Employment Relations Authority – Employment status – Building apprentice
At issue was whether a building apprentice was an employee or a contractor.
A building apprentice claimed that he was an employee and that he was unjustifiably dismissed. The alleged employer claimed the apprentice was a contractor. In this proceeding the Authority determined only whether the building apprentice was an employee or a contractor.
The Authority found the building apprentice was an employee. In coming to that decision the Authority took into account the following:
- While it was clear the respondent intended the applicant to be a contractor, on the evidence the applicant did not share that intention (see paragraphs 17–20).
- The "essential nature of an apprenticeship is that the apprentice learns under the supervision or control of the other party… This strongly indicates an employment relationship" (see paragraph 23).
- The evidence showed the apprentice was integrated into the business: he worked regular hours; the apprenticeship programme required him to work for only one employer; there was no evidence he was working separately or independently (see paragraphs 24 to 26).
- Apart from owning a small number of hand tools, there was no evidence the apprentice was in business on his own account (see paragraphs 27, 28).
- The Education and Training Act 2020 (external link) and the Code of Good Practice for New Zealand Apprenticeships (external link) are both clear that "an apprenticeship arrangement under an apprenticeship training agreement must occur in the context of an employment relationship" (see paragraphs 31 to 36).