+64 7 872 0236 [email protected]

NZLaw

Calling in sick

Employee Rights, Employer Guidance, Leave Entitlements, Workplace Wellbeing
0

Minimising illness in the workplace

The winter months always seem to take their toll around the workplace with bugs lingering long into spring. While you can’t always control when sickness hits, as both employees and employers, there are things we can do to minimise the impact of illness in the workplace.

 

What does the law say?

There is no statutory or legal entitlement to work remotely or ‘work from home’ if employees are sick. Whether this is permitted depends on employment agreements and workplace policies.

 

Are you sick or not?

With the increase of remote working arrangements or working from home, the line can be blurred between sick leave and remote working. If an employee is sick, then they should stay home and take sick leave.

 

This does not mean that they are ‘working from home.’ There is no obligation for employees to work while they are sick. In fact, ensuring that employees have time to properly rest and recover is often more helpful in getting them back to the workplace.

 

Coming into work when unwell presents a health and safety risk to other employees; those who turn up sick are likely to expect conversations about going home to avoid others becoming ill. In some circumstances this may mean working from home if, for example, an employee feels well enough but is still contagious. If these discussions take place with care and with all individuals in mind, they are likely to be well received.

 

It is important to remember that any time an employee is not well enough to work, they may take sick leave. This can include sick leave for mental health if the impact of it is adversely affecting the employee’s ability to work.

 

When is a medical certificate needed?

Generally, employment agreements or workplace policies will set out when a medical certificate is required; this is often required where an employee is sick for three days or longer. In workplaces where there is a high level of trust, medical certificates are usually not needed on every occasion. If there is a prolonged illness or something that is going to have a lingering/flow-on effect, medical certificates are helpful to assist employees and employers to manage the issue.

 

If there is no medical certificate, understanding exactly what is going on and how long an employee thinks they may be away from work is important. For an employee, this shows good faith in assisting their employer to manage their absence and workload. That communication can also mean that there is less stress for the employee resulting from their absence from work.

 

There is no need for an employee to provide every detail of an illness, but the more information that is provided, the better the employer can plan around a situation and support their employee. Employees should expect their employers to ask for more detail of the illness or injury, and what that means in terms of their role, in instances of extended sick leave.

 

Requesting sick leave

The procedure for requesting sick leave is generally contained in workplace policies or employment agreements. Although employees are entitled to take sick leave when they are unwell, they should always contact their supervisor or manager first (by phone, text or email, in line with specific workplace policies). It’s essential that employees notify their workplace at the earliest opportunity – either before the start of their upcoming shift or at the start of the working day.

 

In our experience, where the focus is on hauora and where communication is strong, sick leave will be well managed for the benefit of both employees and employers.

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Commercial eSpeaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Commercial eSpeaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2025.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen     E-mail: [email protected]    Ph: 029 286 3650

Planning Ahead: How Enduring Powers of Attorney Helped Steve’s Family

Caring for Aging Parents, Client Stories, Elder Law, Enduring Powers of Attorney (EPA), Future-Proofing Your Family, Health & Wellbeing, Legal Tips, Life Planning, Peace of Mind Planning, Wills & Estates
0

A few years into Steve’s retirement, things started to change.

 

Steve was not quite himself anymore. He became forgetful, sometimes confused, and would occasionally lose track of where he was or what he had planned for the day. At first his children, Luke and Sally thought it might just be part of getting older. But over time, it became clear that it was something more serious. Steve was beginning to lose mental capacity.

 

It was a difficult time. Watching the strong and capable father they had always relied on start to struggle was heartbreaking. But one thing made a huge difference. Steve had prepared for this.

 

Years earlier, with the help of Edmonds Judd, Steve had put in place Enduring Powers of Attorney. He had taken the time to meet with a lawyer, talk through his options, and sign the documents while he was still well and able to make decisions for himself. He had appointed both types of attorney. One for property, which would allow his children to manage his finances and property. And one for personal care and welfare, where he had named Sally as his first attorney to make decisions about his health and daily care.

 

When Steve’s condition worsened, Luke and Sally were able to step in without any delays or uncertainty. Luke handled the financial side, making sure bills were paid and everything stayed in order. Sally worked closely with Steve’s doctor and made the final call on his treatment when he was no longer able to do so himself.

 

There was no need to go through the courts. There were no arguments about what should happen or who should decide. Steve had made his choices clear, and they could simply carry them out.

Because of the advice and support he received from Edmonds Judd, Steve’s family had the tools they needed to care for him with clarity and compassion. His wishes were protected, and his children could focus on what mattered most.

 

It was not just legal paperwork. It was peace of mind. And it made all the difference when Steve and his family needed it most.

Georgia Willard

Employment-law-reform-in-2025

Employment law reform in 2025

Business Updates, Contracts and Agreements, Employment Law, Health & Safety, Legal News, Workplace Advice
0

Employment law continues to evolve, with several changes, or proposed changes, introduced by the government in recent months. The changes are widespread across the employment law spectrum, and it will be important for both employers and employees to be across them.

 

Theft by an employer

The Crimes (Theft by an Employer) Amendment Bill came into effect on 13 March 2025. Amending the Crimes Act 1961, it now states an employer will commit theft if they intentionally fail, without reasonable excuse, to pay money owed to an employee under their employment agreement and/or statutory obligations. This includes all remuneration entitlements during the notice period and any outstanding holiday pay when they leave their employment.

 

Whilst this does not change employer obligations, it increases their potential vulnerability to criminal prosecution if money is withheld.

 

If employers are found guilty of theft under this new law, they can be liable:

  • For individual employers, for a fine of $5,000, up to one year’s imprisonment, or both, or
  • For corporate employers, a maximum fine of $30,000.

Equal Pay Amendment Act

On 14 May 2025, the government amended, under urgency, the Equal Pay Act 1972; this was originally implemented to promote gender pay equity by ensuring that employees received equal pay for work of equal or comparable value.

 

These amendments increased the threshold for what is required to raise a claim under the Act and discontinue current pay equity claims.

 

Pay deductions for partial strikes

On 25 June 2025, the Employment Relations (Pay Deductions for Partial Strikes) Amendment Bill was passed.

 

Partial strikes are a common bargaining tool used by employees in negotiations with their employer; employees report to work but reduce their usual outputs or breach their employment agreement in some way. This legislation has reintroduced the ability to make pay deductions from an employee who is involved in a partial strike.

 

The specified pay deduction can be calculated by either:

  • Calculating the percentage of reduction in work rate resulting from the strike, or
  • Applying a 10% deduction.

 

The deduction will only apply to the time period an employee took part in a partial strike (notice to an employee would be required before the deduction is made). An employee’s remuneration for that period will not be subject to statutory minimum wage requirements.

 

There is an exception to this where an employee has reasonable grounds for believing the strike is justified on the grounds of health and safety under s84 of the Employment Relations Act 2000.

 

Termination of employment by agreement proposal

The Employment Relations Act 2000 (ERA) currently states that an employee can only be dismissed if there is a good reason to do so (justification), and a fair and proper process is followed.

 

The Employment Relations (Termination of Employment by Agreement) Amendment Bill would allow an offer to be made to an employee to mutually terminate their employment by paying a specified sum to them by way of settlement. This change would allow greater freedom for parties to negotiate exits without the risk of a personal grievance claim arising from the termination offer.

 

Employee remuneration disclosure

The ERA currently allows employers to include provisions that prevent their employees from disclosing, or discussing, their remuneration with colleagues or third parties. Under this proposed legislation employees would not be required to keep their remuneration details confidential.

 

The Employment Relations (Employee Remuneration Disclosure) Amendment Bill sets out that employees will have grounds for a personal grievance under s103 of the ERA, if an employer has engaged in adverse conduct for a remuneration disclosure reason. The intent behind the Bill is to increase pay transparency, and with the hope of addressing pay inequities.

 

Unjustified dismissal regime

The government announced on 17 June 2025 the introduction of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill. The bill proposes that employees who earn $180,000 per annum or more (in base pay) will be prevented from raising a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal. This threshold aligns with the top tax bracket and is said to affect about 3.4% of the current workforce. The threshold would subsequently be adjusted annually to reflect the CPI.

 

Under this proposed legislation, an employee earning above the specified income threshold could be dismissed without the risk of an unjustified dismissal claim – unless their employment agreement explicitly preserves this right. This change will apply to all new employees and, after a 12-month transition period, to all employees.

 

If this bill is passed, we expect more senior employees to negotiate compensation provisions in their employment agreements in the event of termination.

 

Personal grievance remedies reduction

The ERA currently requires an employee’s conduct to be considered when the authority or court awards remedies for successful personal grievances (PG). However, the Employment Relations Amendment Bill introduced on 17 June, gives greater weight to an employee’s behaviour by:

 

  • Removing an employee’s eligibility for remedies for a PG if their behaviour amounts to serious misconduct
  • Removing an employee’s ability to apply for reinstatement or compensation (other than lost wages) if their behaviour contributed to the issue giving rise to the PG
  • Allowing courts and tribunals to reduce awards entirely
  • As part of the potential awarding of remedies, considering whether an employee delayed the disciplinary process, and
  • Removing employer penalties for minor flaws in the disciplinary process if all other conduct was fair and reasonable.

 

Review of health and safety

In 2024 the government undertook a consultation aimed at understanding how the current health and safety legislation works. In response, the following changes have been proposed:

  • An exemption for small, ‘low risk’ businesses from some general Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (HSWA) requirements. These businesses will only have to manage critical risks and provide basic facilities to ensure worker welfare
  • Landowners will not be responsible if someone is injured on their land while doing recreational activities. These responsibilities will lie with the organisation that is running the activity
  • Addressing overlapping health and safety duties by clarifying boundaries between the HSWA and regulatory systems that manage the same risk
  • Amending the notification requirements, so that only significant workplace events are reported, and
  • Clarifying the distinction between governance and management’s role in managing health and safety risks, ie: the board leaving the day-to-day management of risks to management.

 

Additional proposed changes to note

The Employment Relations (Restraint of Trade) Amendment Bill is awaiting its second reading. This bill seeks to limit circumstances where restraint of trade provisions can be enforced by having an income threshold, requiring compensation for the period of the restraint and ensuring they are reasonable.

 

The Employment Relations Amendment Bill introduced on 17 June 2025, included the long awaited ‘gateway test’ to be used when determining whether a worker is a contractor. For clarification on this proposed test, please get in contact with us.

 

Wide impact

There will be few employers and employees who are not impacted by the proposed changes; these will require employment agreements to be reviewed, change the way employment relationships are terminated and result in a different focus in personal grievance disputes.

 

We are happy to advise on how to work your way through the impacts of both the proposed changes and the recently passed legislation.

 

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Property Speaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Property Speaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650

Life Stage – First Home

Economy & Finance, Employment, Estate, House, Media, News, Online, Uncategorized
0

It felt like Bob’s life had been turned upside down. Not only had his father, Steve, passed away recently leaving him upset and overwhelmed, but his burger bar business was also struggling. Bob had put all his life savings into his burger bar, which he opened 6 months prior. Further adding to the stress, Bob currently did not have a home. He had been couch-surfing at friends places while he saved up enough to rent a place of his own.

 

After a few difficult months, Steve’s estate was finally settled. As one of the beneficiaries, Bob received a substantial inheritance. Though the money offered some relief, Bob knew he needed to use it wisely. His first step: finding a home. He realised that in order to take care of his business and himself, he needed a stable place to live and rest, putting him in a better frame of mind to make smart business decisions.

 

As Bob now had more funds than he had expected to receive from years of working, he decided this was the right time to buy a property rather than rent. He browsed listings on local real estate websites and soon found a small, tidy place in a quiet neighbourhood—within his budget and close to his burger bar.

 

He decided to call his lawyer and ask for the things he should consider before making an offer. His lawyer guided him through several key considerations:

 

  1. Conditions in the Sale and Purchase Agreement: He needed to decide whether he wanted to include conditions in the agreement. He already had the funds available for the purchase so he did not need to make it conditional on finance. Bob did not realise that he could also include other conditions such as a LIM report, builders report, and toxicology report. Bob decided to include each of these as it was better to make sure there were no big issues before being locked in a deal.

 

  1. KiwiSaver: If Bob has KiwiSaver funds, he would need to fill out an application to withdraw the funds from his provider. He would need a solicitor to witness him signing this as it could not be left until the last minute.

 

  1. Insurance: The lawyer stressed to Bob the importance of checking he could obtain insurance cover for the property prior to going unconditional. Also, if there were any issues under the builders report / LIM report / toxicology report, he would need to disclose said issues with his insurer.

–

  1. Relationship Property: Bob had not had the time to date with everything going on but was made aware to obtain advice in this regard once he had a partner in the future.

 

Bob took all the advice into consideration and obtained all recommended reports. Within weeks, his purchase when unconditional, and weeks after, settled.

 

Bob was beyond happy, he now felt as though he had the stability he had been searching for. This feeling lasted only a few minutes though as Bob was about to receive a call in relation to his business that would change everything…

 

 

Macayla Brdanovic 

 

 

📢 Supreme Court Decision: Fiduciary Duties and Parent-Child Relationships

House, Kids, Media, News, Online, Property, Relationships
0

The Supreme Court recently issued its much-anticipated ruling in A, B and C v D and E Limited as Trustees of the Z Trust known as the Alphabet case. It concerns the extent of fiduciary duties owed by a parent to an adult child. ⚖️

The case involves a father, who transferred most of his assets to a trust during his lifetime, leaving his adult children without any entitlement to those assets. The children argued that due to past abuse they suffered at their father’s hands, including physical, emotional abuse and sexual abuse, their father owed them fiduciary duties that extended into adulthood. They believed his actions in transferring assets breached those duties, and the assets should revert to his estate to satisfy their Family Protection Act claims to be provided for from his estate.

While the Court agreed that fiduciary duties exist between a parent and minor child, it ruled that those duties generally end once the child reaches adulthood or the caregiving responsibility ends. The Court rejected the notion that such duties continued into adulthood, despite the children’s vulnerability due to the abuse they suffered during childhood. Importantly, the Court noted that imposing fiduciary duties in this case would create legal uncertainty and “reverse engineer” a remedy for past wrongdoing.

The Court also ruled against treating the trust assets as part of the father’s estate. However, it acknowledged the need for legal reform in this area and pointed to the Law Commission’s 2022 proposal to allow courts to unwind property transactions that intentionally defeat claims under succession law.

While the Court was sympathetic to the appellants, it ultimately found that the law could not support their claim in this case. The ruling highlights the need for further reform in this area of law, which the Law Commission’s proposals may address in the future.

Kerry Bowler, Solicitor Kerry Bowler

Get in touch today, we’d love to talk.

+64 7 872 0236 [email protected]