30-day rule for new employees to be repealed
The Coalition Government has today announced changes to employment regulations relating to collective agreements, to be included in the Employment Relations Amendment Bill due to
The Coalition Government has today announced changes to employment regulations relating to collective agreements, to be included in the Employment Relations Amendment Bill due to
The likelihood for confusion to occur over when the 28 days for filing a challenge to an Employment Relations Authority determination expires has been much reduced by a recent decision of the Employment Court. In making its decision, the Court refused to follow the earlier decision of the Court in Vice-Chancellor of Lincoln University v Stewart.
The question of whether privilege can be lifted with regard to communications made “without prejudice” has recently met with roughly the same response as the question of whether what happens in mediation can be disclosed.
A company that agreed with an employee to pay him an incentive payment if he remained with it until a certain date, or was made redundant or unjustifiably dismissed prior to that date, found that it was obliged to pay holiday pay on the incentive payment when it made him redundant.
Since 1 April 2011, the 90-day trial period has been available to all employers regardless of the number of employees. Employers now have the opportunity to hire new employees subject to a trial period of 90 days or less. In the event that an employee is dismissed during the trial period, they are prevented from taking a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal. However, employees can still still take a personal grievance on other grounds.
Question: An employee has had a workplace accident. The employee has sick leave available. I understand they are entitled to be paid for the first week (or part thereof) to compensate them for lost earnings, at 80% of what they would have earned that week. Can an employee choose to receive sick leave rather than 80% of their standard wage when they have a workplace accident?
In Barclay v Richmond Services Ltd [2014] NZERA Auckland 126, the employee claimed she had been constructively dismissed. She said the employer wished to be rid of her and she listed a number of incidents for which she had been disciplined during her employment and claimed that a complaint that she had bullied a client which led to a fifth disciplinary matter was the “final straw” that forced her to tender her resignation.