Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act 1987

Protection of employment

51: Special defences relating to dismissal during parental leave

You could also call this:

“When an employer can let you go while you're on parental leave”

If you are dismissed from your job while on parental leave, your employer has some special defences they can use. These defences apply in specific situations.

Your employer might be able to defend the dismissal if they can prove that they couldn’t keep your job open because of changes in their business. This could be due to a redundancy situation or other circumstances that happened after they gave you notice about your parental leave.

Another defence your employer might use is if they can show that they had to let you go because of a redundancy. In this case, they would need to prove that there was no chance of giving you a similar job to the one you had before your leave.

Your employer also needs to show that they didn’t treat you unfairly during your parental leave. This means they shouldn’t have negatively affected your seniority at work or your superannuation rights from the start of your leave until the end of your employment.

Remember, these are defences your employer might use if they dismiss you during parental leave. They need to prove these points to justify the dismissal.

This text is automatically generated. It might be out of date or be missing some parts. Find out more about how we do this.

This page was last updated on

View the original legislation for this page at https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM121023.


Previous

50: Special defences relating to dismissal, or

“When an employer can explain why they fired someone after parental leave”


Next

52: Special defence relating to dismissal during the 26 weeks following parental leave, or

“Employer's reasons for ending your job after parental leave”

Part 6 Protection of employment

51Special defences relating to dismissal during parental leave

  1. Where the termination is proved to have taken place during the employee's absence on parental leave, it shall be a defence for the employer to prove—

  2. that,—
    1. in the case of a period of parental leave to which section 40(1) applies, on the ground of the occurrence of a redundancy situation that occurred in the employer's business after the employer gave the employee notice in terms of section 36(1)(c)(i), the employer was unable to keep the employee's position open; or
      1. in the case of other periods of parental leave, on the ground of circumstances (of the type referred to in section 41) that occurred in the employer's business after the employer gave the employee notice in terms of section 36(1)(c)(i), the employer was unable to keep the employee's position open; and
      2. that the employer terminated the employee's employment on account of a redundancy situation of such nature that there was no prospect of the employer being able to appoint the employee to a position which was vacant and which was substantially similar to the position held by the employee at the beginning of the employee's parental leave; and
        1. that the employer had not, in the period commencing with the beginning of the employee's parental leave and ending with the termination of the employee's employment, prejudicially affected either the employee's seniority or the employee's superannuation rights.
          Compare
          • 1980 No 162 s 29