He denied writing the resignation email but poor records still cost wage arrears
The Employment Relations Authority rejected a cook's unjustified dismissal claim, finding he sent the resignation email he denied writing, Matthew Piper ruled 23 July 2026.
The cook was employed at a Rotorua restaurant, Maa Kalinka & Rishiram Son's Pvt Limited, on a work visa the company sponsored, and brought a wide-ranging claim against the business and its owner, who is married to the sister of the cook's wife. Piper noted the dispute arose from overlapping family relationships, with a volume of evidence covering payments between relatives not otherwise connected to the employment.
The cook alleged he was underpaid throughout his employment, required to repay wages above $400 a week to the owner, denied statutory leave entitlements, and unjustifiably dismissed. Maa Kalinka said it kept accurate records, paid him correctly, and that he had resigned rather than been dismissed.
His original employment agreement set hours at 30 a week, rostered between 10am and 9:30pm. A second agreement signed in June 2023 stated hours would run "as per weekly roster or fix roster as applicable." Piper found the cook's account of his working hours unreliable, noting his own emails at the time recorded roughly 41 hours a week, contradicting his claim of working more than 60, and that timesheets he had signed himself contradicted his underpayment claim.
The Authority also rejected the alleged repayment arrangement. Bank records the cook pointed to as evidence of funnelling wages back to the owner were instead found to relate to a $5,000 loan for a car purchase between family members, unconnected to the employment relationship. Claims regarding unpaid annual leave and public holidays were likewise not established, contradicted by timesheets and emails sent at the time.
One claim did succeed. Before the cook opened a New Zealand bank account in March 2023, the restaurant paid him in cash but kept no written record of the amounts or how they were calculated, breaching record-keeping duties under section 130 of the Employment Relations Act 2000. Without those records, Piper found the company's evidence could not be accepted as a defence, and ordered arrears for the period from 2 January to 28 March 2023.
The dismissal claim turned on an email sent on 14 April 2024, in which the cook purportedly resigned to care for his ill mother in India. He told the Authority the email was fabricated or sent by someone else, though he accepted sending other emails from the same account. Piper was not persuaded. "I find [the cook] did send the email on 14 April 2024," he found, concluding the dismissal claim was not established.
Maa Kalinka was ordered to pay the cook $4,662.40 gross in wage arrears within 28 days. No penalty was imposed over the record-keeping breach, and given the modest sum awarded, the Authority declined to make personal liability orders against the owner. Costs were reserved for the parties to resolve between themselves.
