Written By: - Date published: 1:44 pm, June 24th, 2008 - 102 comments
Categories: labour, nz first, wages, workers' rights -
Tags: minimum wage
Labour, with the support of New Zealand First, has developed a bill based on Darien Fenton’s private members’ bill that will ensure tens of thousands of workers are no longer ripped off by ‘triangular employment’ situations, whereby their effective employer contracts out the actual employment of staff to a labour hire company.
It works like this: The labour hire companies cheaply and quickly provide businesses with labour that they can dispose of whenever they choose. The labour hire company makes a mint by charging out their workers for twice the rate that gets passed on to the worker. As the worker, you usually get minimum wage, the labour hire company makes $12 an hour off you, and your job can disappear at a moment’s notice. It really is the sharp end of surplus value.
The Bill will ensure that workers in triangular employment situations get the same work rights (including such basics as sick pay), the same wages, and same conditions as other workers in the same job, which many of them miss out on currently.
Business New Zealand, always a friend of the ordinary Kiwi, is complaining that these provisions to ensure workers get their basic rights will put the labour hire companies out of business. Good. The labour hire companies are scum. They take advantage of desperate workers and undermine workers’ rights by offering businesses a cheap way to get around labour law. My personal experiences and the horrific stories of other workers being exploited by labour hire companies make me think any law that sticks it to them and protects workers is good for the people of New Zealand.
Expect the Bill to pass with support from Labour, NZF, the Greens, the Maori Party. National will continue their perfect record of always voting against workers’ rights.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
HS
Go easy on them, some people still think a job is for life and that all anybody really wants is a permanent job.
Draco TB
Brilliant – you turned down a job and took a benefit. More people should do that if they don’t like the working conditions, then the working conditions would change. It’s just a pity not everybody has the same principals (or choices) as you did.
Ever worked as a temp HS? Thought not. Fu*k off back to under your rock. I’ve seen factories in which temps have been doing 60 or 70 hour weeks at time one when time one meant minimum wage. If workers complain they get sent down the road and get some other chump in. If you’ve ever had to work like that and just suck up the dangerous conditions, suck up having no breaks and suck up not knowing how much longer you’re going to have income for then you’d have some compassion.
As you clearly don’t I’ll reiterate. Fu*k off back to under your rock you nasty little bigot. And for fu*k’s sake stop pretending you’re a surgeon. With an IQ like yours you couldn’t operate a fu*kin yoyo…
Oh my, sod’s not a happy chappy.
Must go, as the hood just stole me firewood truck.
Robinsod
Can you answer the question, is this bill designed to cover all casual labour situations or is it supposedly targeting min/low wage working conditions? If it’s targeted how will we have any confidence in that targeting after the fiasco we have seen with the EFA and it’s unintended consequences?
Also you really need to take your Ritalin, even if the organisations HS speaks of employee 10 people on a core of 3 permanent staff, his point about the shops closing down is still valid. Have you any fricken idea how hard it already is to find a Dr and get an appointment? Perhaps you already know, seems like you were out of Ritalin last time you were banned and you still are.
Is getting a bit past your bedtime. Night Peter
.
Many thanks HS: as I suspected, your experience of temp workers has been exclusively from the viewpoint of an employer and with specialised “scarce” occupations. As other commenters have noted, there is a place for agencies in such circumstances where the need for temporary staff is systemic.
And you admit you have no idea how many FTEs are temps at any DHB – sort of negates your assertion that the “situation would be perilous within a week” if the agencies disappeared don’t you think? I suspect the figure is far lower than you imply.
My own experience comprises dealing with many low-paid, unskilled and semi-skilled workers over decades, and the fact that I have a relative who started (and continues to own) one of these very agencies way back (early 70s from memory).
I can unreservedly assure you HS, that in my and many thousands of others’ experience, the statement; agency parasites continue to leech their hourly slice off these workers – often for years – for practically nil input. is (sadly) most demonstrably accurate.
burt: It’s just a pity not everybody has the same principals (or choices) as you did.
and judging by your spelling, obviously it’s lucky not everyone had the principals you did….
(heh – you’ve been waiting months to “ritalin” sod, havent ya burt!)
ak
You are absolutely correct, people in these situations should negotiate open disclosure and a declining margin in predefined step(s). EG: It halves on the first renewal. However min/low wage workers will not always have that luxury and if professionals don’t take care of it themselves then it’s their loss.
Is this bill well targeted or is it just destroying the concept of ‘independent contractor’ as it sweeps through the marketplace?
s0d
Yes worked as a locum many times in my younger years.
If you have seen the factories where you assert these practices are going on why don’t you report them and why don’t the workers at said factories move to alternate employment as the posters here have pointed out more than once unemployment is at very low levels in NZ and it’s an employees market.
And I’d suggest you clear out your mouth you are beginning to sound like Randal which is a very poor look.
Lynn can you censure Sod and perhaps give him another couple of weeks off at his own blog I don’t see why I need to be accused of bigotry, lying and told to f off on the basis of my comments on this post
Is this bill well targeted or is it just destroying the concept of ‘independent contractor’ as it sweeps through the marketplace?
(heh – settle, petal, there isn’t a commie conspiracy under every rock burt! nigh nigh bud)
Steve
I very rarely agree with your partisan approach to todays problems but WINZ operating in the way you decribe is something I would strongly support.
Razorlight
Would you strongly support that if it had a virtual monopoly on casual labour?
Burt – fu*k off and come back when you know what you are talking about. Specialist temps already get paid over the odds – anyone temping scarce or skilled positions won’t be disadvantaged by this bill. It’s the cowboys who will take a hammering. I’ll tell you a wee story mate from first had experience. Chicken factories (including the name brands) hire huge numbers of temps so that the unions on site can’t gain enough strength to negotiate decent conditions. When you turn up at the ***** factory as a temp they hand you a pair of overalls and a hairnet and then make you hump chicken guts around. There is no H & S training as that would be uneconomic for temp staff. Most of the temps end up with campylobacter but they don’t get quick treatment because that costs money and they don’t take time off work because that costs money they don’t have too.
That disease goes around and around in circles as people infect and reinfect their surroundings and each other and when you as a consumer don’t cook your chicken right or you cut some fruit on the board you cut the chicken on without washing it properly you catch campylobacter too. But while you are sh*tting blood you can take comfort in the fact you have helped the company keep the wage costs down.
I’m gonna cut you some slack and assume you are just too privileged to have had to come face to face with the sort of shit most temps deal with Burt. If you’re not then you need to check your moral compass and figure out where along the trail you became scum.
HS, take some smelling salts and have a wee lie down. Poor wee dear.
Fact is you often assume that the working conditions at your (alledged) place of employment are replicated everywhere. By this I mean that when ever workers rights come up you ask whether or not they are really needed because the folk you work with are doing fine.
This is a pretty silly argument to be making, or rather it is a silly question because your workplace is not typical of the types of workplaces that need worker protection. It is a pretty obviously stupid error that you make a lot. Which is why people that work to protect vulnerable workers get het up, and wonder about your level of stupidness.
And you never did apologise properly for calling r0b a liar, (in fact you studiously avoided doing so in the manner of the slimiest of politicians) so I wouldn’t throw that particular stone.
ni’night
Robinsod
No shit! But they do not get holiday pay or sick leave from their clients. This is the point dip shit, keep up. I don’t give a shit if a contract Dr being paid $400/hr is getting whacked $100 in agency margin, it’s obviously worth it for them or they wouldn’t do it. Can I make this any clearer?
I have no drama with enforcing minimum standards, I do have a problem with one size fits all employment law. Are you getting the difference or should I clarify myself further?
I’ll ask again – is this bill designed to cover all casual labour situations or is it supposedly targeting min/low wage working conditions? … from an enforcement of sick pay, holiday pay and other benefits that broadly differentiate employees from contractors?
PB
Perhaps you need to take a look at my post way back yonder on this thread.
“There are undoubtedly bad employers out there but I believe they are in the minority – Clinton always seems to take a very black and white view of employers as all evil and that staff are all hard done by this is of course incorrect and as facile as the Labour is good National is bad (or vice versa) views on political blogs.”
As per the point Burt makes if the law captures the poor employers and protects the vulnerable fine – if it’s as poorly conceived and written as the EFA one could expect chaos
captcha – mob mentality (how very apt)
No Burt
I wouldn’t support them being a virtual Monopoly. I just think it would be a good way of WINZ getting long term unemployed into at the very least, casual work.
Not quite work for the dole, but as close as we will get in the current political climate.
Robinsod
Also, with the govt pulling moves like disallowing the Junior Dr’s the same level of pay rises they have enjoyed themselves, you had better to use to the idea of more contract specialists being paid over the odds.
The odds are set low, not the contractors overpaid – why can’t you lefties get this?
Razorlight
I would agree with them having a more active role in that area. Companies like Grunt Labour have preferential deals with the ATO in Australia. They take a standard rate of tax at source and they take minimum margins. Forcing them to pay sick pay and holiday pay to all casual workers would be wasteful churn. The margins would need to increase to support the extra administrative overhead and money that’s currently going into workers pockets would be spent on administration and compliance. Paper would be consumed and take home wages reduced.
Sure, smack the filth operators, but do that by providing a better option. No good will come of simple legislation that punishes valid and ethical operations, burying them in paper work and reducing the money available to productive workers.
Steve P.
If we are talking about enforcing payment of sick leave and holiday pay then what about employer contributions to KiwiSaver?
Can you tell us more about the mechanics of the bill?
Burt, all you’ve done is guess that the bill will affect a few people it’s not meant to, and then ask whether this is true. Over and over and over and over…
If you’re worried, go and find out. Write a letter to Fenton if you actually care, but please stop whining on here about it!
How, for god’s sake, is a bill that gives proper rights to temps, going to “[destroy] the concept of ‘independent contractor’ as it sweeps through the marketplace?”
If they are independent contractors and can negotiate a good wage, how is legislating for leave provisions going to affect that?
Honestly, you take tangent to a new level.
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding on this thread. Business NZ has misrepresented the provisions of the bill.
The bill will allow labour hire employees to enjoy the terms of any collective agreement on site and to seek redress against the principal if treated poorly. Currently, they have few protections and it’s not a case of them “choosing” that sort of employment, it’s a device used to drive down labour costs to the detriment of all employees.
The bill is also going to allow labour inspectors to make rulings on whether someone is a casual or permanent employee. Business NZ’s attempt to portray this as a decision on a contract of service v. contract for services is a load of rubbish. Similarly, the bill is not trying to give casual workers the same rights as permanent workers. It’s also going to include a code of practice to help guide employers on the difference. Maybe Business NZ should read the bill before commenting next time, but that’s not really their job. Their job is to oppose any piece of pro-worker legislation while demonstrating faux concern for workers. Disingenuous.
I am aware of a case where a worker working for a labour hire company was ‘employed’ in a factory (at of course an hourly rate at a minimum wage). Most workers in the factory were in that way, and staff numbers went up or down frequently as orders were filled / new orders came in. The problem was that the training was poor and due to that poor training the worker I know was injured due to that inadequate training (it was the fault of another worker but that is irrelevant). ACC paid for time off for the injury, but employment ceased. I did wonder which company would be regarded as the employer for ACC purposes – I suspect the labour hire company. One impact of that would be to give the factory little incentive to provide a safe workplace and to properly train short term workers.
Well, I used to train kiwi workers in literacy HoS and communications skills and the majority of them were ESOL so it was interesting. There was no discrimination over whether part, or full-time workers received training, I suspect in part because the Government assisted in the funding of this regardless of the workers’ status. The company used a lot of Part-time workers simply because they planned to close-down, and ditch them when it was convenient. Some of these people were kept on for years – at least long enough to complet many Unit Standards, and – failed to enjoy some of the basic protections their full-time brothers and sisters enjoyed. But the Union still got the cash injection via the training scheme funding from the Govt. (funny that). The disparity included a severe impact on Part-timers’ rights to any redundency payments.
They still had kids to feed though when the job ended.
This was all done with the complete knowledge of, and collusion with the union in question.
I applaud the good motives of the unions, also the involvemnt of the employers in this.
Throughout the good times, when employment was secure(ish) the left-leaning government and unions sat on their hands. Now, when the downturn is imminent, and many more may face the axe, suddenly we have this feel-good legislation to make the unions feel validated to spend money, time and people power to lobby on Labour’s behalf? That’s a neat way to circumvent the limitations on spending Labour imposed on unions with their ‘shot in their own foot’ EFA Legislation eh?
I agree with this Bill I am just a little disappointed that people had to wait for nearly nine years or months before a potential Labour election loss to have it mooted.
Still, on the bright side, it will make an excellent stick with which to beat National with during this very crucial election year.
Too little (no pun intended) Too Late?
I agree with this Bill I am just a little disappointed that people had to wait for nearly nine years or months before a potential Labour election loss to have it mooted.
I’m with you on that. This is something that should have been dealt with in 2000. If it makes you feel any better the unions have been pushing hard for this for the last 8 years. I think the right often overestimate the influence the union movement has on Labour!
What next? IT Professionals and management contractors no longer allowed to contract (or unable to because they have to get holiday pay and sick leave like happened in the UK)
If you *choose* to use an agency, then shop around for one that treats you right. If it is so hard, why are there now only 17,465 unemployed in New Zealand? Or is there a false statistic here?
You can’t have it both ways.
They still have rights, you will note all contractors have an arbitration clause in their contracts. All contracts have out clauses for both parties. If you are a labourer, and your contract doesn’t have these, change agencies.
If these people are not understanding their contracts, or signing something they have not read, then it is their own fault if they are getting screwed.
Many companies need short term resource, both labour and professional services. This change will simply restrict production even more, and it is already one of the lowest in OECD. Why? Because NZ workers are basically unskilled and lazy.
If you want to earn the same as someone who has bothered to get trade qualifications, then guess what, you have to get off your butt and do something about it. Your choice, not the employers. If people want better wages, they need to be more productive, and that is all about upskilling.
Everyone is self-employed, as soon as people realize that, this attitude of mediocrity that has seeped into NZ work culture will go away.
We’re talking about labour hire companies who supply what are essentailly day labourers to firms, not recruitment companies for IT, medical, and other professional contractors.
“This change will simple restrict production even more, and it is already one of the lowest in OECD. Why? Because NZ workers are basically unskilled and lazy.”
Three sentences, three incorrect assetions, well done.
If you *choose* to use an agency, then shop around for one that treats you right… If you are a labourer, and your contract doesn’t have these, change agencies.
Karl Rohde, “Entrepreneur – Father – Life Coach – Budget Advisor”, you fail to understand the inherent imbalance of power in the employment relationship.
Here’s a hint – one side owns the means of production, the other doesn’t. Work your way from there.
“inherent imbalance of power”
Sorry, I wholly disagree with this. Having worked in a factory for 5 years; being the lowest paid in the factory at the time, why am I not there now?
Because I got off my sorry butt and did something about it. Was it easy? No. Was it life changing? Yes.
Everything in life is about personal choice, except for random occurrences – but that’s out of your sphere of control.
Do you go home and sit in front of the TV after working in the factory, or do you spend 2 hours studying so that you can get your trade certificate in six months time.
Don’t tell me you are too tired to study, or don’t have the skills to study. That’s just a cop-out.
“Do not wait; the time will never be “just right.” Start where you stand, and work with whatever tools you may have at your command, and better tools will be found as you go along.”
- Napoleon Hill
Re: Steve Pierson:
We are ranked 22 out of the 29 measured OECD countries for GDP output per hour worked. Norway being the highest, and Mexico being the lowest.
That is a strong indication of “productivity”, and shows a very lacklustre performance by the workforce.
It comes down to an unskilled core workforce. And that is the responsibility of the individual; not the employer, and certainly not the government.
Libraries are free. Self-education is free. Mediocrity is a cancer.
“Libraries are free. Self-education is free. Mediocrity is a cancer.”
So is the assumption that everyone who isn’t in a good situation can think positive thoughts, read “the secret” and do better because they will it to happen.
So is being happy to advocate a position where someone leaving such a situation will leave it to someone else to suffer through, without wanting to make it better.
So is realising that some jobs are unskilled by definition, yet being satisfied that they have terrible conditions – lack of empathy is a more virulent cancer than mediocrity.
I worked in a factory 20 years ago – “the secret” didn’t come out that far back. Andrew Carnegie however, did exist, as did Napoleon Hill and various other people who all have a common thread to their approach to life – self esteem and respect is of utmost importance, and passing the buck is simply not acceptable.
Can’t think of better role models for most young people today, in fact many people of my generation could learn a lot from it as well.
It still comes down to attitude. No one in a country like NZ is stopped from changing their lot in life, but they are the ones that have to take the first step. Expecting someone else to do it for them is puerile. If that is a lack of empathy, then we are doomed.
By saying “I can do better than this”; the person who steps in your shoes after you sees they to can do it as well.
I can’t see how wanting a personally empowered community is showing a lack of empathy. I want to see people work hard and get remunerated for that hard work. I want to see NZ lead the world in research and development of new technologies. Most of all I want to see a work force with some self-esteem rather than cowering behind legislation that probably won’t fix their situation long term.
If you do what you have always done, you get what you have always got.
The ‘the secret’ comment was in jest.
The rest wasn’t. Your attitude that someone who isn’t in a good situation can improve it is all fine and well to a limited degree (it ignores circumstance and is a gross generalisation), I take no issue though, because that’s not what this is about. You neglect to mention that there will always be people left in those jobs others fight to get out of – and you show no interest in helping them.
If we’re all ‘empowered’ someone’s still got to shovel the shit, right?
Yours personal ethos does nothing to encourage a strong community.
Karl Rohde, “Entrepreneur – Father – Life Coach – Budget Advisor’, makes the mistake of assuming that ‘anyone can beat the odds’ means ‘everyone can beat the odds’.
The inconvenient truth is that even if everyone in society put their social and class circumstances behind them, did night school and got all manner of skills and qualifications, someone would still have to empty our rubbish bins and clean shit off our old people. The capitalist system, and the Karl Rohdeses who inhabit its managerial class, rely for their existence on a pliant labour force doing menial work for crap pay.
Karl Rohde wants to pretend we can all be lords and none of us serfs. In doing so he shows a complete ignorance of the very system he worships.