She kept piling on new claims after the hearing. None of them stuck
A New Zealand disability support worker who refused the COVID-19 vaccine has lost every claim she brought against her former employer, with the Employment Relations Authority ruling on 1 May 2026 that Spectrum Care Limited did not breach its legal or contractual obligations.
In Kecer v Spectrum Care Limited [2026] NZERA 267, Authority Member Rachel Larmer worked through a sprawling list of claims that grew as the case wore on, and found, one after another, that none could succeed.
Luboslava Kecer worked as a Community Support Worker – Residential for Spectrum, a registered charity providing services to intellectually disabled people, from September 2018 until 21 December 2021. Her role involved providing general assistance, home management, care and support to clients in their private homes, as well as travelling with them in the community.
Then came the COVID-19 Public Health Response (Vaccinations) Order 2021. Spectrum, a "certified provider" under the order, told staff that workers in care roles had to be vaccinated. Kecer declined. She wrote to Spectrum's executive board on 28 October 2021 raising safety concerns, questioning the vaccine's effectiveness and challenging whether the order applied to her role. She warned: "Should my choice [not to be vaccinated] not be respected, and you elect to disadvantage my employment by linking my employment with a participating in a trial for an experimental treatment that does not guarantee the prevention of transmission of COVID-19, then I may exercise my right to file a personal grievance."
Spectrum consulted with her, invited her to explain why she believed her role was not covered, and held a Teams meeting on 23 November 2021 with her co-ordinator, manager and an HR representative. There were no redeployment opportunities. She was given two weeks' verbal notice, later extended to four weeks in writing on 1 December 2021 to align with Schedule 3A of the Employment Relations Act 2000.
Kecer lodged her statement of problem in November 2024. The Authority addressed a wide range of issues, including whether the vaccination order applied to her role, whether Spectrum breached contractual and good faith obligations, whether a risk assessment or exemption application was required, and whether Kecer had valid personal grievance claims. By the hearing, her advocate had identified claims for breaches of clauses 4 (variation), 46 (occupational health and safety), 59 (termination) and 61 (disciplinary policy), unilateral variation, unsafe workplace, breach of good faith and unjustified disadvantage. Further claims, including redundancy, a "disciplinary dismissal," and an "exit package," were raised late, including some not properly before the Authority. The dismissal grievance was withdrawn.
The Authority found Kecer's role fell within items 7.3 and 7.4 of Part 7 of Schedule 2 of the order. Larmer noted the Employment Court in Young v Port of Tauranga Ltd had said a "broad and precautionary approach" was appropriate when assessing what was covered.
On good faith, Larmer was direct: "There was no coercion by Spectrum, which left it up to Ms Kecer to decide whether she wanted to be vaccinated or not. Spectrum also respected Ms Kecer's choice to not be vaccinated."
The contract claims also failed. Clause 4 did not apply because the order did not require the agreement to be varied. Clause 46 required compliance with relevant legislation, which Spectrum did. Clause 59 was not breached because Kecer received more than two weeks' notice. Clause 61 did not apply because, as the Authority put it, "There was no disciplinary process, no disciplinary allegations, no disciplinary action and no disciplinary outcome."
On the personal grievances, Kecer relied on emails sent in October and November 2021, but her statement of problem was not filed until 21 November 2024, putting most of those communications outside the three-year limit in s 114(6) of the Act. Larmer also found no valid grievance had been raised in those communications. Repeating the same complaint later, she confirmed, does not restart the clock, "repetition cannot restart the three-year time frame."
Larmer concluded: "There are no claims Ms Kecer can pursue in the Authority." Spectrum, as the successful party, is entitled to a contribution towards costs based on the daily tariff of $4,500.
