Auckland chef told to sign an English-language letter that would end his job
A restaurant in Auckland has been ordered to pay more than $41,000 to a wok chef who was made redundant through a letter written in a language that he could not understand.
The Employment Relations Authority (ERA) found that the restaurant unjustifiably dismissed the chef. It did not consult him beforehand and gave no financial information to justify the redundancy.
The chef began working at the restaurant on 12 July 2021. A new director took over management of the business in 2023, and the chef said he signed a new employment agreement but never received a copy, despite asking for one.
After his wages started arriving late in January 2025, the director told staff on 24 January that the restaurant was in financial difficulty and asked the chef to sign a letter. The chef said the director told him that signing it would allow him to claim government benefits or welfare.
"[The chef] did not understand English and therefore could not understand the letter which was in English," the ERA said.
Once his wife had the letter translated, the chef realised it was a notice of redundancy. It said his role would be redundant effective from 20 January 2025, four days before he received it. His last working day was 1 February 2025.
No consultation, no financial evidence
The respondents did not lodge a statement in reply. The director had agreed to the investigation meeting date but did not attend.
ERA member Eleanor Robinson accepted that the chef may have known business was declining.
"However that does not necessarily imply that an employee's employment may be terminated as a result," Robinson added. "Moreover there was a complete lack of financial information provided as justification of the redundancy decision."
Robinson said the duty of good faith required the employer to consult meaningfully with the chef, but "there had been no consultation" before the letter was presented.
"I find that [the employer] failed to follow a fair and proper process," she said.
The ERA also found the chef was unjustifiably disadvantaged because he was never given a copy of his employment agreement or paid his outstanding holiday entitlement.
Orders and penalties
The employer was ordered to pay the chef $23,847.12 in holiday pay, $5,538.24 in lost remuneration and $12,000 in compensation. The chef told the ERA that the abrupt termination left him "feeling very anxious" about providing for his family. The restaurant must also cover his filing fee and pay $2,250 towards his costs.
Robinson found the employer breached the Holidays Act 2003, wage and time record obligations, and the duty of good faith, stressing that "minimum entitlements are non-negotiable."
She reduced the penalty from a potential $40,000 to $3,000, taking into account the restaurant's trading difficulties and penalties in similar cases. Twenty per cent of the penalty, $600, goes to the chef.
The director and another director were found knowingly concerned in the breaches and can be held liable for the minimum standards payments if the employer fails to pay.
