Plain language law

New Zealand law explained for everyone

Plain Language Law homepage
103: Personal grievance
or “This law explains what counts as a personal grievance, which is when an employee feels their employer has treated them unfairly at work.”

You could also call this:

“This explains how to decide if an employer acted fairly when dismissing or disciplining an employee.”

When you have a personal grievance about being dismissed or an action taken against you at work, there’s a test to see if it was fair. This test looks at whether what your employer did was reasonable.

The test asks if a fair and sensible employer could have done the same thing in the same situation. When looking at this, the Employment Relations Authority or the court will think about a few things:

  1. Did your employer look into the situation properly before they took action? They’ll consider if the employer had enough resources to do this.

  2. Did your employer tell you about their concerns before they did anything?

  3. Did you get a fair chance to explain your side of the story?

  4. Did your employer really listen to what you had to say about the situation?

The Authority or court can also think about other things that seem important.

If your employer made some small mistakes when they were dealing with the situation, it doesn’t automatically mean they were unfair. The dismissal or action will only be unfair if these small mistakes led to you being treated badly.

Remember, this is all part of section 103(1)(a) and (b) of the Employment Relations Act 2000.

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 It might be out of date or be missing some parts.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


Next up: 103B: Joining controlling third party to personal grievance

or “A person who controls and directs a worker can be added to a complaint about unfair treatment at work.”

Part 9 Personal grievances, disputes, and enforcement
Personal grievances

103ATest of justification

  1. For the purposes of section 103(1)(a) and (b), the question of whether a dismissal or an action was justifiable must be determined, on an objective basis, by applying the test in subsection (2).

  2. The test is whether the employer's actions, and how the employer acted, were what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances at the time the dismissal or action occurred.

  3. In applying the test in subsection (2), the Authority or the court must consider—

  4. whether, having regard to the resources available to the employer, the employer sufficiently investigated the allegations against the employee before dismissing or taking action against the employee; and
    1. whether the employer raised the concerns that the employer had with the employee before dismissing or taking action against the employee; and
      1. whether the employer gave the employee a reasonable opportunity to respond to the employer's concerns before dismissing or taking action against the employee; and
        1. whether the employer genuinely considered the employee's explanation (if any) in relation to the allegations against the employee before dismissing or taking action against the employee.
          1. In addition to the factors described in subsection (3), the Authority or the court may consider any other factors it thinks appropriate.

          2. The Authority or the court must not determine a dismissal or an action to be unjustifiable under this section solely because of defects in the process followed by the employer if the defects were—

          3. minor; and
            1. did not result in the employee being treated unfairly.
              Notes
              • Section 103A: substituted, on , by section 15 of the Employment Relations Amendment Act 2010 (2010 No 125).