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.
![Mere Broughton v The Whanau Ora Community Clinic Ltd [2023] NZERA 52 - Unjustified dismissal, probation clause misused](/Images/site/EmploymentAdvocatesAucklandCard.jpg)
In Mere Broughton v The Whanau Ora Community Clinic Ltd [2023] NZERA 52, the ERA found an unjustified dismissal after the employer wrongly relied on a probation / "90 day" misunderstanding after the probation period had already expired, and failed to pay notice and holiday pay. Remedies included $20,000 compensation and reimbursement of lost wages.
ERA found the employee was constructively and unjustifiably dismissed after the employer raised performance concerns by text and threatened she would not make it out of a '3-month trial' when no trial clause existed. Orders included $3,600 reimbursement, $8,000 compensation, and a $2,000 penalty, and the employer's $10,000 counter-claim was dismissed.
In Kaytlin Pinder v S & O Bayliss Ltd [2022] NZERA 646 the ERA held the 90-day trial clause was invalid because employment had already been accepted before the agreement was signed. The dismissal was unjustified. The Authority awarded $12,692.28 gross lost wages, $15,000 compensation, and $1,000 penalties for record / agreement breaches.
The ERA first had to decide who employed a worker hired through a Facebook job ad for a firewood operation (Ignite Firewood). The respondents argued the worker was employed by a third party supervisor as a sole trader, or by a company. The Authority held Darcee Gosling was the employer and...
In Leo Waters v S.T.L Linehaul Ltd [2021] NZERA 304, the ERA held the redundancy dismissal was unjustified due to a lack of consultation, lack of relevant information, and failure to properly explore alternatives and redeployment. The Authority awarded $17,000 compensation and reserved costs.
A meatworks employee was suspended immediately after a workplace incident without being told the employer's concerns or given a chance to respond. At a later meeting the employer gave her the option to resign or be dismissed; the ERA held the resignation was strongly induced and the termination...
In Neil Armstrong v Surplus Brokers Ltd [2019] NZERA 235, the ERA found a casual employee was unjustifiably dismissed during a period of engagement. The Authority awarded $9,000 compensation (after 10% reduction for contributory conduct) and imposed a $1,000 penalty for failing to provide an intended employment agreement.
