Employment Law New Zealand

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.

Mr Kumar resigned from JK Hospitality after alleging he was repeatedly denied proper breaks and practical support at work. The ERA considered whether those breaches were sufficiently serious that resignation was a reasonably foreseeable response.

Mr Da Silva left a meeting with DSJ Joinery believing he had been dismissed, although the employer said the meeting was about health and safety rather than discipline. The ERA examined whether there was an actual dismissal and, if not, whether the employer's conduct nevertheless ended the relationship.

Big B Cartage said Mr Tyack had resigned by text, while Tyack maintained he had not and later attempted to return after a period of medical incapacity. The case turned on who actually ended the employment relationship and whether the employer could rely on the alleged resignation.

Mr Chase-Pona resigned after workplace disputes including a theft allegation, but Coin Total terminated his employment before his notice period expired. The ERA had to determine whether the employment ended by resignation, dismissal or constructive dismissal.

Boya Trading summarily dismissed Mr Zheng by text on 26 May 2023, alleging that he had refused to work and abandoned his employment. Mr Zheng said there had been no warning or consultation and raised dismissal and disadvantage grievances the following month.

MOVE Freight dismissed Mr Putaanga for medical incapacity after a workplace accident and a lengthy period assessing his prospects of returning to full-time work. He also alleged the employer had failed to provide a safe workplace and that this caused unjustified disadvantage.

R1i Technology dismissed Mr Bali during a Webex meeting and then confirmed the decision in writing. The employer did not participate in the ERA proceeding and the evidence showed no meaningful process satisfying the minimum statutory tests of procedural fairness.