ClickCease

Results for warnings

Showing 57-64 of 70 results
Daniel Bly v FutureCo Limited [2026] NZERA 269 - dismissal for Instagram posts and Slack messages held unjustified; $15,000 compensation; 6 months' pay less 50% contribution

Daniel Bly was dismissed by FutureCo after Instagram posts and internal Slack messages became the subject of disciplinary allegations. The case tested both the seriousness of the conduct and whether the employer's investigation and dismissal response were proportionate.

Matched passage: Alternatives not considered: the termination outcome did not address alternatives (warning, coaching, final warning, or conditions), despite the small-business context and the employee's acknowledgment of wrongdoing.
Clive Bryham v Electrix Limited (trading as Omexom New Zealand) [2026] NZERA 147 - interim reinstatement granted; arguable unjustified dismissal where employer alleged reputational harm without evidence

Clive Bryham, a long-serving field operations manager, was dismissed after Omexom alleged he mishandled an 'illegal connection' incident involving a direct report and exposed the business to reputational risk with a key client. He sought interim reinstatement pending final determination of his dismissal and disadvantage grievances.

Matched passage: The Authority also emphasised that damages are often a poor substitute for the loss of a job, and cited recent authority warning that routinely declining reinstatement can "monetise the employment relationship".
Lillian Shorter v Waiheke Island Supported Homes Trust [2026] NZERA 54 - summary dismissal for alleged sleeping on night shift held unjustified; six months lost wages ordered and $18,750 compensation

Lillian Shorter was summarily dismissed by Waiheke Island Supported Homes Trust after covert video showed her sleeping during night shifts. She said night workers had a recognised practice of sleeping during combined breaks and challenged both the investigation and the unequal treatment of staff.

Matched passage: Publication note: The determination begins with a warning about non-publication orders.
Jingkai Wang v Envoco Limited [2025] NZERA 845 - resignation, covert recordings and limited unjustified disadvantage

Jingkai Wang claimed Envoco had dismissed him and subjected him to bullying and an unsafe workplace, while the employer said he resigned. The evidence also included covert recordings and a trial clause signed only after work had begun.

Matched passage: The determination is also a useful warning that covert recording can affect the Authority's assessment of credibility and good faith where it appears inconsistent with genuine attempts to resolve a workplace problem.
Edmundo Marcelo v Golden Bulls Limited [2025] NZERA 814 - chef dismissed after failed food safety inspection; substantive grounds, but process flaws made dismissal unjustified; $13,707 ordered

Chef Edmundo Marcelo was dismissed by Golden Bulls after a failed food-safety inspection. The employer had substantive concerns about the incident, but the ERA examined whether those concerns were fairly put to him and whether the disciplinary decision was reached through a proper process.

Haochen Guo v Su's Investment Limited [2025] NZERA 805 - suspension without process, bullying, and redundancy while on ACC leave; $25,000 compensation plus arrears and penalty

Haochen Guo was suspended, complained of bullying and was later made redundant while absent on ACC leave. The ERA examined the fairness of the suspension and workplace treatment as well as whether the purported redundancy was genuine and properly consulted on.

Matched passage: On 14 May 2025 SIL told Mr Guo by message that he was being given a serious warning and was immediately suspended.
Lautusi Isaako v ABS Builders Limited [2025] NZERA 678 - Employee status confirmed, dismissal by text, 3 months lost wages, $15k compensation, holiday pay arrears, costs

Lautusi Isaako worked full-time for ABS Builders under day-to-day direction but the respondents disputed aspects of the employment relationship and later ended his work by text after raising performance concerns for the first time. The case also involved public-holiday, annual-leave and record-keeping failures.

Matched passage: Process failure: The termination was by text, with no warning, no review, and no opportunity to respond.
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: The Authority notes that Attached to the email is a letter dated 21 June 2023, which is not a reference but instead appears to be a written warning.

Browse topics