Solution Driven,

People Focused,

& Pragmatic.

Contact Us

Solution Driven,

People Focused,

& Pragmatic.

Contact Us

About

Melissa founded MJ Law after many years of working in leading firms. Melissa was a partner at BE Employment and now consults to BE Employment Law. Melissa is qualified in both New Zealand and the UK, where she spent nine years practising before returning home to focus on helping New Zealand businesses and employees with their workplace challenges.


Clients value Melissa’s down-to-earth, pragmatic approach. She gives advice that is clear, timely, and easy to put into action — always with people at the centre. Her goal is to resolve problems quickly and cost effectively, while helping clients feel supported and confident in the process.


Melissa works with both employers and employees on the full range of employment issues, from day-to-day advice through to complex disputes. She is an experienced litigator who regularly represents clients at mediation and before the Employment Relations Authority. Melissa undertakes workplace investigations and guides organisations through workplace investigations.


Melissa is a sought after speaker and regularly presents at employment law seminars and conferences. Melissa also runs training sessions for HR and management for clients.


Melissa is a member of Kate Sheppard Chambers

Qualifications and Memberships

Bachelor of Arts Criminology and Education

2000

Bachelor of Laws (Honours) Victoria University

2002

Admitted as a Barrister and Solicitor New Zealand

2002

Admitted as a Solicitor in England and Wales

2006

Association of Workplace Investigators AWI certificate holder (AWI-CH) - Utah

Member of the New Zealand Law Society Employment Law Committee

What we do

For Employers

Employment matters go to the heart of any organisation and are often sensitive and personal. Melissa understands the need to find solutions that match your commercial objectives, and culture while maintaining efficient and productive teams.

We Advise On

Read more

Restructures

Performance Management, Misconduct, Serious Misconduct

Restraints of Trade

Personal Grievances

Negotiated Exits Advising

Employment Documentation/Policies

For Employers

Employment matters go to the heart of any organisation and are often sensitive and personal. Melissa understands the need to find solutions that match your commercial objectives, and culture while maintaining efficient and productive teams.

We Advise On

Read more

Restructures

Performance Management, Misconduct, Serious Misconduct

Restraints of Trade

Personal Grievances

Negotiated Exits Advising

Employment Documentation/Policies

For Employees

Melissa understands that employment matters are deeply personal and will help you to strategically navigate the issues you are facing.

We Advise On

Read more

Raising Personal Grievances

Restraints of Trade Issues

90 Day Trial Periods

Negotiated Exits

Advising on Restructures

Representation at Disciplinary Meetings, Investigation and Performance Management Matters

For Employees

Melissa understands that employment matters are deeply personal and will help you to strategically navigate the issues you are facing.

We Advise On

Read more

Raising Personal Grievances

Restraints of Trade Issues

90 Day Trial Periods

Negotiated Exits

Advising on Restructures

Representation at Disciplinary Meetings, Investigation and Performance Management Matters

Investigations

Melissa has completed the certification from the Association of Workplace Investigators in Utah, USA and regularly undertakes workplace investigations as an independent investigator for a large range of companies. She also advises employers who are carrying out internal investigations.

Investigations

Melissa has completed the certification from the Association of Workplace Investigators in Utah, USA and regularly undertakes workplace investigations as an independent investigator for a large range of companies. She also advises employers who are carrying out internal investigations.

Employment Law Changes

The Employment Relations Amendment Act 2026 became law on 21 February 2026. Below is a high-level summary of the key changes and what employers need to know.

High-income earners

Recent amendments to the Employment Relations Act 2000 introduced a $200,000 remuneration threshold, which significantly alters personal grievance rights for high-income earners who are dismissed.


What are the key changes?

  • High-income earners (those earning $200,000 or more) cannot raise a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal.

  • The $200,000 threshold includes salary and wages, bonuses, commissions and employee share-scheme benefits. The amount is annualised over the preceding 364 days.

  • High-income earners may still bring personal grievances or other claims on grounds unrelated to their dismissal.


When do the changes apply?

A 12-month transition period applies to employees who were employed before the amendments came into force (February 2026). So the amendments will apply to all employees from February 2027.


The new rules apply immediately to new hires.


Where to from here?

  • Employers and employees may mutually agree in writing that these dismissal rules will not apply. This allows a high-income employee to retain full personal grievance rights for unjustified dismissal and may be used as a recruitment tool for senior roles.

  • In practice, this is unlikely to be attractive to employers.

  • High-income employees and their advisers are likely to place greater emphasis on robust contractual protections, such as extended notice periods or no-fault termination clauses.


Changes to personal grievance remedies

Significant changes have been made in the personal grievance space. Where an employee is dismissed and their conduct amounts to serious misconduct, they are not entitled to any remedies.

Where misconduct is established, the Authority/Court may reduce remedies by up to 100%, including removing compensation for hurt and humiliation and eliminating reinstatement as a remedy, if the employee is found to have contributed to the personal grievance.


Where to from here?

You should review policies and employment agreements to ensure that definitions of serious misconduct remain appropriate and up to date. Lawyers and employees are likely to raise novel arguments about the definition of serious misconduct.


Section 103A - Test of Justification

The test of justification focuses on whether the employer's actions were those that a fair and reasonable employer could have taken in the circumstances, at the time the decision was made.

The change - a dismissal will not be unjustified solely due to procedural defects unless those defects result in actual unfair treatment. This shifts the focus away from minor technical errors towards the overall substantive fairness.


New test for contractors

The amendments introduce a new 'specified contractor' gateway test for determining whether a worker can claim employee status.

If all criteria below are met, the worker cannot challenge their status:

  • A written agreement states the person is an independent contractor and not an employee.

  • The worker is not restricted from performing work for others.

  • The worker:

    • Is not required to work set days, times or hours; or

    • May subcontract the work

  • The arrangement cannot be terminated because the worker declines additional work.

  • The worker had a reasonable opportunity to seek independent advice.

If these criteria are satisfied, the individual will be a contractor and cannot challenge that status. If they are not satisfied the worker can still challenge their status under the traditional "real nature of the relationship" test.

Where to from here?

You should review your contractor arrangements.


Trial periods

An employee cannot bring a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal (that remains the same) but now can't bring a personal grievance for unjustified disadvantage where their employment is terminated under a valid trial period.

Trial Periods

A trial period allows employers to assess whether a new employee is suitable for a role. During this time, an employer may dismiss the employee without the employee being able to raise a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal—provided the trial period is valid. When used correctly, trial periods can be a valuable tool for employers, but they are often challenged. It is therefore crucial to understand when they can be used and what is required.

Key requirements

The trial period clause must meet the requirements in sections 67A and 67B of the Employment Relations Act 2000.

  • The trial period begins on the employee’s first day of work and may last for up to 90 days.

  • The employment agreement must clearly state when the trial period starts and how long it will run.

  • Both parties must agree to and sign the employment agreement before the employee starts work.

  • The employee must be given a reasonable opportunity to seek independent legal advice.

  • The employee must be a new hire who has not previously worked for the employer.

  • During the 90-day period, the employer may dismiss the employee if they are not suited to the role.

  • The employer must give written notice of dismissal within the trial period, even if the employment end date falls after the 90-day period.

If you have any questions, please reach out.

Upcoming Changes

In September 2024, the Government announced changes to the Employment Relations Act 2000 that will introduce a new gateway test to determine whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor. These reforms are designed to provide greater clarity for both businesses and workers, and are expected to become law in 2026.

The gateway test will serve as the starting point for assessing employment status. If all criteria are met, the worker will be classified as a contractor. If any criteria are not met, the existing tests will continue to apply.

Under the proposed changes, a worker will be considered an independent contractor if all of the following apply:

  • There is a written agreement that clearly designates the worker as an independent contractor.

  • The business does not restrict the worker from providing services to other businesses, including competitors.

  • The business does not require the worker to be available at specific times or for a set number of hours, and allows subcontracting of the work.

  • The business does not terminate the contract if the worker declines additional tasks or engagements.

Once the gateway test is formally enacted, business owners should ensure all four criteria are satisfied when engaging someone as a contractor.

Employment Law Changes

The Employment Relations Amendment Act 2026 became law on 21 February 2026. Below is a high-level summary of the key changes and what employers need to know.

High-income earners

Recent amendments to the Employment Relations Act 2000 introduced a $200,000 remuneration threshold, which significantly alters personal grievance rights for high-income earners who are dismissed.


What are the key changes?

  • High-income earners (those earning $200,000 or more) cannot raise a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal.

  • The $200,000 threshold includes salary and wages, bonuses, commissions and employee share-scheme benefits. The amount is annualised over the preceding 364 days.

  • High-income earners may still bring personal grievances or other claims on grounds unrelated to their dismissal.


When do the changes apply?

A 12-month transition period applies to employees who were employed before the amendments came into force (February 2026). So the amendments will apply to all employees from February 2027.


The new rules apply immediately to new hires.


Where to from here?

  • Employers and employees may mutually agree in writing that these dismissal rules will not apply. This allows a high-income employee to retain full personal grievance rights for unjustified dismissal and may be used as a recruitment tool for senior roles.

  • In practice, this is unlikely to be attractive to employers.

  • High-income employees and their advisers are likely to place greater emphasis on robust contractual protections, such as extended notice periods or no-fault termination clauses.


Changes to personal grievance remedies

Significant changes have been made in the personal grievance space. Where an employee is dismissed and their conduct amounts to serious misconduct, they are not entitled to any remedies.

Where misconduct is established, the Authority/Court may reduce remedies by up to 100%, including removing compensation for hurt and humiliation and eliminating reinstatement as a remedy, if the employee is found to have contributed to the personal grievance.


Where to from here?

You should review policies and employment agreements to ensure that definitions of serious misconduct remain appropriate and up to date. Lawyers and employees are likely to raise novel arguments about the definition of serious misconduct.


Section 103A - Test of Justification

The test of justification focuses on whether the employer's actions were those that a fair and reasonable employer could have taken in the circumstances, at the time the decision was made.

The change - a dismissal will not be unjustified solely due to procedural defects unless those defects result in actual unfair treatment. This shifts the focus away from minor technical errors towards the overall substantive fairness.


New test for contractors

The amendments introduce a new 'specified contractor' gateway test for determining whether a worker can claim employee status.

If all criteria below are met, the worker cannot challenge their status:

  • A written agreement states the person is an independent contractor and not an employee.

  • The worker is not restricted from performing work for others.

  • The worker:

    • Is not required to work set days, times or hours; or

    • May subcontract the work

  • The arrangement cannot be terminated because the worker declines additional work.

  • The worker had a reasonable opportunity to seek independent advice.

If these criteria are satisfied, the individual will be a contractor and cannot challenge that status. If they are not satisfied the worker can still challenge their status under the traditional "real nature of the relationship" test.

Where to from here?

You should review your contractor arrangements.


Trial periods

An employee cannot bring a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal (that remains the same) but now can't bring a personal grievance for unjustified disadvantage where their employment is terminated under a valid trial period.

Trial Periods

A trial period allows employers to assess whether a new employee is suitable for a role. During this time, an employer may dismiss the employee without the employee being able to raise a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal—provided the trial period is valid. When used correctly, trial periods can be a valuable tool for employers, but they are often challenged. It is therefore crucial to understand when they can be used and what is required.

Key requirements

The trial period clause must meet the requirements in sections 67A and 67B of the Employment Relations Act 2000.

  • The trial period begins on the employee’s first day of work and may last for up to 90 days.

  • The employment agreement must clearly state when the trial period starts and how long it will run.

  • Both parties must agree to and sign the employment agreement before the employee starts work.

  • The employee must be given a reasonable opportunity to seek independent legal advice.

  • The employee must be a new hire who has not previously worked for the employer.

  • During the 90-day period, the employer may dismiss the employee if they are not suited to the role.

  • The employer must give written notice of dismissal within the trial period, even if the employment end date falls after the 90-day period.

If you have any questions, please reach out.

Upcoming Changes

In September 2024, the Government announced changes to the Employment Relations Act 2000 that will introduce a new gateway test to determine whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor. These reforms are designed to provide greater clarity for both businesses and workers, and are expected to become law in 2026.

The gateway test will serve as the starting point for assessing employment status. If all criteria are met, the worker will be classified as a contractor. If any criteria are not met, the existing tests will continue to apply.

Under the proposed changes, a worker will be considered an independent contractor if all of the following apply:

  • There is a written agreement that clearly designates the worker as an independent contractor.

  • The business does not restrict the worker from providing services to other businesses, including competitors.

  • The business does not require the worker to be available at specific times or for a set number of hours, and allows subcontracting of the work.

  • The business does not terminate the contract if the worker declines additional tasks or engagements.

Once the gateway test is formally enacted, business owners should ensure all four criteria are satisfied when engaging someone as a contractor.

What our clients say

Peter

Melissa Johnston was outstanding to work with. She was highly responsive, provided clear and strategic advice, and guided me through my employment issue with professionalism and care. Thanks to her expertise, we achieved a great result, and I couldn’t recommend her more highly.

Employee

Melissa's advice and support throughout a complex restructure was invaluable. From our very first conversation, she brought a sharp, strategic perspective that gave me complete confidence I was in capable and highly skilled hands during a particularly challenging time. Her legal expertise is outstanding, but what truly sets her apart is her empathetic and professional approach. She was consistently responsive, transparent, and honest about the issues we faced through the process — and always made me feel like I was her most important client. I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend her, and she’ll be the first person I call if I ever need employment support again.

Employee

Melissa showed incredible empathy for my situation, quickly grasping the relevance and implications of every detail. She mapped out a clear strategy to address the immediate issues and set a plan for a successful outcome. Our interactions were always efficient, focused, and to the point, and she helped me identify which parts of the preparation I could handle myself — saving both time and fees. From the start, Melissa provided clear expectations around timelines and costs, meeting every deadline and tailoring her approach to my individual circumstances. She guided me not just legally, but emotionally, helping me understand what was genuinely worth concern and what was simply standard practice. Her empathy and awareness of my mental wellbeing during a difficult time were exceptional. I felt fully supported by someone deeply competent, strategic, and experienced. Knowing she had multiple approaches ready, if needed, was reassuring. Her clear guidance and communication saved me enormous time (and money) and stress. I would have no hesitation recommending Melissa to anyone seeking expert, practical, and compassionate

Ann

I highly recommend Melissa Johnston, an experienced employment lawyer who combines clear, practical advice with strong advocacy. Her professionalism, empathy, and genuine support make her an outstanding choice for anyone facing workplace issues.

Kingspan Insulation New NZ Limited

Every interaction wtih Melissa is a learning lesson that I honestly take seriously and hope not to come back with the same issues. The restructure has ended and gone smoothly. Thank you for every step of the way, you've brought clarity, challenge and I've learned a lot just from the way you've helped us navigate the process. . The restructure is finally done. It wasn't simple - plenty of twists - butting through it with you beside us made all the difference. You didn't just give legal advice; you gave us confidence to do what was right, even when it was hard. That support means a lot - not just to the business, but to me.

Pasifika Medical Association

Melissa Johnston has been an exceptional legal partner to the Pasifika Medical Association Group. Her efficiency, professionalism, and deep understanding of employment and health sector law have been invaluable in guiding us through complex disciplinary matters, patient complaints, restructuring and operational challenges with confidence and care. With her extensive healthcare background and strong networks, Melissa brings a depth of knowledge that aligns seamlessly with the nature of our work and the communities we serve. Her practical, solutions focused approach and ability to interpret the nuances of the health sector have strengthened our internal processes and supported sound decision making across the organisation. Melissa has always provided timely, practical, and well-informed advice on various operational and organisational matters. She is a trusted and respected partner, whose commitment to achieving fair and effective outcomes make her a highly valued and respected partner in supporting the ongoing success of Pasifika Medical Association Group.

Peter

Melissa Johnston was outstanding to work with. She was highly responsive, provided clear and strategic advice, and guided me through my employment issue with professionalism and care. Thanks to her expertise, we achieved a great result, and I couldn’t recommend her more highly.

Employee

Melissa's advice and support throughout a complex restructure was invaluable. From our very first conversation, she brought a sharp, strategic perspective that gave me complete confidence I was in capable and highly skilled hands during a particularly challenging time. Her legal expertise is outstanding, but what truly sets her apart is her empathetic and professional approach. She was consistently responsive, transparent, and honest about the issues we faced through the process — and always made me feel like I was her most important client. I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend her, and she’ll be the first person I call if I ever need employment support again.

Employee

Melissa showed incredible empathy for my situation, quickly grasping the relevance and implications of every detail. She mapped out a clear strategy to address the immediate issues and set a plan for a successful outcome. Our interactions were always efficient, focused, and to the point, and she helped me identify which parts of the preparation I could handle myself — saving both time and fees. From the start, Melissa provided clear expectations around timelines and costs, meeting every deadline and tailoring her approach to my individual circumstances. She guided me not just legally, but emotionally, helping me understand what was genuinely worth concern and what was simply standard practice. Her empathy and awareness of my mental wellbeing during a difficult time were exceptional. I felt fully supported by someone deeply competent, strategic, and experienced. Knowing she had multiple approaches ready, if needed, was reassuring. Her clear guidance and communication saved me enormous time (and money) and stress. I would have no hesitation recommending Melissa to anyone seeking expert, practical, and compassionate

Ann

I highly recommend Melissa Johnston, an experienced employment lawyer who combines clear, practical advice with strong advocacy. Her professionalism, empathy, and genuine support make her an outstanding choice for anyone facing workplace issues.

Kingspan Insulation New NZ Limited

Every interaction wtih Melissa is a learning lesson that I honestly take seriously and hope not to come back with the same issues. The restructure has ended and gone smoothly. Thank you for every step of the way, you've brought clarity, challenge and I've learned a lot just from the way you've helped us navigate the process. . The restructure is finally done. It wasn't simple - plenty of twists - butting through it with you beside us made all the difference. You didn't just give legal advice; you gave us confidence to do what was right, even when it was hard. That support means a lot - not just to the business, but to me.

Pasifika Medical Association

Melissa Johnston has been an exceptional legal partner to the Pasifika Medical Association Group. Her efficiency, professionalism, and deep understanding of employment and health sector law have been invaluable in guiding us through complex disciplinary matters, patient complaints, restructuring and operational challenges with confidence and care. With her extensive healthcare background and strong networks, Melissa brings a depth of knowledge that aligns seamlessly with the nature of our work and the communities we serve. Her practical, solutions focused approach and ability to interpret the nuances of the health sector have strengthened our internal processes and supported sound decision making across the organisation. Melissa has always provided timely, practical, and well-informed advice on various operational and organisational matters. She is a trusted and respected partner, whose commitment to achieving fair and effective outcomes make her a highly valued and respected partner in supporting the ongoing success of Pasifika Medical Association Group.

The Cider Building,

4 Williamson Ave,

Grey Lynn,

Auckland 

The Cider Building,

4 Williamson Ave,

Grey Lynn,

Auckland