Employment Relations changes announced

20 comments on “Employment Relations changes announced ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Michael 1

   25 January 2018 at 1:31 pm

   Fire at will remains for 97 percent of all NZ workplaces. A clear win for the bosses, as it is a defeat for vulnerable workers. Business as usual under “Labour”.
   • McFlock 1.1

     25 January 2018 at 1:46 pm

     Because lab+grn < nat+NZ1.

     97% of employers, but 29% of employees. So clear benefit to 70% of employees. Still a turd, but hardly BAU.
   • red-blooded 1.2

     25 January 2018 at 1:54 pm

     I agree that it’s really disappointing that the plan to repeal the 90 days law got diluted. Don’t just dump your anger on Labour, though – this a a Labour-led government, but they need the agreement of all three parties to progress a new law or law change, and in this case the sticking point was NZF. That’s the reality of MMP.

     There are other good things happening, as noted by E Tu and others, but I really wish they’d been able to deliver more fully by repealing this unjust law. I seem to recall findings from MBIE that the 90 days law hadn’t made any appreciable difference to employment despite all the talk about making it less risky to hire new employees.

     Side note, it may be 97% of workplaces, but the percentage of employees employed in workplaces of 20 employees or fewer is 29%. That’s probably a more significant figure when considering the impact of this.
     • indiana 1.2.1

       25 January 2018 at 2:44 pm

       Do you think that small business owners will think twice before expanding their business above 20 employees?
       • red-blooded 1.2.1.1

         25 January 2018 at 2:57 pm

         I doubt it (that would assume that they’ve got very little confidence about their own hiring practices), but if it does, then I guess that’s an issue to take up with NZF.
       • Draco T Bastard 1.2.1.2

         25 January 2018 at 3:33 pm

         I’m pretty sure that most small business owners vote National which is proof that they don’t actually think.
       • infused 1.2.1.3

         26 January 2018 at 12:16 am

         If the law got rejected, we would stop some of our programs, like taking kids straight out of polytech etc.
         • McFlock 1.2.1.3.1

           26 January 2018 at 12:29 am

           What, you can’t handle a trial period where you have to be fair to your employees?

           Or you can’t deal with the concept of fixed term roles targetted at specific projects?

           Or give employees enough rope to hang themselves through the disciplinary process, e.g. an early start time to weed out the partiers?

           Or is it that your job requires skillsets you don’t test for in the recruitment process?
         • Draco T Bastard 1.2.1.3.2

           26 January 2018 at 2:24 am

           Well, what we do know is that the Fire at Will Bill never actually achieved anything that National and all other RWNJs said it would anyway so nobody gives a fuck about your imaginary threats.
2. Son of Don 2

   25 January 2018 at 2:38 pm

   TPPA and 90 day trials all get the thumbs up in the same day. Add to that the backdown on select committees, tree planting BS, previous backdown on CGT etc and this is a party big on rhetoric and not much more. Watch for the new post “Lies from Jacinda”
   • SPC 2.1

     25 January 2018 at 3:07 pm

     And in 2020 there is a CGT in the manifesto and a centrist Labour in place to enact it. And tree planting and Kiwibuild will be at pace by the second term.
   • red-blooded 2.2

     25 January 2018 at 3:07 pm

     “Previous backdown on CGT” – you’re going back a full election cycle to find that one, mate! Plus, note that the 90 days thing has gone for 70% of workers, the 5 issues Labour wanted addressed for TPPS have been addressed (including things the Nats said were impossible but hadn’t even asked about), and the tree planting plan is going ahead.

     Don’t get over-excited, Don!
3. mary_a 3

   25 January 2018 at 2:59 pm

   With the exception of the 90 day trial period, which I was hoping to be completely abolished, I think Labour is on the right track here rectifying the past biased employment law.

   Vicious employment law that encouraged slave labour and workplace abuse, courtesy of Key, English, Joyce et al, will take some time to adjust.

   I’m feeling a little more positive now about future employment relations after reading through this bill. At least it’s pointing in the right direction and is some progression forward.

   Having been a small business employer of two people in the past, my experience was to always treat staff with respect, fairness and consideration, something which in turn led to happy, honest productive staff.
4. Pat 4

   25 January 2018 at 3:24 pm

   “We will also reinstate key minimum standards and protections to employees, such as the right to prescribed meal and rest breaks….”

   An important if overlooked aspect, particularly in hospitality industry.
   • patricia bremner 4.1

     25 January 2018 at 8:27 pm

     These are the first gains for workers in a long long time. Once again!!! We are not going to get everything straight away.
5. millsy 5

   25 January 2018 at 8:43 pm

   Ironically, the small business sector is where this law is mainly misused. For the larger companies, it’s probably just a formality, and you have to do something really bad to not get through the 90 days.

   The outcry at these moves just really go to show about how expendable workers are in this country.
6. eco maori 6

   25 January 2018 at 9:15 pm

   When a employer can sack you with in 90 days and is not required to give you any written reason on why You have been fired leaves the door open for the employer to lie about the reason you are dismissed when you find that the employer has breach your contractual employment rights and try to litigate sue them nothing in writing no proof for the employee. I say that stinks to high heaven. All employers should be legerslated to provide a written reason for a dismissal. (I say that all employers should be legerslated to provide written reason why the employee is being dismissed. If not then this breach your human rights rights to a fair trial)
   Ka kite ano
   • Ed1 6.1

     25 January 2018 at 9:53 pm

     There may not be sufficient votes in favour of doing away with the 90 day rule entirely, but should there be a provision that removal of the availability of that provision be able to be removed for any breach of employment law? That may be sufficient to catch at least the worst offenders – could that be acceptable to NZFirst?
     • McFlock 6.1.1

       25 January 2018 at 10:39 pm

       The thing about the 90day as it stands is that they don’t have to say the reason. Unless there’s a bit of paper somewhere that explicitly states you were fired for illegal X, they just stay quiet and you can’t prove a damned thing.

       Fortunately most of the worst offenders are too bloody stupid to even do the 90day thing legally, and either fuck up the paperwork on implementing it in the first place, or outright say that they fired the person on illegal grounds (e.g. human rights act violation).

       In general, this case illustrates the coalition nature of the current government – NZ1 would be after the SMEs who are too dim to employ people properly and are kneejerk conservatives, but alienated by National’s love of the corporate chequebook. The people who would normally vote Nat but are in the regions or don’t have enough profit to spend on a Cabinet Club ticket.

       It might get revisited when a few of the regional development projects are ticking over, but… we need a bigger christmas tree vote next time to really move it further.
7. Sanctuary 7

   26 January 2018 at 6:08 am

   Retaining the limited 90 day fire at Will rules is disappointing on another level. According to reports, Labour was “lobbied” so they changed their minds. This is troubling at two levels. First, the affront to democracy that elite lobbying is. Who did this lobbying, and who were the weak minded MPs who caved to these lobbyists? This needs to be known and noted ahead of selection for the 2020 election. Secondly, if Labour can rolled so easily on the basis of lobbying by elite interests, how much of a pushover will they be when the capitalist class really puts the pedal to the metal?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS