Employment Relations Amendment Bill 2026 Highlights – Effective 21 Feb 2026 The 'Specified Contractor' Gateway Test If you hire someone as a contractor and you want them to be a "Specified Contractor", the engagement MUST meet a specific set of criteria. As such this then exempts them from later challenging the fact and from arguing they were an employee all along: A statement of intent (written agreement) stipulating that the worker is an independent contractor, or 'not an employee'; The party has no restriction on other work. They have the freedom to work for any other party other than during the time in which they are engaged with you, unless if the agreement is to complete a specific project or task Has the flexibility to arrange their working time/hours OR has the ability to subcontract the work; The worker will not be terminated from the arrangement if they decline additional work; and Is proven to have had a reasonable opportunity to seek independent advice before entering the commencement. The important point with all this is that if all the above are not met the worker IS able to challenge the status of their engagement as we have seen for many years. It has been made clear that this provision will not apply retrospectively therefore our recommendation is that if you wish to consider a worker a 'Specified Contractor' going forwards we strongly recommend reviewing your contract with them and vary or re-sign accordingly. Personal grievance remedy awards If an employee brings a personal grievance against their employer, and it is proven that the employee's behaviour has given rise to the issue in the first place, reinstatement of employment may be off the table, and/or financial compensation to the employee may be reduced by up to 100%, and particularly so in the instance or serious misconduct. $200,000.00 remuneration limit on unjustified dismissal grievances An employee who earns over a certain income threshold (currently set at $200k per annum) cannot bring a personal grievance against the employer for unjustified dismissal. This potentially means that in such cases an employer can 'fire at will' without following a good faith process. This threshold figure includes all wages/salary, commissions, bonuses etc, and will be revised periodically by the Government. The amendment does allow for parties to explicitly opt out of this provision, meaning if agreed an employee on more than that threshold could bring a grievance against their employer. Why an employer would opt into that remains to be seen! For new employees this position is effective immediately. For existing employees you have 12 months to negotiate this point before the default position applies, being that an employee earning $200,000 or more per annum cannot raise a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal. 90-Day Trial Period Further protection for employers is now available. It is a technical point legally, but previously a compliant 90-day trial period provision and associated termination gives an employer legal protection against a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal. However, it is common knowledge and practice that lawyers & savvy advocates turn such challenges into claims of unjustified disadvantage instead, thus potentially circumventing the legal protection for the employer under the Act. This avenue is now blocked. Under this Amendment Act an employee (or representative) cannot claim unjustified dismissal or unjustified disadvantage relating to the dismissal. 30-day rule abolishment  For businesses where collective employment agreements (CEA) are in place, previously any new hire whose work would normally fall under the scope of a CEA scope of such must be hired at least for 30 days on the CEA before even negotiating with the person the option of an individual employment agreement (IEA). Employers Assistance 17.2.2026

In November 2025, the Companies (Address Information) Amendment Act 2025 was passed into law. This Act enables directors who have safety concerns regarding the publication of their residential address to opt to provide an alternative address instead. The existing position under the Companies Act 1993 is that a company must publish the residential addresses of its shareholders and directors on the Companies Register. Long-standing concerns about personal safety and broader privacy concerns related to the public availability of such information have been addressed by this Amendment Act. Process for substituting a residential address It is important to note, however, that the ability to substitute a director’s residential address must be carried out by application to the Registrar of Companies. The application seeking approval must: - Be made by the director in the prescribed form; - Include a statutory declaration by the director verifying that the public availability of their residential address is likely to result in physical or mental harm to the director or a person they live with; - Specify an eligible alternative address; and - Include the prescribed fee (if any). Alternative addresses must be physical New Zealand addresses. The alternative address cannot be the company’s registered office or address for service, nor a postal centre or document exchange service. Where the alternative address is the office of an accountant, law firm etc, this must be specified. Coverage for shareholders The Act does not generally include alternative options for shareholders’ addresses. However an alternative address for shareholders may be allowed when the applying director is also a shareholder of the company, or lives with a shareholder of the company and consents to the use of the alternative address. If your application is approved Where the Registrar has approved an application for the use of an alternative address, they will take reasonable steps to prevent public access to the director’s residential address, including redacting the address from historic filings and other documents that previously disclosed the address. In summary While the Amendment Act has been passed, it will not come into force until a date set by Order in Council. In the event that the Act has not come into force by 18 November 2026, it will do so on that date. Directors will not be able to submit applications until the Amendment Act is in force. It remains to be seen what threshold of harm will be considered sufficient to have an application succeed under the alternative address regime, and whether any supporting documentation will be requested as part of the application.  Our commercial team is closely following this, as well as the wider reforms to the Companies Act 1993 currently being considered by the government. If you need assistance, we recommend seeking support from an experienced commercial lawyer. Rainey Collins Feb 26