ERA rejects the employer's flood-related excuse
An Auckland swimming centre and its two directors have been ordered to pay a former employee more than $37,000 after the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) rejected their bid for more time to settle a long-overdue debt.
The ERA ruled against Waterhole Swimming Centre Limited, finding the company had breached a legally binding Record of Settlement (ROS) and had no valid grounds to delay payment further.
Flood allegedly delays payments
The case stems from an employment dispute over alleged underpayment of minimum wages and leave entitlements.
Following mediation in mid-2025, Waterhole agreed to pay former employee Suzanne Smith $36,000 across four instalments between October 2025 and April 2026.
Directors Judith Wright and Gwynneth Ryan also signed a personal guarantee to cover payments if the company could not. The settlement was certified in August 2025, giving it full legal force under the Employment Relations Act 2000.
The first payment of $1,500 arrived, while the rest of the payments failed to materialise.
When this happened, Smith's counsel demanded the full remaining balance of $34,250, which is a right provided under the settlement's default clause.
Ryan responded by citing the impact of the 2023 Auckland floods, referencing ongoing building repairs and a pending insurance payout, and requested a two-week "reprieve."
But no further payments followed. Smith brought the matter to the ERA seeking a compliance order, interest, penalties, and legal costs.
Request for extension denied
The ERA rejected the company's request for more time to settle.
"The ROS is not conditional upon receipt of insurance money before money is paid to Ms Smith. The ROS is a legally binding and enforceable agreement. In the circumstances, Waterhole's application for further delaying payment is not accepted," the ERA said in its decision.
The Authority further noted that Waterhole had entered the settlement in August 2025 already aware of the flood damage, undermining any claim of unforeseen circumstances.
The company, as the ERA found, had "intentionally breached the ROS and has made no attempt to pay any portion of the monies owed to Ms Smith since the initial payment, despite assurances in January 2026."
The ERA also stressed the wider public interest, noting that it is necessary to "uphold the integrity of full, final, binding and enforceable agreements" under the Act.
The Authority further recorded that Smith "continues to suffer financially from the loss of this money and also emotionally," adding that the drawn-out saga mirrored the conduct she had experienced during her employment itself.
Waterhole has been ordered to pay the $34,250 balance, interest, a $750 penalty share, and $2,571.55 in costs.
