ERA orders reinstatement after employer botches medical incapacity dismissal

The employer held the worker back despite a medical clearance to return

ERA orders reinstatement after employer botches medical incapacity dismissal

A stevedore dismissed for medical incapacity has won interim reinstatement after his employer failed to adequately explore alternative duties. 

On 24 March 2026, the Employment Relations Authority ordered Qube Ports NZ Limited to reinstate Craig Campbell after finding his 18 February 2026 dismissal raised serious questions for a full hearing. 

Campbell, a Port of Tauranga stevedore since March 2023, disclosed childhood asthma at his pre-employment medical. On 6 January 2024, while working in a ship's cargo hold during palm kernel operations, he suffered acute respiratory and facial irritation. His doctor advised against bulk work involving palm kernel. 

Qube accommodated him for 15 months with van driving and general hand work. He met his annualised hours in 2024 without further asthma incidents. 

By April 2025, Qube's General Manager – Industrial Relations, Dean Carter, signalled the exemption could not continue indefinitely. Campbell then sustained a finger injury at work on 14 April 2025 and a non-work-related foot injury in May 2025, sidelining him for months. 

When Campbell provided a return-to-work certificate in December 2025, Qube did not allow him to return. Campbell agreed to attend an occupational health assessment undertaken by Dr Roderick Douglas, received on 30 January 2026. The parties interpreted the report very differently. Qube concluded Campbell could not safely work in any dusty environment. Campbell maintained it cleared him for most duties. Dr Douglas also noted Campbell had not tried other types of PPE or respiratory protection since the 2024 incident. 

Dr Douglas had written: "Mr Campbell is fit for the majority of his usual work roles. At this time the only exception is working in particularly dusty environments such as beneath the hopper or in the ships hold when significant amounts of airborne organic dust are present." 

After considering the report and Campbell's submissions, Qube dismissed him on 18 February 2026. He filed a personal grievance the next day and sought interim reinstatement on 20 February 2026. 

The Authority found the Port environment did not present an unreasonable health and safety risk. It identified gaps in Qube's consideration of alternatives. Qube had not explored whether Campbell could do bulk work where palm kernel was absent, or work outside the hold and hopper. The Authority concluded it was "arguable Qube did not adequately consider alternative duties or the extent to which the bulk work exemption could be modified." 

Qube's own data showed 47 per cent of casual work in December 2025 was general hand work, averaging 12.6 hours per week in non-bulk roles. Campbell was willing to trial a return on that basis, but Qube did not pursue it. 

Qube argued reinstatement would cause operational disruption if a gang was redirected mid-shift to bulk work. Campbell countered this had occurred once and was resolved by reassigning him to van duties for the rest of his shift. 

Campbell faced fortnightly income loss of $2,106.36, two mortgage payments, and monthly expenses exceeding $5,150. His most recent medical certificate confirmed he was fully unfit until 24 March 2026, the date of the determination. A return-to-work plan had been formulated but never implemented due to the dismissal. The Authority also noted Qube had not put in place a return-to-work plan that would have given the parties an opportunity to work constructively on managing Campbell's asthma condition at the Port. 

The Authority ordered reinstatement to payroll within two days, physically to the Port within 21 days, and directed mediation within 14 days. A case management conference was directed within 21 days to progress toward a substantive investigation meeting. 

The case is a reminder that medical incapacity dismissals require thorough exploration of alternative duties, careful reading of occupational health advice, and a return-to-work plan. Where an employee has performed modified duties over an extended period, clear evidence is needed to justify ending that arrangement. 

LATEST NEWS