Search New Zealand employment-law guides, ERA determinations, Employment Court decisions and topics.
Results for serious misconduct
A practical framework for distinguishing ordinary misconduct from serious misconduct after the 2026 remedy amendments, with emphasis on the contractual standard, the facts proved and proportionality.
Oranga Tamariki summarily dismissed social worker Bigson Gumbeze after an external investigation into complaints about his supervision, dealings with managers and aspects of his practice. The ERA upheld the dismissal, but he challenged that result afresh in the Employment Court.
Healthcare assistant Shubanghi Kaushal was suspended and then summarily dismissed after an incident the employer characterised as serious misconduct. The ERA examined the incident in context, an existing final warning and whether dismissal was within the range open to a fair and reasonable employer.
Fire and Emergency summarily dismissed Crawford Morris after complaints about interactions with a female volunteer firefighter, including comments about physical capability and a later dispute over protective clothing. The ERA examined whether insensitive conduct reached the serious-misconduct threshold.
Auckland Transport investigated FHE over serious conduct involving a former employee with whom he had been in a relationship. Before completing a fair consultation process over suspension, AT had already effectively removed him from work for two days.
Analysis of the 2026 contribution changes and the continuing need to prove blameworthy employee conduct that contributed to the situation giving rise to the grievance before remedies are reduced or removed.
Employment-law lessons from misconduct at Christmas parties and other work functions, including alcohol, off-duty conduct, investigations and when discipline or dismissal may be justified.
QN was summarily dismissed as a branch manager after FT Limited investigated an alleged undisclosed conflict of interest involving the engagement of a close family member's company. The ERA examined both the underlying conflict and whether the investigation and decision-making process was fair.
