Emma Baldwin returned from parental leave to find that RJ Hospitality Solutions Limited had changed the days and hours she had consistently worked for more than two years, provided fewer than her 20 guaranteed hours, and did so without a workplace-change proposal or consultation. The ERA rejected the dismissal and bullying claims, but found an unjustified disadvantage. It awarded $15,000 compensation, 15.5 hours' wage arrears, and any outstanding annual-leave arrears...
Employment Law
We represent employers and employees in employment disputes in New Zealand. All employees have rights under the Employment Relations Act 2000. This blog discusses common and relevant issues in New Zealand employment law.
Search tips
- Use quotes for exact phrases, eg "unfair dismissal".
- Use +word to require, -word to exclude, eg +redundancy -trial.
- Use OR to broaden, eg dismissal OR redundancy.
Browse topics
Browse articles
Ilalio Solomona v Auckland Council [2026] NZERA 418 - conflict of interest dismissal unjustified
CaseAuckland Council summarily dismissed a fitness instructor over an undeclared personal-training business and three social-media videos filmed at a Council leisure centre. The ERA held that the Council relied on policies which did not in substance fit the alleged conflict, failed to raise the contractual obligations it might have relied on, and pursued discipline over matters known long beforehand without first discussing them in good faith. The dismissal was unjustified. Remedies were reduced by 10 percent for the employee's use of customers and the workplace to promote his own business...
Aaron Potter was summarily dismissed by Talley's Limited after a complaint connected with an election for a health and safety representative. The ERA found Talley's had not properly investigated the complaint, had not clearly set out the allegations or supporting information, had not given Mr Potter a fair opportunity to respond, and could not reasonably conclude that he had bullied, intimidated, or attempted to influence the vote. Mr Potter was awarded $20,000 compensation and $7,226.25 gross lost remuneration, no contribution was found...
Neil Hall v Consultex Company Limited [2026] NZERA 410 - genuine redundancy but unjustified process
CaseNeil Hall's Northland asbestos-surveyor and mould-testing role was genuinely disestablished for commercial reasons, but Consultex Company Limited failed to consult in good faith. It did not meaningfully answer Mr Hall's request for financial information, failed to engage with his redeployment question, and sent a response that strongly suggested the decision had already been made before consultation closed. The ERA found unjustified dismissal and ordered $8,000 compensation, with no reduction for contribution...
In this non-publication determination, four salaried union members established personal grievances for unjustified disadvantage arising from discrimination and duress connected with their union activity. The Authority found that a senior manager held one-on-one meetings in which the applicants were told that strike action and delegate roles harmed their job security and career prospects. A temporary decision to deny striking employees access to discretionary work from home arrangements was also discriminatory. Each applicant was awarded $10,000 compensation, with no reduction for contribution.
Sophie Kennett was required to resign before holiday leave and then re-employed after the break. The ERA held that Polygon had manufactured the termination to minimise Holidays Act liabilities, meaning her employment was continuous. It also found a later redundancy dismissal unjustified because the business sale remained uncertain, redeployment was not properly considered, relevant information was withheld, and no contractual notice was provided. The Authority ordered compensation, lost wages, notice pay, Holidays Act entitlements, wage arrears, interest and a penalty...
The Department of Corrections dismissed Principal Corrections Officer Rakai Tawhiwhirangi after he used force on a prisoner and did not report the incident. Although he had been acquitted of assault on the basis of self-defence, Corrections revisited the same factual questions and reached the opposite conclusions. The ERA found the dismissal unjustified because Corrections blurred the criminal and employment issues, did not properly identify and assess the remaining policy breaches, allowed a conflicted decision maker to continue, and relied on conduct that was not put as an allegation. Reinstatement was declined, but the Authority ordered $17,000 compensation and $19,882.50 lost wages after a 15 percent contribution reduction...
Rachel Hankins was engaged as an accountant on a fixed term maternity-cover agreement due to end on 15 August 2025. The ERA found the fixed term complied with section 66 of the Employment Relations Act 2000, but Huhtamaki Henderson Limited prematurely ended the employment relationship by requiring the return of company property, cutting off IT access, and treating her engagement as concluded before the agreed end date. The Authority found unjustified dismissal and unjustified disadvantage, ordering $11,500 compensation and four weeks' salary.
