web analytics

Are you worth less this year?

Written By: - Date published: 10:40 am, September 21st, 2009 - 42 comments
Categories: Unions, wages, workers' rights - Tags:

Right now, spurred on by the hypocritical words of Bill English and John Key, employers in the public and private sectors are saying they can only offer a 0% pay increase this year – and many are trying to cut conditions like redundancy and overtime.

0% is a pay cut. The cost of living went up 1.9% last year. If your wages don’t go up that much, you’re going backwards.

What you’ve got to ask yourself is ‘am I worth less than I was last year?’

I bet few of you answered ‘yes’. Most of us are probably more productive for each hour worked than we were last year. So why should we be paid less?

Don’t fall for the ‘we’re in the middle of a recession’ bollocks. You’re producing as much wealth as you were last year, probably more, therefore, you have the right to at least as much pay in real terms. Anyway, I keep hearing the recession is over already so they can’t keep trying to use that excuse to hold us down.

It’s not like asking for a cost of living adjustment is going to break the bank. The companies’ and the government’s revenues go up with inflation, why shouldn’t your wages?

Besides, as long as Bill English is allowed to stuff his pockets with allowances worth the the same as a typical workers’ total income, which he isn’t even eligible for, I don’t see why we shouldn’t get a basic cost of living adjustment. It’s only fair.

The good news is that the unions are winning at least cost of living adjustments. The Police Association just won 2% in arbitration (that is, a court decided they had the better case asking for 2% than the government did arguing for 0%). That has opened the door for other public servants to demand the same. In the private sector, too, the workers who have stood strong and said 0% isn’t good enough are getting more. The Metals MECA, which covers thousands of workers across hundreds of small manufacturing businesses, recently settled for 2% plus redundancy protections.

But it doesn’t happen by magic. Left to their own devices, the bosses will give you 0% and tell you you’re lucky to have a job. If you want more, if you think you’re worth as much as or more than you were last year, you’re only going to get it as a member of your union.

42 comments on “Are you worth less this year? ”

  1. Jasper 1

    I’ve heard the following in use to argue for a payrise, and is actually quite good as it has resulted in several pay rises being granted to people I know who were previously faced with 0%.

    “Economic circumstances may have changed, but business practices haven’t. Ergo, the business practices being followed must still be dictated which includes minimum pay rises, as CEOs and senior managers are still receiving pay rises, along with the company increasing prices in line with inflation”

    A bit hard to argue justification for 0% to lesser employees with that certain statement being presented to employers.

    fwiw: I don’t think the recession is over – yet – as Wednesdays figures may yet still be negative. I do think that there is a lot of “talk up” taking place to encourage consumers to spend as this will get us out of the recession faster.

  2. Greg 2

    I think this post highlights the difference in mentality between the employee and the employer. The employer expects the employee to be constantly improving, when they improve over and above this expectation they generally receive a pay rise. The employee on the other hand, expects a pay rise for any improvement made. You see the difference?

    • snoozer 2.1

      So, you’re saying that if I produce as much this year as last I should get paid less? And the boss keeps the difference? Because that’s what happens if I get 0%.

  3. ieuan 3

    I think ‘am I worth less than I was last year?’ is the wrong question.

    The right question is ‘is it acceptable to have a decrease in my standard of living?’.

    The effects of the recession are not even across all sectors of the economy so the ability to pay an increase will depend on the performance of the particular industry the person is employed in.

    • snoozer 3.1

      No. I’m still producing as much wealth as last year, why should I get a smaller right to consume wealth? (money of course is a right to consume production)

      • Rob A 3.1.1

        Sorry but no. A good friend of mine works for one of the smaller dairy companies (no OCC!!!) making milk powder. They way the prices have collapsed means that he is making no where near as much wealth as he was 12 months ago.

        • snoozer

          He’s still producing the same amount of milk powder isn’t he?

          • Rob A

            Sure he is, if not more. But its worth far less, thus he’s creating less wealth for the company. They have had a pay freeze this year but by the sounds of it people there understand the situation and are willing to take the long term view and hope the companies promises to see them right when things pick up are true.

            • snoozer

              Your mate could hope the company sees him right, rather than just pocketing the money in the good years and cutting his wages in the bad years. Or, your mate and his coworkers should agree a collective with the employer that has pay increase (perhaps contingent on higher prices) written into it.

              The company is still making a profit (it is, all the dairy producers are), so why should your mate get poorer?

              The company took the lion’s share of the boom in prices, it can absorb the lower prices now, rather than your mate and his family being made poorer for doing the same work.

  4. StephenR 4

    No. I’m still producing as much wealth as last year,

    What if people are buying less of this wealth you’re producing? i.e. the factory you work for is selling less than last year.

    • snoozer 4.1

      well, I’m not in a factory. I still produce as much as last year (more actually)… my level of consumption should equate to my level of production, shouldn’t it? I mean that’s how you justify million dollar salaries for CEOs, because they ‘create’ so much wealth.

      So, if I’m producing the same wealth I should get to consume the same wealth and that means a cost of living adjustment to my wages.

  5. Scribe 5


    That’s the question some people are unwilling to answer.

    If a company is making less money because of a recession, how is it going to pay its staff the same — or more, if there are demands for pay increases — as it did last year? It’s just not possible for small businesses, which hire the majority of Kiwis but are making small profits in good times.

    • snoozer 5.1

      actually, most Kiwis are employed by a small number of large employers. http://www.med.govt.nz/templates/MultipageDocumentPage____3187.aspx SME’s make up the largest number of employers but they employee relatively few people each (by definition). Operations like Air NZ, Telecom, the Power cos, Fonterra, and biggest of all being the State are the big employers.

      when you get that kind of basic wrong, it kind of blows your entire position.

      The State and most large companies had a nominal increase in income last year and found money for their CEOs, so surely can afford to give their workers a nominal increase in line with inflation.

      • Scribe 5.1.1


        You’ve linked to stats that prove my point, yet you’ve claimed they refute it.

        According to your link, more than half the workforce, i.e. the majority, work in companies with fewer than 50 employees.

        It’s one thing for someone else to make you look silly. You’re doing it all by yourself — making yourself look silly, I mean.

        • snoozer

          SMEs by definition have 20 or fewer workers. Christ, how can we have a conversation when you don’t even know this stuff?

          • Scribe

            Really? Try telling that to the New Zealand Centre for Small and Medium Enterprises Research


            in New Zealand, our 350,000 or so SMEs make up more than 99% of all businesses and account for about 60% of employment. The SME sector broadly covers micro-enterprises (fewer than 5 staff), small enterprises (6-49) and medium enterprises (50-100)

            Is this a common occurrence, you embarrassing yourself? Two attempts to discredit what I’ve said only to make yourself look stupid.

            Own goal. Epic fail. Call it what you like.

            Leave the grown-ups to talk about how businesses actually work rather than trying to financially cripple the employers who keep this country prosperous.

            • snoozer

              Personally, I go with the official definitions:

              “Defined, in New Zealand, as enterprises with fewer than 20 employees, SMEs account for 96 percent of enterprises, 30 percent of employment and 38 percent of output. The average SME has four to five employees.”

              It’s not surprising that an SME research centre, whose whole existence is premised on making SMEs sound important, would use the broadest definition it could make up. It is surprising you got suckered in when the official definition is so easy to find.

  6. Shane 6

    Great piece!

    I would just add to the end of it something like “And if you’re a freeloader, you’re like that person who always goes to parties but never brings any drink (or a plate if guests are asked to bring one!).

  7. SJ Hawkins 7

    You are suggesting that “The companies’ and the government’s revenues go up with inflation, why shouldn’t your wages?”
    In respect of private companies, what if their revenues fall for any reason? By your logic are you suggesting workers should take a pay cut in that scenario? Because if you’re not then you’re advocating a ratchet effect that means wage to revenue ratios can only ever go up and not down.

    • snoozer 7.1

      This is about nominal increases in wages to reflect nominal increases in the cost of living and in the prices which employers get for the products you produce as a worker. It’s not a real terms increase.

  8. Galeandra 8

    Let’s inflate prices/earnings/bonuses and deflate worker’s salaries and expectations. Japan tried this and it worked a treat in the 90’s so surely we should try it? Soon we’ll all be able to afford crayfish,oysters and cheese again.

  9. Pascal's bookie 9

    It isn’t even Alanis ironical that when John Key said he’d love to see wages drop, there were folks a plenty saying that it was obviously a mistake because no one could possibly mean that.

    And yet, and yet. When discussing the exact secnario John was responding to, all of a sudden a drop in real wages is the obvious place for the burden to fall, and it’s just silly old class warfare or whatever to suggest otherwise.

    • felix 9.1

      …it was obviously a mistake because no one could possibly mean that.

      It occurred to me at the time – and does again now – that the inability to parse Key’s statement was/is either a testament to the naivety or the altruism of the kiwi psyche.

      It offends our sense of altruism to think anyone would want wages to drop, but it’s naivety if we didn’t realise that it depends whether you’re the one paying the wages or the one earning them.

      Key meant exactly what he said and he’s proving it every day. If anyone is still in any doubt about his choice of words then it’s beyond naivety.

  10. Gordon Shumway 10

    Typically, Eddie forgets that the labour market is exactly that, a market.

    The reason why wages will not rise is that there is excess supply of labour and decreased demand for it.

    The productivity issues have less of an impact on the cost of labour. If you think you’re being undervalued, then piss of somewhere else where you get appreciated fully, you poor baby. Even better, go set up a business and pay everyone what you believe “true value” to be.

    If current “underpaid” employees want to take the risk of throwing themselves on the job market, then perhaps that will pay off with an increased salary. On the other hand, it might also be a lot of wasted (and unremunerated) effort going to job interviews, etc.

    It’s that simple: supply and demand. In a recession, most people are happy to stay employed. My pay has not risen for at all for 18 months now and I consider myself fortunate.

    • snoozer 10.1

      I don’t think anyone’s forgetting that the labour market is a market but the point is that if you want fair pay you need bargaining power.

      As an individual worker, you’re effectively a supplier in perfect competition – a price taker, which allows employers to set wages at the lowest rate which will get them the amount of labour they need.

      By unionising, you stop being a price taker and get to bargain instead, using the pooled power of you and your workmate’s ability to withdraw your labour. Rather than the compnay getting to hold the maximum amount of profits, it instead has to share with you and you get a fairer return for your labour (what’s fair? an income that allows you to supply a decent quality of living for you and your family in return for a decent day’s work, that’s unlikely to be the minimum that the boss can get away with paying you).

      • Gordon Shumway 10.1.1

        I don’t disagree with a word you’re saying about unionising and the way it increases bargaining power. I certainly wasn’t posting against unions or their efforts for workers.

        I am, nevertheless, still amazed that Eddie – who I assume based on previous posts is or has been active in unions and therefore plays a role in the direction of negitiations – believes that pay must always rise no matter what or else it’s an indication that the worker is getting screwed.

        Eddie’s commentary is always high on rhetoric and devoid of analysis. Seriously, WTF does Bill English have to do with the issue of whether worker salaries should automatically rise even in a recession? It’s populist ranting without any sort of substance at all.

        The world is a changeable place and, frankly, almost everyone has taken a hit in recent times.

        The mantra should be – suck it in, work hard, keep your job.

  11. BLiP 11

    My pay has not risen for at all for 18 months now and I consider myself fortunate.

    So – the answer to the question posed by the post, in your case, is Yes. You’ll be pleased, then, to know that’s there plenty more coming for you to be grateful for.

    • Gordon Shumway 11.1

      No BLiP. I am not necessarily “worth less” or “worth more”, but I’m sensible enough to know that my “worth” is affected by wider business conditions (if by “worth” you mean whether or not I get a payrise this year).

      There’s been a recession on, you know. My employer is making significantly less money than in previous years. If I think that doesn’t affect my pay, then I am an idiot.

      I am not stupid enough to use my salary (or last salary rise) as any sort of indication of my inherent “worth”, my productivity, or indeed how well I’m doing the particular job I’m currently employed in.

      My salary reflects what the employer was prepared to pay for me when I was first offered a job, together with any rises that they’ve given me to stop me looking elsewhere.

      • Maynard J 11.1.1

        If you do not think your salary was not offered (when you were first offered a job) based upon your productivity then what exactly do you think your employer is basing your pay on?

        Are you really trying to deny any causal link between wokplace productivity and wages?

        “I am not stupid enough to use my salary (or last salary rise) as any sort of indication of my inherent “worth”

        So a salary is not what you are worth, but what your employer pays.

        A bottle of coke is not “worth” $2.50, but that just happens, by coincidence, to be what is paid for it? In this case, the price is determined not by supply and demand, but by the perceived utility to the buyer. Why do you not think this is the case with the labour market (with a few more complications…

        I think that in your haste to dish out childish barbs to BLIP you left your sense at the door.

        • Gordon Shumway

          Maynard – Productivity is not a “cause” of salaries for any particular job. The “cause” is a bunch of employers offering a particular pay and enough employers accepting it.

          When my employer offers my starting salary they have no idea what my ACTUAL level of productivity will be. They have a maximum limit that they can pay which is influenced by expected productivity of course, but ultimately they will pay the lowest amount below that max cap at which I will accept the job.

          Thereafter, raises are of course influenced by productivity gains (i.e. the “cap” amount will rise if productivity rises), but raises will always remain influenced by whether or not they still need ME to do the job.

          Finally, to answer your questions:

          Yes, if i am “producing the same” but being paid “less” (because world prices have risen), I can still be grateful.


          Because instead of looking only at those who get paid more than me (or who have been lucky enough to get pay rises despite the recession), I look at people who are unfortunate enough to be without jobs, or live in the third world, or whatever, WHILE THE WORLD IS IN A FUCKING RECESSION. It’s not a zero sum game. I don’t have to “improve” every year of keep up with every other player in the market economy. It’s foolhardy to try and do so.

          I realise, however, that my pay depends ENTIRELY on whether or not I work for a profitable business. If my employer suffers too many months without profit, then I have get NOTHING no matter how “productive” I am willing to be. My job isn’t a question of theorectical productivity – it’s a question of whether my ACTUAL employer remains solvent during this ACTUAL recession.

          You guys are fuitloops running the line (as you appear to be doing) that the recession should not affect your current pay. It is not a “fallacy”, it’s totally obvious.

          And BLiP, I am certainly not spineless — are you another batshit stupid, whining grinder whose envy and lack of perspective guarantee you a life of underachievement?

        • Gordon Shumway

          Maynard – In your example, you’ve allowed the “worth”/price of the Coke to be determined by supply and demand, but you’re not letting the same happen for the “worth”/price of labour.

          For labour, you want to set the “worth”/price based on what the end-user (i.e. the employer) gets out of it (or the “employer’s productivity”).

          That’s like saying the price of the Coke should be determined by its deliciousness, is it not?

          • Maynard J

            “In your example, you’ve allowed the “worth’/price of the Coke to be determined by supply and demand, but you’re not letting the same happen for the “worth’/price of labour.”

            I said the exact opposite, read again.

            “For labour, you want to set the “worth’/price based on what the end-user (i.e. the employer) gets out of it (or the “employer’s productivity’).

            That’s like saying the price of the Coke should be determined by its deliciousness, is it not?”

            Ditto. Supply and demand are economic concepts that are actually fairly well removed from everyday transactions – they form a simplistic concept from which economic realities are elucidated.

            Despite your attempt to patronise me by reducting a concept such as marginal utility down to a frivolous term (deliciousness), that is exactly what is going on. Where do you think demand comes from?

            Now, remove that preconception of my idea, reapply the actual idea to your assessment of the labour market and you might start to get a view closer to reality, and more removed from a simplistic theory-based view that is not worth the bandwidth it took to type it out. (hint – it is not just supply and demand)

            I do not know when you started addressing BLIP, but can only assume it is before the questions, since they bear no semblance to anything I asked.

            And quit the shouting please – I know you think we are idiots, yet we manage to retain some sense of decorum.

            Regarding the general idea of the post – the main idea to take out of it is that the recession is too easily used as an excuse, and that is not right. For example, dividend payouts are remaining steady, yet wages are falling, and unemployment is increasing – what does that tell you?

            Why should workers suck it all up – you have some choice vulgarities to dispense to BLIP but you seem to be the one happy to get on your knees and kowtow your betters. Show a bit of spine and you might not have to wait 18 months for the next pay rise. Given you have shown yourself to be so ‘flexible’, it may just be longer than that. I am not going to take no for an answer like you are happy to, but hey, maybe I am just another batshit stupid envious underachiever.

            • Gordon Shumway

              Maynard – I know what marginal utility is, thanks. An economics education is not that unusual.

              The inherent “worth” of Coke is demonstrated by what consumers are prepared to pay (and Coke Co is prepared to sell) in the then-prevailing circumstances. You don’t come up with a scale showing “enjoyment”. Price tells us what the buyer values the enjoyment at. The same applies to labour.

              How is marginal utility of labour demonstrated if not through what the employer pays the next new employee through the door? Marginal utility doesn’t “set” demand for a coke. It’s a way of measuring what people will pay for the Coke by trying to put a $ value on their enjoyment. Their enjoyment (and demand for Coke) depends on millions of frankly unmeasurable things happening in the market – hot.cold day? advertising? competitor availability (Pepsi)? fashion? etc.

              The original post focuses on one tiny aspect affecting labour market (i.e. worker productivity) and ignores all the others. That’s batty.

              You guys are ones getting it back to front and saying “I believe I am ‘producing more’ now so I am automatically entitled to get a pay rise” (totally ignoring the context of the surrounding market conditions, which do affect the employer’s assessment of ulitity from additional labour).

              Two situations:

              1. Jobseeker A, in a red-hot growth phase of the economy, turns down $15 an hour because he knows he has three other offers at $16.

              2. Jobseeker B, with his mortgage costs rising, knowing that no-one else is hiring, is offered $14 an hour and happily takes it, because if he stays unemployed then he loses his house.

              Eddie’s post, together with many of the supportive comments, seem to be trying to argue against the obvious – circumstances matter. The circumstances at present are a fucking great big recession.

              So I stick by what I say. Firstly, your own assessment of your own “productivity” means three fifths of jack sh1t in terms of setting pay. Secondly, wider economic conditions certainly play a part because they impact on each party’s decisionmaking in deciding at what price to buy/sell labour. And finally, anyone who believes it’s lack of “spine” to aggressively seek payrises in a depressed economy needs psychiactric help.

              Finally, if you read back my first response to BLiP, you won’t find any vulgarities at all. No need to play white knight I’m sure BLiP can look after himself after starting the name-calling.

              [Use of CAPS is obviously not shouting – intended for emphasis of particular words to help clarity.]

            • Maynard J

              Learn Internet, Gordon. Caps is shouting. I can read without your emphasis, though if you really need to you could learn to use basic HTML tags. And while you are at it, again, learn some common decency. It is possible to have a conversation without inferring that people have mental issues, are inferior to you, are losers. It is just plain obnoxious, and makes you look like someone old enough to know better with the king complex of a toddler.

              Speaking of ignoring the wider conditions, why do you insist upon using the recession as the only relevant factor when you are talking about wage or salary increases? If ‘the left’ is blinded by only looking at productivity, at least it is a reference to something directly relevant to their income, as opposed to some blanket cop-out of an excuse that you are using (or your employer has on you).

              And I am not “aggressively seek[ing] payrises in a depressed economy” as you put it (where does this anger come from?), not taking no for an answer eans wanting a decent reason, not ‘there’s a recession’. So what – has that affected where I work for? Have dividends dropped? What about leadership payrises? That is more relevant.

            • Quoth the Raven

              Gordon – I recommend this:

              Those small words, in the free market, are most important because without them, the argument fails and is utterly false. Can it really be “voluntary’ to choose only from shitty jobs in a regulated economy where most work options have been made unavailable and a job is necessary to generate monetary income to pay taxes? I say it is not. Even if you make the choices yourself, it cannot be considered a voluntary choice to pick a least bad option from the options remaining within a suffocating framework of coercive measures.

              Of course, the choice itself is voluntary and in that sense the rationalist logic seems applicable. But the choice is still made in an environment where most choices have been coercively done away with and where the chooser is restricted from making the choices he or she should have made were it a free market. It is like saying you have free speech only you cannot speak of X, Y, Z or A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J and K. That is not free speech it is regulated speech, and what you choose to speak of necessarily depends on what you aren’t allowed to speak of.

              Free market arguments are simply not applicable to the real world as it is. They are only applicable as arguments for the superior functions and mechanisms of the free market. And the free market itself is a great standard to which the real economy can and should be assessed to make clear its inefficiencies and injustices as well as providing an outstanding alternative. You cannot, however, make your own mix of the two; using free market logic to argue for low salaries and bad working conditions in contemporary state economy is simply a mistake.

            • Gordon Shumway

              Maynard – stop being so precious. In your first contribution to this stream you said I had “left my sense at the door”, so you’ve got no grounds to at to start playing at being pious. You dish out the insults so often you don’t realise you’re doing it and your writing style is one of the most pompous and condescending around here. Perhaps I thought speaking your language might help the message get through?

              You’re giving up now on the economics and concentrating solely on playing the man. So I don’t know to write Italics – bite me.

              You’re not even trying to understand the arguments now. I am not using the recession as the ONLY factor in setting wages. I am strongly arguing against a position that seems widely supported on here, which is that the impact of a recession is a “fallacy”. Eddie’s post in based on the premise that “productivity” is somehow the main (or determining) factor in setting wages. That’s clearly and demonstrably wrong, no matter how hard you try to argue the toss.

              It’s also, I would have thought, a dangerous position for the Left to take. Do you really believe, when there’s a renewed demand for labour, it would benefit workers if the economic orthodoxy was that wages should rise with productivity increases?

              Recession is of course only one factor when employers consider how much labour to take on and what they are willing to pay for it, but it’s a pretty fucking big factor and should be recognised as such. We’ll have to agree to disagree because you continue to miss the basic point – “there’s a recession on” IS a decent reason when employers decide not to hire new labour or pay more for existing labour.

              Where does my anger come from? You base that on what, use of the word “aggressive” on an internet forum? What a stupid statement. There’s absolutely no anger on my part – as I said up front I am delighted to remain in paid employment in the current environment and regard myself as fortunate. It’s you guys who want me to be angry with my employer or feeling as if I am “worth” less now that previously. A little understanding of context means my life is full and rewarding still (absence of payrises notwithstanding), though I have genuine sympathy for those who have lost their income or careers entirely.

              (QTR – I’ve read your quote a couple of times but I’ll happily admit when out of my depth. Based on previous exchanges we’ve had, I think you have an anarchist bent (?) so appreciate your arguments that the whole capitalist system is broken. At least you are – or appear to be – consistent!)

            • Maynard J

              “and your writing style is one of the most pompous and condescending around here. ”

              No Gordon, what happens is that I mirror the style of the person I am conversing with. So I am gladdened to see you interpret the style as pompous and condecending – you are spot on with regards to the effect I am trying to achieve. At least you can get that right, even if only by accident and a thorough inability to identify your style when you see it. (I have a mental image of a bird flying into a mirror here)

              “You’re giving up now on the economics and concentrating solely on playing the man. ”

              False, you are just choosing to ignore my points and revert back to the original post.

              “Recession is of course only one factor when employers consider how much labour to take on and what they are willing to pay for it, but it’s a pretty fucking big factor and should be recognised as such. We’ll have to agree to disagree because you continue to miss the basic point “there’s a recession on’ IS a decent reason when employers decide not to hire new labour or pay more for existing labour. ”

              The recession is the only thing you have mentioned here until you made that statement above, so forgive me for trying to make the point, several times in fact, that there is more to it. Consider:

              “There’s been a recession on, you know. My employer is making significantly less money than in previous years.”

              “It’s that simple: supply and demand. In a recession, most people are happy to stay employed.”

              “The world is a changeable place and, frankly, almost everyone has taken a hit in recent times.

              The mantra should be suck it in, work hard, keep your job.”

              “I look at people who are unfortunate enough to be without jobs, or live in the third world, or whatever, WHILE THE WORLD IS IN A FUCKING RECESSION. ”

              “And finally, anyone who believes it’s lack of “spine’ to aggressively seek payrises in a depressed economy needs psychiactric help.”

              “The circumstances at present are a fucking great big recession.”

              I wonder where I got the idea that the recession is the only factor you seem to mention, while I am talking about just considering all the other factors that might be involved when discussing a pay increase, or lack thereof.

              Like as not, Gordon, and yes, agree to disagree, but I believe you are a sap if you accept that reasoning without question. And that, incidentally, is where I disagree with the original post. Some may be producing less, where demand has slumped, and then you have a reason for a pay cut or no increase – because you are doing less! That would be the hypothetical reason, not the recession.

              If you are working just as hard, producing just as much and your employer’s financial situation is relatively static then perhaps you might want a better explanation than the recession.

              “Where does my anger come from? You base that on what, use of the word “aggressive’ on an internet forum?”

              Just your general demeanour, Gordon. But I am ready to realise that you may be an entirely amicable fellow, aspects of performance here notwithstanding, so I will withdraw that.

              P.S. caps is universally interpreted as shouting but I appreciate that was not the case earlier. If you want to drop in italics and such, try looking here for some pointers.

              P.P.S. an excerpt from your first comment: “If you think you’re being undervalued, then piss of somewhere else where you get appreciated fully, you poor baby.” It was not all sunshine and roses and level-headed charm, was it Gordon? ‘Leaving sense at the door’ seems a positively benign comment, in consideration.

            • Gordon Shumway

              Maynard – that doesn’t wash, sorry. You’re missing half of what I write and selectively quoting. Whether intentionally or not, I have no idea. Perhaps the red eye patch is in the way? 🙂

              I’ve of course made repeated references to the recession because you are arguing that it is irrelevant, or a “fallacy”. It’s hard to refute that without referring to “recession” once or twice. While the vast majority of what you’ve quoted back at me is insightful, elegantly expressed and obviously right, it’s only fair to point out that I also said:

              “The original post focuses on one tiny aspect affecting labour market (i.e. worker productivity) and ignores all the others. That’s batty.”

              “So I stick by what I say. Firstly, your own assessment of your own “productivity’ means three fifths of jack sh1t in terms of setting pay. Secondly, wider economic conditions certainly play a part because they impact on each party’s decisionmaking in deciding at what price to buy/sell labour.”

              “my “worth’ is affected by wider business conditions (if by “worth’ you mean whether or not I get a payrise this year).” [wider business conditions can go up, or down, Maynard…]

              And I gave the example of two different jobseekers, one of whom would be “happy” with a lower “worth” than the other (You’ve ignored this example, btw, even though it’s the absolute essense of what we’re talking about since it’s behaviour that’s being repeated over and over again in NZ. Recessions have an impact on how both employers and employees negotiate salaries – far more of an impact than theoretical analysis, after the fact, of what worker “productivity” has been).

              If you want to know what a “fallacy” is, it’s the bit where you believe you are “producing” the same as you did previously solely because you punch in and out at the same time each day and do roughly the same job as last year. There’s a whole host of ways I can show you that’s mistaken/irrelevant. But if, even before getting into that issue, you really believe a global recession is irrelevant to the wage/salary growth, I cannot be arsed.

              As a hint, it involves the fact that (a) workers “produce” absolutely nothing independently – the good/service is “produced” by the entity that employs you, using its own machinery, infrastructure, borrowings, electricity, marketing, management, distribution networks, etc., together with YOUR labour. The costs of all of these inputs can go up and down, affecting the cost-per-unit-produced; and (b) in running a business, confidence today about tomorrow’s sales affects how much product businesses manufacture/stockpile now. Think about what might happen in a recession and take it from there yourself.

              Believe me, as a leftie you do not want productivity as the sole (or even main) determinant of wage increases. When good times return, the labour demanded by healthy growing companies, together with strong union advocacy on behalf of workers, will see wage growth at far greater rates than “productivity” gains per worker. Thank god no one who really knows economics believes the “theory” in the original post (or so strongly supported by you) represents any sort of orthodoxy.

              And finally, “aspects of your perfomance here notwithstanding”*, I’ll assume you’re not a pompous twat.

              * even though use of phrases like that makes it incredibly hard to do so.

            • Maynard J

              Ok I will drop the act. Yep we are essentially arguing the same thing here, maybe I am just a bit more wary of motives when employers claim recession – some have dne fairly well out of it, and others not suffered too badly. Not that I was aound at the time, but it really pales compared to the Great Depression, yet that is what it is being compared to. I suspect some are talking it up, but in doing so have made it seem relatively minor.

              In the end all we have discussed happens almost without reference to the recession – unless your hours start dropping, or you are asked to take some unpaid leave or so on. And yes, as in your example – people may settle for a lower paying job than they would hope for due lack of choice.

              If anything is wrong with the original post, it is that if you are in an industry measured by prodictivity – i.e. a primary or secondary industry, you probably will be producing less, because there is less needed to be produced. If you are working just as hard, then either ‘productivity’ is not a relative measure to your role, or your business has not been affected.

      • BLiP 11.1.2

        Scrambling behind an attempt to redfine the terms of the argument might work on Melmac, but not here. Who’s talking about your inherent worth or your productivity or indeed your career. You’ve simply fallen for the fallacy: “we’re in the middle of a recession bollocks” – perhaps you didn’t read the whole post?

        Simple fact is, you are producing the same – or more – amount of wealth that you were producing last year but now your own income will purchase less. And you’re grateful for it? Employee of the month, are you, or just yet another spineless wimp willing to take whatever shit the boss hands you for lunch? Suck it up, slave.

        • Gordon Shumway

          Reply is above to Maynard. No attempt to redefine argument at all.

          “Worth” is what my employer is prepared to pay. When times are tough, employers aren’t prepared (or able) to pay as much.

          The salary is influenced, or course, by productivity. Productivity puts an upper cap on what employer will pay. However, of greater importance is whether my ACTUAL emplyer remains solvent during an ACTUAL recession.

          What I reject is the Left’s effort to redefine basic economic concepts in order to try and support ill-timed claims for wage and salary increases.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Cost of Government Southern Response proactive package released
    The Government has announced the proactive package for some Southern Response policyholders could cost $313 million if all those eligible apply. In December, the Minister Responsible for the Earthquake Commission, David Clark announced a proactive package for SRES claimants who settled their claims before October 2014. It trailed the judgment ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 hours ago
  • New support to reduce emissions from public building and construction projects
    Government agencies are getting new support to reduce carbon emissions generated by construction of new buildings, with the release of practical guidance to shape decisions on public projects. The Ministers for Building and Construction and for Economic Development say a new Procurement Guide will help government agencies, private sector suppliers, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    9 hours ago
  • He Whenua Taurikura: New Zealand’s first Hui on Countering Terrorism and Violent Extremism
    The Prime Minister has opened New Zealand’s first hui on Countering Terrorism and Violent Extremism, which is being held in Christchurch over the next two days. The hui delivers on one of the recommendations from the report of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the terrorist attack on Christchurch masjidain ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    10 hours ago
  • Speech to inaugural Countering Terrorism Hui
    E aku nui, e aku rahi, Te whaka-kanohi mai o rātou mā, Ru-ruku-tia i runga i te ngākau whakapono, Ru-ruku-tia i runga i te ngākau aroha, Waitaha, Ngāti Mamoe, Ngai Tahu, nāu rā te reo pohiri. Tena tātou katoa. Ki te kotahi te kakaho ka whati, ki te kapuia, e ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    10 hours ago
  • Campaign shines a light on elder abuse
    A new campaign is shining a spotlight on elder abuse, and urging people to protect older New Zealanders. Launched on World Elder Abuse Awareness Day, the Office for Seniors’ campaign encourages friends, whānau and neighbours to look for the signs of abuse, which is often hidden in plain sight. “Research suggests ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    13 hours ago
  • Farewelling sports administrator and philanthropist Sir Eion Edgar
    Sport and Recreation Minister Grant Robertson today expressed his sorrow at the passing of Sir Eion Edgar – a leading sports administrator and celebrated philanthropist who has made a significant impact both within and beyond the sport sector. “Sir Eion’s energy, drive and generosity has been truly immense. He leaves ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Government to apologise for Dawn Raids
    The Government will make a formal apology for the wrongs committed during the Dawn Raids of the 1970’s. Between 1974 and 1976, a series of rigorous immigration enforcement policies were carried out that resulted in targeted raids on the homes of Pacific families. The raids to find, convict and deport overstayers ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Humanitarian support for Bangladesh and Myanmar
    Foreign Affairs Minister Nanaia Mahuta today announced that New Zealand is providing NZ $8.25 million in humanitarian assistance to support refugees and their host populations in Bangladesh and to support humanitarian need of internally displaced and conflict affected people in Myanmar.  “Nearly four years after 900,000 Rohingya crossed the border ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Poroporoaki: Dame Georgina Kamiria Kirby
    E Te Kōkō Tangiwai, Te Tuhi Mareikura, Te Kākākura Pokai kua riro i a matou. He toka tū moana ākinga ā tai, ākinga ā hau, ākinga ā ngaru tūātea.  Haere atu rā ki te mūrau a te tini, ki te wenerau a te mano.  E tae koe ki ngā rire ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Feedback sought on future of housing and urban development
    New Zealanders are encouraged to have their say on a long-term vision for housing and urban development to guide future work, the Housing Minister Megan Woods has announced. Consultation starts today on a Government Policy Statement on Housing and Urban Development (GPS-HUD), which will support the long-term direction of Aotearoa ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Clean car package to drive down emissions
    New rebates for electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles start July 1 with up to $8,625 for new vehicles and $3,450 for used. Electric vehicle chargers now available every 75km along most state highways to give Kiwis confidence. Low Emission Transport Fund will have nearly four times the funding by 2023 ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Progress towards simpler process for changing sex on birth certificates
    The Government is taking the next step to support transgender, non-binary and intersex New Zealanders, by progressing the Births, Deaths, Marriages and Relationships Registration Bill, Minister of Internal Affairs, Jan Tinetti announced today. “This Government understands that self-identification is a significant issue for transgender, non-binary and intersex New Zealanders, and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Crown speeds up engagement with takutai moana applicants
    The Crown is taking a new approach to takutai moana applications to give all applicants an opportunity to engage with the Crown and better support the Māori-Crown relationship, Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Minister Andrew Little says. Following discussions with applicant groups, the Crown has reviewed the existing takutai moana application ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment (AODT) Court opens
    The Minister of Justice, Kris Faafoi, and the Minister for Courts, Aupito William Sio, have welcomed the opening of a new Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment (AODT) Court in Hamilton. The AODT Court (Te Whare Whakapiki Wairua) addresses situations where substance abuse and offending are intertwined. “New Zealanders have told ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • EU and UK FTAs top of list for first ministerial trip since COVID-19
    Trade and Export Growth Minister Damien O’Connor today announced details of his planned visit to the United Kingdom and European Union next week, where he will hold trade and agriculture discussions to further New Zealand’s economic recovery from COVID-19. The visit will add political weight to ongoing negotiations with both the EU ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Arihia Bennett to chair Royal Commission Ministerial Advisory Group
    Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu chief executive Arihia Bennett MNZM has been appointed chair of the newly appointed Ministerial Advisory Group on the Government’s Response to the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the terrorist attack on Christchurch mosques. “Twenty-eight people from diverse backgrounds across Aotearoa have been selected for the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Speech to the New Zealand Medical Association General Practitioners' Conference, Rotorua
    Ki ngā pou maha o te whare hauora o Aotearoa, kei te mihiTo the pillars of our health system I acknowledge/thank you Ki te ope hapai hauora o roto o tēnei rūma, kei te mihi To our health force here in the room today, I acknowledge/thank you He taura tangata, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Karangahape Road upgrades are streets ahead
    The upgrades to Karangahape Road makes the iconic street more pedestrian and cycle-friendly, attractive and environmentally sustainable, Transport Minister Michael Wood and Auckland Mayor Phil Goff said at the formal celebration of the completion of the Karangahape Road Enhancements project. The project included widening footpaths supporting a better outdoor dining ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Speech to APEC business event
    E ngā tumu herenga waka, ākina ā ngaru, ākina ā tai ka whakatere ngā waka ki te whakapapa pounamu, otirā, ki Tamaki o ngā waka Tena koutou katoa… To the great leaders assembled, who guided your waka through turbulent times, challenging waters and you continue to navigate your respective waka ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Pause on Quarantine Free Travel with Victoria extended
    Following an assessment of the COVID-19 outbreak in greater Melbourne, New Zealand’s Quarantine Free Travel pause with Victoria will continue for a further seven days, COVID-19 Response Minister Chris Hipkins says. There are now 93 cases associated with the outbreak in greater Melbourne, spread over four clusters. Contact tracing efforts ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Supplier Diversity Aotearoa Summit: Navigate 2021
    *** Check with delivery *** A mihi to all who have contributed to making today a success – starting with you! As you have explored and navigated government procurement today you will hopefully have reflected on the journey of our people so far – and how you can make a ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Pukemiro School to close
    Pukemiro Primary School near Huntly will close following years of declining roll numbers, Education Minister Chris Hipkins announced today. “I’ve consulted with the School Commissioner, and this decision acknowledges the fact that the few remaining students from last term are now settled at other nearby schools. “I want to thank ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Govt acts to protect NZers from harmful content
    New Zealanders will be better protected from harmful or illegal content as a result of work to design a modern, flexible and coherent regulatory framework, Minister of Internal Affairs Jan Tinetti announced today. New Zealand currently has a content regulatory system that is comprised of six different arrangements covering some ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Consultation on exemption of new builds from proposed tax rules
    The Government has today confirmed new builds will be exempt from planned changes to the tax treatment of residential investment property.  Public consultation is now open on details of the proposals, which stop interest deductions being claimed for residential investment properties other than new builds.   “The Government’s goal is to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Speech for Predator Free 2050 Conference
    Introduction E ngā mana E ngā reo E ngā iwi Tēnā koutou katoa   Ka huri ki ngā mana whenua o te rohe nei. Tēnā koutou He mihi hoki ki a tatou kua tau mai nei i raro i te kaupapa o te rā Ko Ayesha Verrall toku ingoa No ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • New stock exchange to help grow small businesses
    A new share trading market, designed as a gateway to the NZX for small-to-medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), has been granted a licence by the Government. Commerce and Consumer Affairs Minister, David Clark said Catalist Markets Ltd will provide a simpler and more affordable ‘stepping stone’ for SMEs to raise capital. “This ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Visa extensions provide certainty to employers and 10,000 visa holders
    Changes to onshore visas will provide employers and visa holders with more certainty, Immigration Minister Kris Faafoi has announced. Around 10,000 Working Holiday visas and Supplementary Seasonal Employment (SSE) work visas due to expire between 21 June 2021 and 31 December 2021 will be extended for another six months to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Border class exceptions approved for more farm workers and vets
    The Government has approved border class exceptions for an additional 200 dairy workers and 50 veterinarians to enter New Zealand, Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor announced today.  “It is clear from conversations with the dairy and veterinarian sectors that they are facing workforce pressures. These border exceptions will go a long ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • More freezers and South Island hub to support vaccine roll-out
    A South Island hub and 17 new ultra-low temperature freezers will help further prepare New Zealand for the ramp up of the vaccination programme in the second half of this year, COVID-19 Response Minister Chris Hipkins says. The new freezers arrived in New Zealand on 27 May. They’re currently being ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Speech at the release of Climate Change Commission's final advice
    Good morning – and thank you Prime Minister. Over the last three and half years we have been putting in place the foundations for a low-carbon Aotearoa that will be a catalyst for job creation, innovation, and prosperity for decades to come. In that future, many of our everyday tasks ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Achievable blueprint for addressing climate change released
    Report says Government making good progress on emissions reduction, but more action required Meeting climate targets achievable and affordable with existing technology Economic cost of delaying action higher than taking action now Benefits from climate action include health improvements and lower energy bills All Ministers to help meet climate targets ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Speech to release of Climate Commission final report
    A few years ago in a speech in Auckland, I compared climate change to the nuclear free movement of roughly four decades ago. And I did so for a few reasons. Firstly, because the movement of the 1980s represented a life or death situation for the Pacific, and so does ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Appointment of Judge of the High Court
    Auckland Barrister Michael Robinson has been appointed a Judge of the High Court, Attorney‑General David Parker announced today. Justice Robinson graduated with a BA and an LLB (Hons) from the University of Auckland in 1996, and commenced practice as a solicitor with Brookfields in Auckland.  In 1998 he travelled to London ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Government takes action to improve protections for subcontractors
    The Construction Contracts (Retention Money) Amendment Bill – which provides greater financial protection for subcontractors, has passed its first reading today. The Bill amends the retention provisions in the Construction Contracts Act 2002 (CCA) to provide increased confidence and transparency for subcontractors that retention money they are owed is safe. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • 1 million more Pfizer doses to arrive in July
    Pfizer has scheduled delivery of an estimated 1 million doses of vaccine to New Zealand during July, COVID1-9 Response Minister Chris Hipkins said today. “These consignments will double the total number of Pfizer doses we have received this year to more than 1,900,000 – enough to fully vaccinate almost 1 ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Long-term home of the Independent Children’s Monitor identified
    The Independent Children’s Monitor (Te Mana Whakamaru Tamariki Motuhake), which is currently located within the Ministry of Social Development (MSD), will become its own departmental agency within Government. “Following the recommendations of several reviews, Cabinet agreed in 2019 to build a significantly expanded independent monitor for children in care,” Carmel ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Racing Integrity Board members announced
    The new Racing Integrity Board will be up and running from July 1 to ensure high standards of animal welfare, integrity and professionalism in the racing industry. Racing Minister Grant Robertson today announced the appointments to the new Board: Sir Bruce Robertson KNZM – Chair Kristy McDonald ONZM QC Penelope ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Govt crackdown on organised crime continues
    A major operation against multiple organised crime groups with international links will make a significant dent in drug harm and violent offending linked to organised crime networks, Police Minister Poto Williams says. “I want to take an opportunity to congratulate the Police for their role in Operation Trojan Shield. This ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Farm planning framework supports farmers into the future
    A new framework, agreed between Government and industry, will make it easier for farmers and growers to integrate future greenhouse gas emissions and freshwater regulatory requirements into their farm planning, Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor said. “The Good Farm Planning Principles Guide out today, provides guidance for how farmers can organise ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Enhanced Task Force Green Approved for Canterbury
    The Government has activated Enhanced Taskforce Green (ETFG) in response to the Canterbury floods. The Minister of Social Development and Employment, Hon Carmel Sepuloni says $500,000 will be made available to help with the clean-up. The flooding in Canterbury has been a significant and adverse event damaging farmland, homes, roads ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago