Do you need assistance understanding 90 day trial periods?
Contact our team of employment law experts today to set up an appointment.
29 February, 2012 | Smith and Partners
In our employment law update in April last year we discussed the impact of an Employment Court case, Smith v Stokes Valley Pharmacy[1], on the use of 90 day trial periods with new employees. One of the key conclusions of the Court in that case was that the 90 day trial period provision did not apply to the employee as she had commenced employment prior to signing her employment agreement and therefore was not a “new employee” as per the requirements of the Employment Relations Act.
A recent decision of the Employment Court[2] reaffirmed the Court’s approach in Stokes Valley by stating that a 90 day trial period will only be valid if it has been entered into prior to the commencement of the employment relationship. The Court also took issue with the employer for not giving the employee an opportunity to consider, seek advice about and raise any issues with the agreement before signing it – a further requirement of the Employment Relations Act and another way in which a 90 day trial period may be invalidated.
Recommendations arising from these two cases include the following:
[1] (2009) Limited [2010] NZEmpC 111
[2] Ricky Blackmore v Honick Properties Limited [2011] NZEmpC 152
12 October, 2011 | Smith and Partners
29 February, 2012 | Smith and Partners
13 March, 2012 | Smith and Partners