Search Employment Law

Electrician Brent Colyer was investigated and given a written warning by New Zealand Aluminium Smelters after a gantry-crane incident involving another employee. He later resigned, alleging both unjustified disadvantage from the disciplinary process and constructive dismissal.

OCO resigned after being suspended and put through a disciplinary process by ZUA. The case centred on whether the suspension and investigation were fair and whether the employer's cumulative conduct was serious enough to make the resignation a constructive dismissal.

Mr Raina faced disciplinary action by Hall's Refrigerated Transport, including a meeting invitation that did not tell him he could bring a support person and a generic warning that dismissal was possible. The case concerned both disadvantage during the process and the justification for the eventual termination.

Ms Moke faced complaints and an external investigation while employed by Raukura Hauora O Tainui Trust. The case examined the fairness of the investigation, disciplinary steps and the Trust's eventual preliminary and final conclusions, including whether tikanga and kaupapa-based processes altered the statutory fairness requirements.

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.

Packaging operator Arnold Putt challenged disciplinary action by George Weston Foods after a confrontation with his production manager about task priorities. The ERA examined both the basis for a final written warning and whether shortcomings in the way the process was communicated caused a separate disadvantage.

Duane April, a migrant worker, alleged Coatrite Fire underpaid his agreed hourly rate, made unlawful deductions, subjected him to racialised comments and later dismissed him after a defective disciplinary process. The decision maker did not attend the disciplinary meeting and important allegations were not fairly tested.

Deborah Coley's agreement guaranteed at least 32 hours each week, but Bupa sought to vary that guarantee by averaging hours across a six-week roster and presented redundancy as the alternative if she refused. A later disciplinary investigation and written warning added a second strand to the disadvantage claim.