ClickCease

Results for holiday pay

Showing 65-72 of 102 results
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: Ultimately, Ms Piacun's final payslip shows she was paid $11,076.
Limei Wang v Serenity Float Clinic Limited [2025] NZERA 599 - redundancy without consultation despite insolvency

Limei Wang was made redundant by Serenity Float Clinic while the business was in serious financial difficulty. The issue was not whether insolvency pressures were real, but whether those pressures excused the employer from consulting with her before deciding that her employment would end.

Matched passage: The Authority concluded the evidence showed Charl Eksteen was the decision-maker who decided to stop paying wages and holiday pay.
Emily Barr v Brooker Travel Limited [2026] NZERA 651 - bullying complaint failures led to constructive dismissal

Emily Barr complained about repeated belittling and dismissive treatment by her manager. Brooker Travel obtained an external investigation but then failed to adequately protect her, disclose the final report or provide a workable return-to-work plan. The ERA found unjustified disadvantage and constructive dismissal, awarding $20,000 compensation and six months' lost wages with associated entitlements.

Matched passage: 56 gross lost wages, plus $1,319.
Mandeep Singh v PR Kahlon Limited and Satpal Singh [2026] NZERA 521 - performance dismissal failed because employee was not fairly heard

PR Kahlon had genuine, documented concerns about delivery driver Mandeep Singh's performance and safety, but knew English was a serious barrier and still used English for critical disciplinary communications rather than Punjabi. His suspension and dismissal followed without a clear opportunity to understand and answer the case against him.

Matched passage: The separate claims for earlier wage arrears, holiday pay, unlawful deductions and penalties were not established.
Blue Hunt v Lance Wakelin [2026] NZERA 463 - farm assistant unjustifiably dismissed after cowshed dispute

Farm assistant Blue Hunt's employment ended after a cowshed dispute with Lance Wakelin. The case required the ERA to determine who the employer was, whether Mr Hunt had been dismissed and whether any fair process or substantive reason justified the termination.

Matched passage: Lost wages: Mr Wakelin must pay Mr Hunt $18,057.
Sukhmanpreet Singh v JIT Limited, Davinder Pal and Harmanpreet Kaur Sandhu [2026] NZERA 453 - forced leave request, unjustified suspension and dismissal

Sukhmanpreet Singh's dispute with JIT arose after he was pressed to submit an annual-leave request and a confrontation followed. JIT then cancelled his shifts on claimed mental-stress grounds and later dismissed him for serious misconduct, while the ERA examined the conduct of both sides.

Matched passage: Orders made Personal grievance remedies: JITL must pay Mr Singh $9,019.
Sidney Yu and Jing Tham v Queenstown Nursery Limited [2026] NZERA 446 - casual employment, fixed assignment and unjustified dismissal

Sidney Yu and Jing Tham were engaged by Queenstown Nursery for temporary plant work and were later selected to stop working, with the employer relying on weather and alleged comparative inefficiency. The case concerned whether the casual or short-assignment characterisation justified ending their work without a fair process.

Matched passage: Use written employment agreements: they reduce uncertainty about casual status, assignment length, public holidays, and holiday pay treatment.
Aaron Potter v Talley's Limited [2026] NZERA 412 - flawed HSR election disciplinary process and unjustified dismissal

Aaron Potter was disciplined and dismissed by Talley's after disputes surrounding a health and safety representative election and communications involving other employees. The case focused on whether Talley's properly investigated the competing accounts and relevant messages before deciding serious misconduct was established.

Matched passage: 97 plus holiday pay of $535.

Browse topics