A worker who suffered serious injuries when a one-tonne marble slab slipped during a residential construction job on Auckland’s North Shore has failed in his bid to have the incident treated as an employment matter, after the Employment Relations Authority ruled he was an independent contractor rather than an employee, Stuff has reported.
The accident occurred on February 11, 2025, at a residential property after Weidong Zhou responded to an online advertisement seeking casual labour. Zhou spent three months in hospital following the incident and required about a year to make a full recovery.
Zhou later filed a claim with the Employment Relations Authority, alleging he was an employee of Lihe Construction Limited (LCL) and had been unjustifiably dismissed and disadvantaged as a result of the incident.
However, the authority found that no employment relationship existed between Zhou and LCL, meaning it did not have jurisdiction to consider his claims, Stuff reported.
LCL, a small construction business operated by sole director and shareholder Mr Luo, occasionally engaged additional contract labour for specific projects.
Stuff reported according to the authority’s determination, Luo had been contacted by an Indian-operated contractor, XXD, to arrange additional workers to help unload marble slabs. A message was subsequently posted on WeChat seeking five workers at a rate of $24 an hour, although it did not identify who required the labour.
Zhou, who was unemployed at the time and accustomed to taking on work advertised in this manner, accepted the opportunity through a friend.
LCL maintained throughout the proceedings that Zhou was not an employee but an independent contractor engaged for a specific task.
In assessing the case, Authority Member Eleanor Robinson applied the statutory tests of control, integration and economic reality to determine the true nature of the relationship between the parties.
The authority found that control of the worksite and instructions rested with XXD rather than Luo, whose role was limited to translating directions into Chinese for workers who did not speak English.
Robinson also noted that LCL had no payroll system or organisational structure into which Zhou could be integrated as an employee.
The determination further found that Zhou was free to accept other work opportunities on the day or arrange for someone else to carry out the work on his behalf. Luo also had no contact details for Zhou before he arrived late at the site, leaving no practical means of requiring him to attend or complete the work.
“Having considered all the circumstances, I determine that Mr Zhou was not in an employment relationship with LCL,” Robinson stated in the written determination. “As such, I am unable to assist him further," Stuff quoted.
The authority reserved costs and encouraged the parties to resolve the issue between themselves.
ISSUE
Leave a Comment