26.03.2014

Parental Leave Redundancy: Restructuring While An Employee Is On Parental Leave – A Hard Push?

When restructuring a business, it is important to pay particular attention to employees whose employment may be affected while they are on parental leave.

Do not let employees on parental leave out of your sight!  When restructuring a business, it is important to pay particular attention to employees whose employment may be affected while they are on parental leave.

Employees are afforded extra employment protections under the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act 1987 (“Parental Leave Act”). It is an employer’s obligation not only to ensure that the redundancy is substantially justified and procedurally fair, but that it also meets the requirements under the Parental Leave Act.

The requirements are in place due to the legal presumption that while an employee is on parental leave, his or her position will remain open for the employee to return to. The added protections are also in place as employees on parental leave are deemed vulnerable. They can be overlooked by an employer and are in a difficult position to contest the rationale for a proposal to restructure as the employee will not be in the working or business environment at the time.

However, the employer has a defence to the legal presumption that the employee’s role will remain open for his or her return.  The defence is the occurrence of a genuine redundancy. Where a redundancy situation arises after the employer has already given notice that the employee’s position will be kept open, for the defence to succeed, there must be no prospect of the employer being able to appoint the employee to a position which is vacant and substantially similar to the position held by the employee.  Further, the employer must not prejudicially affect the employee’s seniority or superannuation rights.

In other words, if a restructure creates a position that is similar to the vacant position which is being disestablished, the employer should give preference for the role to the employee on parental leave. Note that if the employee’s role is being covered temporarily while the employee is on parental leave, it is still a vacant role. The same is true if the employee’s role has been absorbed by one or more staff members while he or she is on leave.

There is also an additional defence where an employee is dismissed during the period of 26 weeks beginning with the day after the date on which any period of the employee’s parental leave ended.  The employer has to prove the redundancy is genuine, and the other elements above, as well as show that although the employer was prepared to offer the employee preference over other applicants for any suitable vacancy, no such vacancy ever arose.

The legal test, pursuant to the Employment Relations Act 2000, applies as well.  The test is whether the employer’s actions, and how the employer acted, were what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances at the time the dismissal or action occurred.

A redundancy must be genuine.  An employer is required to justify its business reasoning for the redundancy, why the employer decided upon the particular redundancy, and why any alternatives were rejected. In addition to substantive justification the employer must follow a fair process. This process must commence with a proposal to restructure, not a decision. No decision should be reached until meaningful consultation with all potentially affected employees (particularly any employees on parental leave) has taken place and the employees’ comments have been genuinely considered.

Although fair procedure is required in all redundancy situations, courts have been inclined to apply these procedural obligations far more stringently in cases where a redundancy has occurred while the affected employee has been on parental leave. The leading case authority on point, Lewis v Greene, states that an employer who is contemplating the redundancy of an employee on parental leave is bound to take extra precautions to ensure that the employee has an opportunity to be actively involved in the consultation process in a meaningful way that is at least equal to that of the employees who remain at work.  This could include going to the employee’s home for meetings instead of requiring him or her to come into the office and being flexible with timeframes so that the employee can be accommodated.  The employee may also require additional information relevant to the proposed restructure to get them up to speed on any business changes since they went on leave.

An employer has more stringent and onerous requirements if it proposes to make an employee who is on parental leave redundant. It would be prudent to seek advice or clarification early on in any restructuring process.

Do you need expert legal advice?
Contact the expert team at Hesketh Henry.
Kerry
Media contact - Kerry Browne
Please contact Kerry with any media enquiries and with any questions related to marketing or sponsorships on +64 9 375 8747 or via email.

Related Articles / Insights & Opinion

empty wallet finance concept
Intentionally not paying employees their wages to be deemed theft under the Crimes Act 1961
An amendment to the Crimes Act 1961 (Crimes Act) – the Crimes (Theft by Employer) Amendment Bill has been passed by Parliament. The Bill now awaits royal assent, after which it will be an enfor...
14.03.2025 Posted in Employment
Time’s Up: Late Redelivery and the Assessment of Damages in Hapag Lloyd AG v Skyros Maritime Corporation and Hapag Lloyd AG v Agios Minas Shipping Company
The English Commercial Court gave an instructive judgment on the assessment of damages in Hapag Lloyd AG v Skyros Maritime Corporation and Hapag Lloyd AG v Agios Minas Shipping Company; an appeal brou...
11.03.2025 Posted in Trade and Transport
Team Hands in small
Cartel conduct: Do not pass “GO”, go directly to jail
Until 8 April 2021, cartel conduct was punishable only by civil penalty in New Zealand.  In R v Kumar [2024] NZHC 3955 the High Court imposed the first criminal convictions and sentences for cartel c...
06.03.2025 Posted in Construction & Disputes
Employment
2025 Insights: Proposed Legislative Changes and Employment Team Update
Team update and proposed legislative change – hello from the Hesketh Henry Employment Law Team 2025. Click here
20.02.2025
photo  dbe
When Sweet Turns Sour: The Costly Consequences of Contamination
The New Zealand Sugar Company (NZSC), trading as Chelsea Sugar, recently found itself in hot water after being fined nearly $149,500 by the District Court due to a prosecution brought by the Ministry ...
19.02.2025 Posted in Insurance & Trade and Transport
Mind your business: What happens when an employer uses an employee’s personal information?
A recent decision by the Human Rights Review Tribunal (the Tribunal) provides a noteworthy reminder of the importance of privacy rights and obligations in the workplace.  In BMN v Stonewood Group Lim...
14.02.2025 Posted in Employment
Construction Framework Wide BW
Public consultation on NZS 3916:2025 and NZS 3917:2025
Public consultation on the draft DZ 3916 Conditions of contract for building and civil engineering – Design and construct and DZ 3917 Conditions of contract for building and civil engineering – F...
13.02.2025 Posted in Construction
SEND AN ENQUIRY
Send us an enquiry

For expert legal advice, please complete the form below or call us on (09) 375 8700.