Bus driver wins first round in fight over suspension, transfer

Monday, 20 July 2026

At the heart of the employment issue is a complaint about an ‘interaction with a passenger’ (file photo).

A bus driver who says he was unfairly suspended and then told he would have to work from a different base after a passenger complaint has won an early legal battle.

Alan Hung Lun Au drove for Tranzit Coachlines (Central) Ltd, based in Te Awamutu but was suspended in mid-2025.

That was so Tranzit could investigate “a complaint about Mr Au’s interaction with a passenger”, an Employment Relations Authority determination says.

He was later formally warned and had his work arrangements changed - including a proposed shift to Cambridge.

Au argued he was unjustifiably disadvantaged and he will be allowed to pursue personal grievances, despite Tranzit arguing he didn’t raise them in the required 90-day window.

While the phrase ‘personal grievance’ may not have been mentioned, Alan Au made his objections clear, the Employment Relations Authority ruled.

The authority found he may not have used the exact phrase but made it clear he “considered the proposed arrangements unfair and disadvantageous and that he wanted Tranzit to address that”.

A July 2025 complaint about how Au interacted with a passenger set off events that led to the employment case.

There’s little detail about the complaint in the determination, but it notes Au’s assertion he didn’t refuse to lower a ramp, nor breach policies or procedures. Documents also refer to his wife questioning why he was still away from work “after the allegations were said not to have been substantiated”.

The company suspended him from work while it investigated the complaint.

It later issued him with a warning and decided he would not return to the Te Awamutu service. The proposal was to change his working arrangements so he would work from Cambridge on a 60-hour fortnight.

Tranzit said Waikato Regional Council required Au to be taken off the route, but the authority said Tranzit was still the employer.

Au claims that unjustifiably disadvantaged him, noting impacts such as extra travel time and cost. He also alleges Tranzit breached his employment agreement, failed to act in good faith and breached the implied duty of trust and confidence.

Tranzit denies the claims, saying it acted fairly and reasonably in response to the complaint, and not every employment problem is a personal grievance.

The company says it was Waikato Regional Council that required Au to be removed from the service he had been driving, though the determination doesn’t detail why.

“Tranzit says Mr Au was actually unhappy with the WRC’s conduct, rather than its own,” the authority says. “There is some force in that submission, but it does not answer the point. Tranzit was Mr Au’s employer, not the WRC. It was Tranzit which suspended him and then communicated that he would not return to his previous service.”

The company also argued that Au didn’t notify it of any personal grievance within the required 90-day period.

However, the authority said employees don’t legally have to use the words personal grievance.

“The question is whether, objectively assessed, he made or took reasonable steps to make Tranzit aware that he alleged a grievance in the nature of an unjustified disadvantage and that he wanted Tranzit to address it.”

Authority member Robert Davies found that message came through in Au's meetings, telephone discussions and correspondence with Tranzit.

“No particular formula of words is required. A series of communications may be considered together. The focus is on substance, not form.”

While Tranzit's agreement to attend mediation did not, by itself, prove a personal grievance had been raised, it formed part of the wider context showing the company understood there was a dispute over its employment decisions, the authority found.

Davies concluded that Au had raised personal grievances within the statutory time limit, which means the authority can now move on to consider whether the Tranzit’s actions were justified.