ClickCease

Results for disciplinary process

Showing 57-64 of 97 results
LGY v Board of Trustees [2025] NZERA 809 - interim reinstatement ordered pending dismissal grievance (non-publication)

LGY sought interim reinstatement after being dismissed by a school board while the substantive personal grievance remained unresolved. The Board relied on serious allegations and workplace concerns, while LGY argued there was a strong arguable dismissal case and that reinstatement could operate pending a final hearing.

Matched passage: Disciplinary process and key documents In early November 2024 the chair of the Board recommended a disciplinary process for alleged misconduct/serious misconduct.
BLIGNAUT v WASTE MANAGEMENT NZ LIMITED [2025] NZERA 560 - The personal grievance for unjustified disadvantage was upheld.

Mr Blignaut challenged Waste Management's treatment of him during a workplace conflict, including alleged bullying, suspension and pressure to resign, before he was ultimately dismissed for alleged serious misconduct. The ERA considered both the pre-dismissal disadvantage claims and the termination itself.

Matched passage: The determination records that WMNZ starts a disciplinary process [79] On 14 December 2023 Mr Singh sent an email to Mr Blignaut attaching a letter requesting a meeting on 15 December 2023, for when Mr Blignaut was expected to return to work.
PINK v POWERNET LIMITED [2025] NZERA 374 - redundancy business case not genuine

PowerNet proposed to disestablish Ms Pink's occupational-health role and replace the service model, but the ERA scrutinised whether the proposal genuinely reflected her whole role, the asserted flexibility rationale and the lack of supporting costings.

Matched passage: There being a finding of a lack of genuine reason to disestablish Ms Pink's role, it follows that because there was no disciplinary process The Authority found that Ms Pink was unjustifiably dismissed.
Lekeisha Ramsay v National Storage Ltd [2025] NZERA 269 - Probationary period dismissal held unjustified; $9,000 compensation + $14,040.40 lost wages; penalties dismissed

Lekeisha Ramsay was dismissed by National Storage just over three months into employment under a probationary arrangement. The ERA examined attendance and performance concerns, the adequacy of warnings and whether the employer had given her a fair opportunity to improve and respond before termination.

Matched passage: Related topics Employment Relations Authority (ERA) Unjustified dismissal Disciplinary process Good faith obligations
RAY YU v SYNERGY NUTRITION LIMITED [2025] NZERA 64 - Unjustified dismissal and unjustified disadvantage (warning)

Synergy Nutrition issued Ray Yu a written warning and later dismissed him amid concerns including phone use and his ability to work night shifts. The ERA separately assessed the fairness of the warning, dismissal and Yu's own conduct under the contribution provisions.

Matched passage: The circumstances of the dismissal, which include the discussion of 6 October as well as the meeting of 9 October, do not meet the justification test set out at s 103A of Act or the disciplinary process requirements contained in SNL's policy handbook.
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.
Thuy v Huynh [2025] NZERA 74 - 90-day trial failed; dismissal for seeking employment advice unjustified

A nail technician was dismissed during a purported 90-day trial after seeking advice about her employment rights. The employer had not complied with the notice requirement in its own trial clause.

Matched passage: An employer cannot treat an employee's attempt to obtain employment-law advice as misconduct justifying dismissal.
Resink v Employment Services Limited [2025] NZERA 104 - constructive dismissal after continuing good-faith breaches

Employment Services pursued a disciplinary investigation without clearly identifying all allegations or providing requested information. An intimidating visit to recover Frank Resink's company vehicle became the last straw in continuing breaches of good faith.

Matched passage: 08 gross Compensation: $15,000 Contribution: no reduction Costs: reserved An unclear disciplinary investigation Mr Resink had worked for the labour-hire business for approximately two years.

Browse topics