At first he started working at smaller construction sites then was soon moved to a larger job where he was told he'd need to purchase two nail guns and he could pay them off at a further $100 per week.
However, despite the employment agreement outlining a reimbursement policy and rate if an employee of Warriors NZ was expected to supply his own tools, this page had been struck-through - apparently in favour of the payback system Gemmell set up instead.
"This is in stark contrast to the suggestion in the employment agreement that Mr Dixon should have been the person receiving an allowance," the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) said in its decision released this week.
Dixon told his boss he wouldn't have enough money to pay rent if he had to buy the nail guns back and instead offered a plan to save up and buy them over time.
He told the authority that Gemmell didn't seem happy with this counter offer and Dixon was instead given demolition jobs to do that didn't require a nail gun.
After that, the relationship between the two grew worse.
Dixon said he was habitually asked to work Saturdays despite his contract not stating that in its terms and he was made to take a drug test after coming down with a lung infection.
He failed that test as cannabis was detected in his urine but the authority said Gemmell wasn't justified in making him get tested while at the doctor's being seen about his infection.
According to the ERA things came to a head when Dixon's car broke down and he started coming to work on a moped.
Gemmell wasn't satisfied with this and arranged for a mechanic to fix the car for $700 which would then also be deducted from Dixon's pay.
The bill came out at nearly double that and Gemmell said in a lengthy text message to Dixon that perhaps he could sell the car in order to pay him back for the repairs.
"Please stand down from any work until this matter is resolved," Gemmell said in a follow-up text.
The text then listed a number of other things to be discussed by Gemmell, including Dixon's positive drug test, punctuality, and personal hygiene.
Gemmell also commented on what Dixon would bring for lunch, his failure to purchase tools and his unwillingness to work on Saturdays.
From there a meeting was set up with the organisation managing Dixon's apprenticeship.
However a day before the meeting Gemmell sent Dixon a text saying "there is no work available for you", and then didn't show up for the meeting.
ERA member Claire English said in her decision that Gemmell was unjustified in dismissing his apprentice by text, a day before the meeting and without prior discussion.
"I also find that the way in which Mr Gemmell went about this to be unfair, in that it seems that he listed out a variety of apparently small and unrelated matters that Mr Dixon recalls occurred at various points throughout his employment, but which he was not aware were ongoing unresolved issues," English said.
Dixon gave evidence to the authority that he had suffered shock and embarrassment at being fired and the loss of confidence after having to move back in with his mother.
Gemmell declined to comment to Open Justice for this story.
He did not attend the authority's investigation meeting and told it that his company would soon be liquidated, however the Companies Office shows Warriors NZ is still listed.
Instead of attending the meeting Gemmell said in a statement to the ERA that Dixon acted with "ongoing bad faith".
He said Dixon had low productivity, an inability to listen to instructions, was late to work, didn't have proper tools or was constantly losing them and refused to purchase any.
The ERA noted Gemmell provided no evidence to support those allegations and they were not raised with his apprentice at the time.
Ultimately it awarded Dixon $15,000 in compensation and lost wages.
