run a fair process before deciding to dismiss.
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: The ERA accepted that there was a genuine business reason for reducing the estimation team, and found the dismissal decision probably would not have changed if the process had been done properly.
DQJ v COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE [2025] NZERA 365 - Inland Revenue ended employment prematurely without exhausting alternatives

Inland Revenue ended DQJ's employment after a lengthy deterioration in workplace relationships and concerns that it said could no longer be resolved. The ERA examined whether IR had exhausted fair alternatives before treating the relationship as incapable of continuing.

Matched passage: failures to achieve those standards such as progressive warnings, before considering dismissal.
ADO v JOAN FERNIE CHARITABLE TRUST BOARD [2025] NZERA 3 - redundancy found to be a pretext for conduct concerns

ADO was selected for redundancy by the Joan Fernie Charitable Trust Board after workplace conduct concerns and an argument had arisen. The ERA examined whether redundancy was genuinely driven by commercial considerations and whether redeployment, including a proposed trial in the Stock Manager role, was fairly considered.

Matched passage: ... leave, that Mr Barham embarked on a course of making ill-advised allegations without due process. Additionally, the persistent allegations made against ADO, including from the time of the letter of 10 November 2023 containing allegations not relevant to the purported no ...
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: pdf"; } Andrew McFarlane v Stuff Limited [2026] NZERA 623 Stuff Limited had genuine commercial reasons to restructure its Christchurch agency sales operation, but that did not make Andrew McFarlane's redundancy dismissal fair.
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: The dismissal process was badly flawed Nresh is a small business and did not have a dedicated human resources function.

Browse topics