ClickCease

Results for dismissal process

Showing 1-8 of 204 results
Sirikanya Pankhum v Super Vape Store Limited [2026] NZERA 149 - WhatsApp dismissal during probation, no process; $12,500 compensation, $7,873.92 lost wages, $311.28 holiday pay

Sirikanya Pankhum was working under a six-month probation clause when Super Vape Store ended her employment by WhatsApp. A probationary arrangement did not remove the requirement for the employer to identify concerns, hear her response and use a fair dismissal process.

Matched passage: Outcome: unjustified dismissal (and unjustified disadvantage) upheld because no fair process was followed.
RAINA v HALL'S REFRIGERATED TRANSPORT LIMITED [2025] NZERA 469 - disciplinary process and dismissal procedurally unfair

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.

Matched passage: the employer's performance and disciplinary policy states on page 3 that: Typically, steps in the warning process are as follows: Warning, Final warning, Dismissal.
BRENNAN v STELLA 2020 LIMITED and Ors [2025] NZERA 449 - dismissal without fair process; compensation and lost wages

Ms Brennan's employment with Stella 2020 ended on 30 July 2024 without a fair disciplinary or dismissal process. The employer did not participate effectively in the ERA investigation, which proceeded on the evidence available to the Authority.

Matched passage: At a glance Citation: [2025] NZERA 449 Registry: Wellington Parties: BRENNAN v STELLA 2020 LIMITED and Ors Authority member: Rowan Anderson Hearing date: 3 July 2025 Outcome: The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues.
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: The Authority considered a fair and reasonable employer would normally train and support a new employee, give feedback, and follow a fair process before dismissal.
OCO v ZUA [2025] NZERA 790 - Constructive dismissal after unfair suspension and defective disciplinary process

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.

Matched passage: ZUA then started a disciplinary process against OCO while refusing to identify the complainants or properly set out the allegations.
KALKAT v EASY RECRUITMENT LIMITED T/A EASY RECRUIT [2025] NZERA 257 - dismissal grievance partly succeeds; $9,000 compensation

Mr Kalkat was placed in work through Easy Recruitment and later told the placement employer considered his performance inadequate. He alleged that his employment had been ended without a fair process and sought compensation and lost wages for unjustified dismissal.

Matched passage: ... date: 8 May 2025 Outcome: The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues (partly successful). Story in plain English The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues (partly successful). In summary, Mr Kalkat alleges ...
Gaetan Duvaux v Mega Limited [2026] NZERA 182 - redundancy dismissal unjustified on process; pre-selection and withheld scoring; $8,000 compensation plus three months' pay ordered

Gaetan Duvaux was made redundant by Mega after a selection process in which scoring and comparative information were not fully disclosed and the employee argued the outcome had effectively been chosen in advance. The business case itself was not the only issue: the fairness of selection and consultation was central.

Matched passage: Unjustified dismissal in a redundancy context Redundancy is not automatically unjustified just because process is imperfect.
Kyle Spencer v Modern Transport Engineers Limited [2026] NZERA 60 - dismissal unjustified due to non-minor process defects; $12,000 compensation and employer damages offset

Modern Transport Engineers had evidence capable of supporting serious-misconduct concerns against Kyle Spencer, while also counterclaiming for unauthorised private work and purchases. However, it stood him down early, relied on undisclosed staff discussions and ran a process carrying signs of predetermination.

Matched passage: Outcome on dismissal: Unjustified dismissal (personal grievance upheld), primarily due to significant process defects.

Browse topics