ClickCease

Results for performance dismissal

Showing 57-64 of 117 results
Invalid trial period clause, no process, and wage record failures - Shania Mortimer v Auckland Steam 'N' Dry Limited [2025] NZERA 808; $30,087.30 ordered (lost remuneration and distress compensation)

Shania Mortimer was dismissed by Auckland Steam 'N' Dry under a purported trial period. The dispute concerned whether the trial clause was legally effective, whether any dismissal process occurred, and the employer's wage and record-keeping compliance.

Matched passage: If it does not, the employer cannot rely on s 67B to block an unjustified dismissal personal grievance.
GILLARD v SOUTHSHORE MARINE LIMITED [2025] NZERA 454 - 90-day trial reliance fails; dismissal unjustified

Southshore Marine attempted to rely on a 90-day trial when dismissing Mr Gillard after concerns about his work. The timing of when employment actually commenced and the complete absence of a fair performance, conduct or capacity process were central issues.

Matched passage: Dismissal justification is assessed through s 103A: what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances.
QN v FT LIMITED [2025] NZERA 99 - unjustified dismissal

QN was summarily dismissed as a branch manager after FT Limited investigated an alleged undisclosed conflict of interest involving the engagement of a close family member's company. The ERA examined both the underlying conflict and whether the investigation and decision-making process was fair.

Matched passage: Ultimately, The letter then drew attention to examples of serious misconduct in QN's employment agreement and a company disciplinary and dismissal policy relating to a conflict-of-interest activity and failure to disclose.
Probationary Periods
6 articles

A probationary period does not remove an employee's ordinary dismissal rights. The employer should assess suitability fairly, identify performance concerns, provide a genuine opportunity to improve and follow a fair process before dismissal.

Continue
No Win No Fee Employment Lawyer NZ | Personal Grievance & Dismissal Help

Employee-side no-win-no-fee employment advocacy for suitable personal-grievance, dismissal and redundancy cases, including mediation and ERA representation where the case meets the acceptance criteria.

Matched passage: Unjustified dismissal Employees commonly search for a no win no fee unfair dismissal lawyer after being dismissed for misconduct, performance, medical incapacity, absence, restructuring or another stated reason.
South Pole IP Holding (NZ) Limited v Hao [2026] NZEmpC 193 - constructive dismissal upheld

South Pole maintained that Xinhua Hao had agreed to resign, pressured him to leave, stopped providing meaningful work and refused to engage with him about work matters. The Employment Court upheld the ERA's constructive-dismissal finding.

Matched passage: Where the employee disputes resignation, continues attending work and says they want to remain employed, the employer must address performance through a fair process rather than withholding work or applying pressure.
LEVI-ADAMS v GREENE [2025] NZERA 531 - material withheld until after dismissal; dismissal unjustified

Ms Levi-Adams was dismissed by Greene after a process in which important material was not provided to her until after the termination decision. The ERA examined whether she had been given the information and opportunity to respond that a fair and reasonable employer was required to provide.

Matched passage: Mr Greene also accepted that nothing was investigated prior to this meeting; any concerns he had about Ms Levi- Adams' performance (including her punctuality and attendance) were not put to her for comment prior to the decision to dismiss.
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.

Browse topics