Former rural school principal awarded $10,000 by Employment Relations Authority

Thursday, 23 July 2026

A former small rural school principal has been awarded $10,000 in compensation by the Employment Relations Authority after she resigned.

Blanket suppression orders prevent details of the principal, the school and the presiding member of the board of trustees from being published.

Geoff O’Sullivan, a member of the Employment Relations Authority, released his determination of findings on July 16, almost a year after the matter was heard at a meeting in New Plymouth.

At the heart of O’Sullivan’s decision to award compensation was the stress the principal was put under by the presiding member after he twice visited her at her home unannounced after hours to discuss an abusive parent who had made a series of complaints.

The published decision also revealed a secret recording made at a board of trustees meeting when the presiding member made a number of comments about her to another board member.

They included: “F… that bitch she’s pissed me off” and “I think she tells a lot of lies” as well as “They’re gunna f… off I can tell you that much”.

The principal, who was employed at the school from March 2022 until January 2024, claimed she was constructively dismissed and suffered unjustified disadvantage due to the school's failure to provide a safe and healthy work environment, lack of board support, and specific incidents involving an abusive parent.

She told the hearing she found the presiding member’s visits to her home “distressing and unsafe” and felt the board had taken no steps to support her in dealing with a distressing and potentially violent situation with an abusive parent.

However, the hearing also heard there was conflicting reports of evidence from the principal and the presiding member.

There were also differing accounts of evidence between the principal and a police constable in regards to a potential trespass order on the abusive parent.

The principal’s evidence to the authority also included varying reasons as to why she had resigned.

While officially it was because of her partner’s health, she was adamant it was because of the board’s failure to support her in providing a safe work environment.

“She says that although she gave as a reason for her resignation, her partner’s illness, this was because she had taken advice from advisers at the Ministry of Education who suggested to her that she use her partner’s health as a reason to resign so as not to cause more concerns for her safety.”

However, a senior adviser from the ministry said he had no memory of advising her to use her partner’s health as a reason for resignation.

“He says he would not accept that he made such a suggestion as this would have been outside of his remit.”

In his summary, O’Sullivan said he accepted the principal’s evidence that it was a “very stressful” time for her, her health was suffering and she was suffering from post traumatic stress disorder.

“I make no findings that this was caused by some wrongful conduct by the school.”

Nonetheless, he considered the $10,000 compensation was appropriate.