Authority finds school board took a “shutdown approach” to long-running complaint
A former Christchurch Boys’ High School teacher has been awarded $25,000 in compensation after a long-running employment dispute that ended her 18-year career at the school.
Susan Mowat resigned in 2019 after nearly two years of conflict with headmaster Nic Hill, saying the dispute significantly affected her wellbeing, reputation, and ability to work.
The Employment Relations Authority (ERA) heard Mowat’s claims of unfair dismissal and unjustifiable disadvantage during a five-day hearing in April 2025.
In a determination released last week, authority member Lucia Vincent found the school board failed to adequately address Mowat’s concerns about being blamed for matters she had not done. However, the ERA ruled she had not been unjustifiably dismissed.
Vincent said the board took a “shutdown approach” by maintaining it had addressed Mowat’s concerns when it had not, which was unfair, RNZ reported.
“This approach unjustifiably disadvantaged Mrs Mowat, who felt unheard and had her concerns minimised by the board during a vulnerable time for her following the investigations,” Vincent said.
“It was not consistent with the duty of good faith, which required a more active, constructive, responsive and communicative approach. Nor was it what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances at the time.”
Vincent said there was no evidence the board’s approach was intended to force Mowat to resign and that the breach was not serious enough to make her resignation a foreseeable outcome. As a result, the authority found she had not been unjustifiably dismissed.
The ERA also rejected three other claims of unjustifiable disadvantage. These related to comments by the board chair suggesting Mowat’s conduct amounted to harassment, alleged alterations to board meeting minutes, and concerns about the mediation process.
Anonymous letters dispute
Some of the dispute centred on anonymous letters sent to the board throughout 2017 and 2018 that were critical of Hill.
According to RNZ, Hill told the board he believed Mowat had written the letters because of previous conflict between them and similarities in the language, content, and handwriting. However, an independent investigation was unable to determine who had written them.
Vincent said Mowat was unjustifiably disadvantaged when the board told her it did not intend to respond to issues it believed it had already addressed during the investigation into the letters.
Fair decision
Mowat’s lawyer, Kathryn Dalziel, said the decision formally recognised the significant impact the events had on her client.
“Suz is relieved that the authority has acknowledged the harm caused and has awarded compensation accordingly,” Dalziel said.
“No employee should experience what Susan went through simply for raising concerns in good faith.”
Board chair Emily Flaszynski said the board was satisfied with the ERA’s findings and pleased the long-running employment matter had concluded.
She said the authority identified a single procedural issue and that the board was pleased no other adverse findings were made in relation to how Mowat was treated or in relation to Hill.
Flaszynski said the board remained committed to the wellbeing of its staff and students and to fair and respectful employment practices.
