ClickCease

Results for redundancy

Showing 49-56 of 71 results
Stephanie Martin v SAS Builders Limited [2026] NZERA 226 - genuine restructure but consultation and redeployment failures

SAS Builders made Stephanie Martin redundant during a 2024 restructure. The central issues were whether the commercial restructure was genuine, whether the consultation was fair, and whether she should have been considered for a new role created in the business.

Matched passage: What happened SAS Builders Limited (SAS) commenced a restructure in September 2024, which resulted in the termination of Stephanie Martin's employment.
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: Redundancy still needs process: even where business is slow, consultation and notice are required.
MON v ALLIED AUTO PARTS LIMITED [2025] NZERA 590 - dismissal by text unjustified; no contribution

Allied Auto Parts dismissed Mr Mon by text message and required him to work out two weeks' notice. The employer later relied on concerns about working from home and other matters, but no proper disciplinary or dismissal process had been carried out.

Matched passage: Practical takeaways Redundancy determinations usually turn on genuineness and consultation quality.
TRAIL v VEOLIA WATER SERVICES LIMITED [2025] NZERA 353 - dismissal for workplace outbursts still unjustified

Veolia dismissed Mr Trail after a series of workplace outbursts, having previously issued a warning and then relied on later complaints. The ERA examined whether the proven conduct and disciplinary history could reasonably justify dismissal.

Matched passage: Practical takeaways Redundancy determinations usually turn on genuineness and consultation quality.
CHENG v THE VICE CHANCELLOR OF LINCOLN UNIVERSITY [2025] NZERA 167 - personal grievance partly successful; compensation and lost wages

Ms Cheng's case against Lincoln University involved several employment grievances and required the ERA to distinguish the claims that were made out from those that were not. The resulting orders included both compensation and a wage-related remedy rather than an across-the-board finding for either party.

Matched passage: In summary, After just over two years, Lincoln University disestablished the RFT role based at MGS and as a result Ms Cheng's employment came to an end on 1 May 2024 by reason of redundancy.
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: The letter stated it appeared as a result of the 3 March 2023 meeting, Ms Hill was being made redundant and was suspended.
PIACUN v COOPER NO 1 LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 32 - business sale did not avoid notice; dismissal unjustified

Cooper No 1 sold its business and told Ms Piacun her employment was ending, without paying a notice period. The ERA considered whether the sale itself ended employment or whether Cooper had taken the initiative to terminate her contract.

Matched passage: Practical takeaways Redundancy determinations usually turn on genuineness and consultation quality.

Browse topics