Most employment issues in agriculture don’t start in an office — they start in the shed, in the house, or in a string of texts that get a bit too sharp.
When things get tense, the ERA doesn’t just look at the outcome — it looks hard at how you got there. Here are three rural-relevant decisions that repeat the same themes: process, communication, and the basics.
If you read nothing else…
Process still matters — even when behaviour is clearly not OK.
Silence is risky — leaving someone in limbo (especially after a suspension) can backfire fast.
The basics still bite — agreements, leave, deductions, and records are where a lot of farm issues start.
1) “Serious misconduct” isn’t a shortcut
Mitchell and Anor v Lone Pine Farms Limited [2025] NZERA 547
What happened: Two farm employees were dismissed for “serious misconduct” after an incident involving abusive/expletive language towards the director. The Authority accepted the language was unacceptable, but found the dismissals were still unjustified because the employer’s process was flawed — the allegations lacked detail, the investigation was inadequate, and the outcome appeared pre-determined (including reliance on earlier conduct that hadn’t been properly addressed at the time). The Authority ordered $20,000 each for humiliation/loss of dignity, $12,109.38 each for lost wages, $432.69 each in unpaid Holidays Act entitlements, plus a $4,000 good-faith penalty (split $1,000 to each employee and $2,000 to the Crown account).
What this means on-farm
Employers: Put concerns in writing with specifics (what, when, where). Investigate before deciding. Don’t “stack up” old issues you previously tolerated.
Employees/candidates: You should be told clearly what you’re responding to, and you can bring support. If the story keeps shifting, that’s a red flag.
2) Suspension + no communication = danger zone
Thomas v Scott (trading as Infinity Dairy) [2025] NZERA 592
What happened: A worker was taken off the roster and suspended on full pay after the employer raised broad “health and safety risk” concerns. The issue wasn’t just the suspension — it was what followed: the employer didn’t clearly spell out the case, didn’t move the process along, and communication stalled for more than three months despite the employee (and his representative) trying to get updates and a way forward. The employee resigned, and the Authority found the employer’s handling of the suspension and lack of engagement was unjustified, ordering $3,545.75 in lost wages (over three months) plus $30,000 compensation (over $33,500 total).
What this means on-farm
Employers: If you suspend, you need (1) clear reasons, (2) clear process, (3) clear timeframe — and you must keep communicating.
Employees/candidates: Keep comms calm and in writing. Ask for the allegations, the process, and the timeframe.
3) No agreement + messy rosters + minimum standards = big exposure
Price v Pinevale Farms Ltd [2023] NZERA 45
What happened: A worker started as a relief milker on a simple arrangement, but over time the role grew into regular milking plus extra farm duties, and they also moved into on-farm accommodation. The problem was the paperwork and expectations didn’t keep up — there was no signed employment agreement, and the worker said rosters and days off weren’t clear or consistent, pay didn’t reflect the extra hours, and holiday/public holiday entitlements weren’t being met. They resigned, formally raised their concerns and the Authority ultimately found the situation amounted to constructive dismissal, ordering $20,000 compensation plus more than $36,000 in arrears (over $56,000 total).
What this means
Employers: If a role changes mid-season, update the agreement and expectations. Don’t let hours/rosters drift without conversation and records.
Employees: Ask for an agreement early, and keep a basic record of hours/roster if things feel unclear.
Save this: the “good faith” checklist
Whether you’re the employer or the employee, these are the basics the authoity keeps circling back to:
Clear expectations in writing (agreement, roster patterns, accommodation terms)
Concerns raised early, not stockpiled
Investigation before conclusions (facts first, then decision)
Suspension only with clear grounds + clear timeline + ongoing comms
Records that stack up (hours, pay, leave, deductions)
If you’re dealing with a tricky people issue on-farm and you’re not sure what the next step should be, get in touch with the No8HR team. A quick conversation early can save a lot of stress (and cost) later — we’ll help you work through a practical, fair process that protects your people and your business.