When Dame Noelene Taurua was reinstated as Head Coach of the Silver Ferns after a very public 51 day stand down, some things seemed odd.
First, it was announced that Taurua would not be joining the team when they travelled to the United Kingdom two weeks later to defend the Constellation Cup. The reason given by Netball NZ at the time was that this was to “minimise disruption”. But with no international tests scheduled until the Commonwealth Games in July 2026, this leaves Taurua with very little opportunity to reconnect with the team and to have them game ready.
In any reinstatement situation, the longer the “estrangement” goes on, the more difficult it is to rebuild trust and confidence. But leaving Taurua out in the cold during a critical phase leading into the Commonwealth games seems inexplicable given that the Northern tour was designed to emulate the games schedule, and intended to be an important part of the building plan.
Unsurprisingly this led to speculation as to how genuine the reinstatement was. Former Silver Ferns great Laura Langman expressed concern that Taurua was being set up to fail.
Then there were the media appearances by Taurua a week after news of her reinstatement broke. In those interviews Taurua was obviously keen to tell her side of the story and to share “her truth”.
That “truth” included some pretty direct criticism of the employment investigation and way the process had been handled by Netball NZ. In one interview Taurua broke down and said “It’s been terrible. It’s been terrible”, and “My name’s been put out there without me being able to say anything. I’ve taken it all”.
She also made some surprising statements, repeating a number of times that she did not know why she had been suspended, and that she had not been told what the specific concerns of the players were.
It is obviously unusual for parties to an employment dispute to speak out publicly in this way. A key reason for this is that the settlement of disputes is generally subject to confidentiality undertakings which prevent both parties from speaking out and/or disclosing the terms of the agreement. We can surmise that a formal settlement agreement was likely entered into in this case as Taurua has publicly referred to negotiated terms.
It is not uncommon for the parties to agree in such settlements on the wording of media statements or messaging, but it is unlikely that Netball NZ would have sanctioned the public statements made by Taurua in this instance. Rather it seems that she may have gone “rogue”.
Interestingly, it has been reported that the original reason for Taurua being stood down was not the player complaints themselves, but her reaction to them and the process that followed. If this is true, that reaction and her subsequent media statements would appear to have inflamed an already difficult situation.
In addition to any specific requirements in a settlement agreement, all employees are subject to obligations of confidentiality and fidelity which mean that they cannot disclose confidential or sensitive information about their employment, or information which may damage their employer’s image and reputation. In this instance Taurua’s public statements resulted in further media scrutiny of Netball NZ around the fairness of its process, and potential reputational damage.
It has now been reported that Netball NZ has commenced a further employment process as a result of the media statements made by Taurua. Assuming confidentiality obligations were part of the agreed resolution between the parties, Taurua could now be the subject of legal action and compensation claims for breaching these.
She could also potentially be liable for disciplinary action up to and including dismissal. This would be a very sad end to this lengthy saga, but possibly one of Taurua’s own making.
Originally published in The Post
