web analytics

A real recession policy

Written By: - Date published: 1:27 pm, August 6th, 2009 - 13 comments
Categories: unemployment, workers' rights - Tags:

Darien Fenton’s minimum redundancy bill has been drawn from the ballot and is likely to go before the house in the next two weeks.

In my opinion implementing a minimum redundancy is one of the most significant ways we can reduce the effects of the recession on working Kiwis because it offers a buffer for people when they lose their jobs so they can continue to pay their mortgages for a while, set themselves up in business or get some financial space to retrain.

I expect that National will talk a lot about how business can’t afford this and it will cost more jobs but it’s worth remembering that 85% of union collective agreements have a redundancy clause.

It’s also worth remembering that business got a 3% tax cut from Labour last year.

And that our long-standing politicians are also rewarded extremely well when they are made redundant by voters and that senior managers also tend do very well when they move on.

If it’s good enough for them why should ordinary workers be left high and dry when their job disappears? Especially when those jobs are disappearing at a frightening rate.

Somehow I doubt the political arm of business will agree.

13 comments on “A real recession policy ”

  1. BLiP 1

    No way will business accept this or any improvement in worker conditions. As John Key said this government is about reducing conditions, not improving them.

    Under Labour, business got a real fright when the tables were turned and it was them suffering the shortage, far better, in their venal minds, if there’s a ready pool of humble souls from which to pick and choose.

    Thanks National Inc. I’m lovin’ it.

  2. sausage fingers 2

    “A real recession policy”. Quite true.

    Way to make sure that anyone who was remotely contemplating employing anyone will decide not to.

    Are you desperate to prolong the recession for your political ends?

  3. Rex Widerstrom 3

    Fenton could have blogged a summary of what’s in the Bill (information is what political blogs are meant to be for Darien, not self-congratulatory back-patting).

    Someone want to fill me in? How much money are we talking about? The Herald’s website seems to be all about Field, Keisha Castle-Hughes (could I care less? I think not), and of course Bill’s house.

    Clearly no room for a story on something that would have a major impact on the lives of ordinary working NZers.

    • IrishBill 3.1

      Rex, it’s a four plus two deal capped at 26 weeks with four weeks notice. That’s less than the union standard of six plus two but it would see someone with five years service get twelve weeks of income to get by on. Better than restart for sure.

      I’m getting a bit bored with Bill’s house too. But that’s the media we’ve got.

      • Rex Widerstrom 3.1.1

        Thanks IB. Paid for straight out of business profits? Some form of insurance scheme? Part government assistance? I suppose I should ask over sat Red Alert really, but you guys do analysis, they do propaganda).

  4. vto 4

    12 weeks isnt much but better than nothing. Problem isn’t business absorbing costs such as this, problem is the time it takes to get the cost passed on. As rude as it sounds.

  5. IrishBill 5

    Rex, straight out of business profits. No reason it can’t be put aside in an investment fund over time though.

    vto, three months is a decent period of not having to be on the dole and being able to meet your costs as you normally would while looking for a new job. There’s no reason that the government couldn’t defray the cost to business for redundancies where the worker had more than, say, five years accrued via a tax credit and then phase that out as the cost of the policy fed into the economy over time. It would be a typical tripartite arrangement much like kiwisaver, I’ve not looked into it far enough to approximate the costs but I can’t see how they could be that great once the savings from not paying restart and benefits payments were accounted for.

    • Rex Widerstrom 5.1

      Thanks again IB. I can see how that might cripple small businesses already on the brink if someone doesn’t offer an insurance scheme whereby the premiums are less than one would actually have to set aside to cover the full cost of potential redundancies.

      OTOH it’s an excellent and much-needed idea in principle. No one should be chucked out of a job with nothing more than a “thanks for playing, here’s two weeks wages”, which has happened to me on several occasions.

      I hope it gets through to Select Committee stage so the options can be canvassed, rather than dumped at the first reading on ideological grounds.

    • vto 5.2

      Good to see that the effect on business is being taken into account, as it can’t be ignored. Many costs and impositions get dumped on businesses. It is an easy dumping ground for politicians – example, recently local councils increased levies on developers. They (being the local body politicians) presented the increased costs as being something which the developers would pay, implying that there will be no effect on the public because the developers would be made to pay it out of their profit. Of course the public love hearing that – ‘make them fat cats pay ha ha ha’. That was deceptive in the extreme and if the councils were subject to the Fair TRading Act they would have been instantly in breach.

      No doubt this sort of behaviour will continue, despite its harm and dishonesty.

      • IrishBill 5.2.1

        vto, that’s not in the bill but it’s an option that could be put in the mix if it gets to select committee. Sadly I doubt it will get past the first reading.

      • Armchair Critic 5.2.2

        vto – of course developers don’t pay the levies out of profits, they pass them on to the purchasers of their developments. From that perspective the whole ‘make them fat cats pay’ line is rubbish.
        I know it is a bit of a stretch from a minimum redundancy bill to developers levies, but I have to ask, do you think ratepayers should subsidise all, some or none of the extra costs that are generated by development?

  6. vto 6

    Tell you a funny thing mr critic.

    The line spun by the local body politicians here in this corner of NZ was that development is great and the whole community benefits through having a more vibrant city, increased population, greater job opportunities and investment, etc. The mayor and others went on and on about this, as they do in most centres. You know – get more people coming to the area. Grow, populate, advance, more cosmopolitan, etc etc. So the entire theme, promoted by the pollies themselves, was that development and increased population is something which benefits the entire existing community. Which it does.

    So then some costs come along. Uh oh, dont want to upset the constituency. Politicians then start parroting that those who benefit should pay the costs they impose. Now of course they CHANGE their definition of who it is that benefits – all of a sudden it is only developers who benefit. Not the wider community, the existing community, the future community, not anymore – all their previous statements turn out to be hollow deceptions (lies). So they present a falsehood, claim it is only the developers who benefit, and lump 100% of those costs onto them.

    Bloody deceitful Councillors.

    Getting to your exact question – those who benefit should pay. It is partly the entire existing community as outlined above and partly the developer and partly the new resident and partly the residents that will follow. So the costs should be spread across those groups – which includes existing and future ratepayers and the developers.

    • Armchair Critic 6.1

      Thanks vto. I’ve always favoured splitting the costs between the purchasers of the development and the existing ratepayers. No one seems to have worked out how to split the costs (I think it varies from place to place) and do it in a transparent manner and politically acceptable way.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Government's response to preliminary referendums' results
    Minister of Justice Andrew Little has acknowledged the provisional results of the two referendums voted on in the 2020 General Election. New Zealanders were asked whether they supported the proposed Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill, and whether they supported the End of Life Choice Act 2019 coming into force. On ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    22 hours ago
  • New testing requirements for international maritime crew arriving in NZ
    The Government is moving to provide further protection against the chance of COVID-19 entering New Zealand through the maritime border.  “Yesterday I instructed officials to consult with the maritime sector around tightening of the requirements for international maritime crew entering the country,” Health Minister Chris Hipkins said.  “Ultimately, this will ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    24 hours ago
  • Fast-tracked Northland water project will accelerate economic recovery
    The Government has welcomed the decision to approve a new water storage reservoir in Northland, the first of a number of infrastructure projects earmarked for a speedy consenting process that aims to accelerate New Zealand’s economic recovery from Covid-19.  The Matawii Water Storage Reservoir will provide drinking water for Kaikohe, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Tokelau Language Week reminds us to stay united and strong
    Staying strong in the face of challenges and being true to our heritage and languages are key to preserving our cultural identity and wellbeing, is the focus of the 2020 Tokelau Language Week. Minister for Pacific Peoples, Aupito William Sio, says this year’s theme, ‘Apoapo tau foe, i nā tāfea ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • NZ announces a third P-3 deployment in support of UN sanctions
    The Government has deployed a Royal New Zealand Air Force P-3K2 Orion (P-3) maritime patrol aircraft to support the implementation of United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions imposing sanctions against North Korea, announced Minister of Foreign Affairs Winston Peters and Minister of Defence Ron Mark. “New Zealand has long supported ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Pacific trade and development agreement a reality
    Pacific regional trade and development agreement PACER Plus will enter into force in 60 days now that the required eight countries have ratified it. Trade and Export Growth Minister David Parker welcomed the announcement that the Cook Islands is the eighth nation to ratify this landmark agreement. “The agreement represents ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Securing a pipeline of teachers
    The Government is changing its approach to teacher recruitment as COVID-19 travel restrictions continue, by boosting a range of initiatives to get more Kiwis into teaching. “When we came into Government, we were faced with a teacher supply crisis,” Education Minister Chris Hipkins said. “Over the past three years, we ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 weeks ago
  • Border exceptions for a small number of international students with visas
    The Government has established a new category that will allow 250 international PhD and postgraduate students to enter New Zealand and continue their studies, in the latest set of border exceptions. “The health, safety and wellbeing of people in New Zealand remains the Government’s top priority. Tight border restrictions remain ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 weeks ago
  • First COVID-19 vaccine purchase agreement signed
    The Government has signed an agreement to purchase 1.5 million COVID-19 vaccines – enough for 750,000 people – from Pfizer and BioNTech, subject to the vaccine successfully completing all clinical trials and passing regulatory approvals in New Zealand, say Research, Science and Innovation Minister Megan Woods and Health Minister Chris Hipkins. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 weeks ago
  • International statement – End-to-end encryption and public safety
    We, the undersigned, support strong encryption, which plays a crucial role in protecting personal data, privacy, intellectual property, trade secrets and cyber security.  It also serves a vital purpose in repressive states to protect journalists, human rights defenders and other vulnerable people, as stated in the 2017 resolution of the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 weeks ago
  • Ministry of Defence Biodefence Assessment released
    The Ministry of Defence has today released a Defence Assessment examining Defence’s role across the spectrum of biological hazards and threats facing New Zealand. Biodefence: Preparing for a New Era of Biological Hazards and Threats looks at how the NZDF supports other agencies’ biodefence activities, and considers the context of ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 weeks ago