ClickCease

Results for genuine redundancy

Showing 65-72 of 72 results
Recurring problems that come up in ERA cases

Recurring factual and procedural mistakes seen in ERA disputes, including poor records, unclear allegations, rushed dismissals, weak redundancy consultation and failures to prove loss or mitigation.

Matched passage: A short, strict "reply" statement only where genuinely necessary (for new matters), limited in length and scope.
EMA's case for regulating employment advocates is not evidence-led

A critique of the Employers and Manufacturers Association case for new regulation of employment advocates, focusing on whether the publicly identified evidence demonstrates widespread advocate-specific consumer harm.

Matched passage: Its own material describes services involving personal grievances, dispute resolution, mediation, ERA and Employment Court representation, disciplinary matters, performance, incapacity, restructuring and redundancy.
Shaun Graves v NZSL Employment Limited [2026] NZERA 669 - contractor became an employee before summary dismissal

Shaun Graves initially worked through his own contracting company, but later moved onto NZSL's PAYE payroll, worked regular hours under its direction and used its equipment. The ERA found he had become an employee from 23 September 2024 and was unjustifiably dismissed when simply told his services were no longer required.

Matched passage: There was no disciplinary or redundancy process, no consultation, no opportunity to respond and no fair notice of an employment decision.
Qi Sun v Keene Construction Limited [2026] NZERA 465 - builder dismissed by text after querying apprenticeship costs

Qi Sun was an apprentice builder with Keene Construction when he queried an unpaid $300 apprenticeship-cost payment. The director then texted that there would not be a company and told him not to bother coming to work, creating a dispute about whether those messages amounted to dismissal.

Matched passage: Process still matters: commercial difficulty does not remove the need for a fair process before dismissal or redundancy.
Four Applicants v A Respondent [2026] NZERA 407 - union activity discrimination, duress, and work-from-home disadvantage

Four salaried union members alleged that a senior manager pressured them over strike action and delegate activity and that striking staff were temporarily denied discretionary work-from-home access. The non-publication case tested discrimination and duress protections connected with lawful union activity.

Matched passage: The respondent argued that the applicants had not established a tangible detriment because the adverse events referred to by the manager, such as lack of promotion or redundancy, had not occurred and the applicants remained active union members.
Fiona Scott v Ritchies Transport Holdings Limited [2026] NZERA 342 - casual bus driver found to be permanent and unjustifiably dismissed

Fiona Scott signed a casual agreement with Ritchies but in practice regularly drove urban bus routes. After disciplinary issues arose, the employer relied on the casual characterisation and later ended her work, raising questions about her real status and the justification for dismissal.

Matched passage: Ritchies did not establish a valid substantive reason to end the employment, such as serious misconduct or redundancy.
Received a Personal Grievance from an Employee?

What an employer should do after receiving a personal grievance: do not concede or retaliate, preserve records, identify the legal claims and deadlines, and assess whether mediation or a defended response is appropriate.

Matched passage: Check the employment agreement: notice, trial period, disciplinary, abandonment, restructuring, and dispute clauses may matter.

Browse topics