sdav:Inphinity: One difference I see in this case, that is imo important, is the *employee* is the one who has raised the case to the ERA. Air NZ aren't taking her to court or anything, she's gone to ERA to contest her dismissal, and it would seem that it has been raised that content on her facebook indicated she was not using her sick leave legitimately. Thus, the ERA have requested she disclose this information for *HER* case to continue. While I don't condone in any way the right of an employer to obtain social media or other personal info, I do think if you're going to try and make this sort of formal complaint (in this case to the ERA) then go "No I can't show you that it'll show I'm lying" (not a quote, of course, but it is heavily implied by the refusal).. you may want to think things through a bit better next time. You're welcome to not disclose it, and by doing so, the ERA can draw their own conclusion (or, in fact, simply decide there's no evidence either way and drop the complaint).
Ah, at last...well put Inphinity. People seem to have been getting a bit bent out of shape (and it's made for some amusing reading!) about how unfair all this is, while losing sight of the fact it's her case and she has to stump up with the evidence.