Kiwis Stand Up To Corporate Bully

Written By: - Date published: 8:00 am, March 25th, 2015 - 14 comments
Categories: boycott, Ethics, Globalisation, human rights, Unions, workers' rights - Tags: , , , , ,

 

Boycott Cotton On

Social media shoop calling for a boycott of Cotton On

 

 

UPDATE: Following a sustained Kiwi public backlash against it, Cotton On has now – apparently – backed down in its attempt to force staff at its Auckland distribution centre to negotiate whether or not or when they can have rest and meal breaks. First Union has been negotiating the collective agreement for staff with Cotton On since July last year. The company had previously agreed existing conditions would remain but suddenly abandoned that position to propose that staff rest and meal breaks  be “in accordance with the ERA”.  This post was written before Cotton On responded to the resulting torrent of objections from Kiwis. Accordingly, some details in the post have been superseded but other related and important points about Cotton On remain valid.

The shoops are flying as more and more New Zealand customers of Australian corporate bully “Cotton On” are standing up and saying “enough is enough” in response to the company being the first to exploit the National Ltd™ Cult of John Key’s imposition of “flexibility” into the labour market.

The push-back, which is gathering social media momentum ,  stems from recent moves by Cotton On to enforce an unworkable code of behaviour on its staff and play silly buggers in its negotiations with the union representing workers at its Auckland distribution centre. Cotton On is attempting to prevent the Auckland staff from taking adequate rest and meal breaks while also demanding, according to a document leaked to media, that all its workers demonstrate that they are having fun in a family-like environment. Failure to display the required level of “fun, entrepreneurial, keeping it real, family, ethical, engaged” behaviour will, Cotton On threatened, result in instant dismissal or other disciplinary action.

Cotton On is taking advantage of the new business environment heralded into New Zealand by the National Ltd™ Cult of John Key in October last year. In a burst of pent-up ideology-driven vandalism, all manner of protections for New Zealand workers and every objective of the Employment Relations Act 2000 were trashed. It was the National Ltd™ Cult of John Key’s first piece of legislation passed after the 2014 election and came into force this month.  According to John Key, the new laws would support small New Zealand businesses yet, bang on schedule, the first company to put the boot into its workers was large Australian conglomerate Cotton On.

Acting on instructions from its head office, Cotton On first demanded that staff start showing they were having “fun” working for the company and then promptly reneged on already negotiated and agreed arrangements concerning rest and meal breaks. Without discussion, or notice, Cotton On’s Australian human resources staff simply drew a line through the agreed points, replacing them with a short statement declaring its intent that all rest and meal breaks would be observed and paid as per the Employment Relations Act.

Unilateral change to already agreed provisions for workers at Cotton On's Auckland Distribution Centre.

Unilateral change to already agreed provisions for workers at Cotton On’s Auckland Distribution Centre.

Cotton On’s act of provocation is matched in its cynicism only by the company’s contempt for the negotiation process. As well as going back on its word, Cotton On simultaneously may also have breached the newly amended sections 4 and 32 of the ERA which relate to participants acting with goodwill, and not undermining the bargaining process and/or the agents involved.

Last Friday, just half and hour before workers at the company’s distribution centre were to meet with their union, First Union, to discuss the negotiations Cotton On management called a staff meeting. Robert Reid from First Union says management told staff that the union was a waste of money, that the union would best be replaced with an in-house committee, and then encouraged the workers to leave the union and receive an immediate pay-rise. Watch this space as First Union seriously considers taking Cotton On to the Employment Relations Authority in what may be the first test of the goodwill provisions.

Cotton On's General Manager, People and Culture, Dr Pippa Grange who is in charge of the company's human resources functions.

Cotton On’s General Manager, People and Culture, Dr Pippa Grange who is in charge of the company’s human resources functions.

Largely responsible for Cotton On’s bullying behaviour is the company’s recently appointed General Manager for People and Culture, Dr Pippa Grange. “People and Culture” is another term for the malignant and pernicious practise of “Human Resources Management” which, at Cotton On, is made all the more bizarre by the fact that Dr Pippa Grange is a well recognised “ethicist”.  What looks like might be some of her work is splattered all over the Cotton On’s website in typical Human Resources Management speak but with a tint of ethics  . . .

The Cotton On Group is focused on building an ethical, sustainable and profitable business and ensuring we have a positive impact on our people, the community, the planet and all those we connect with. It’s not only the right thing to do; it’s the best way to do business.

and . . .

We’re the first to admit there is more to do and we continue to explore every opportunity to do business ethically and sustainably. It’s the only way we are going to ensure a better tomorrow for everyone we touch.

not to mention this classic . . .

No matter what part of the business our people are in, or where in the world they are located, we want them to feel connected and valued as well as understanding the important role they play in the broader Cotton On Group story

Dr Pippa Grange has certainly done some good work in the past and perhaps her appointment does reflect a genuine intent by Cotton On to include ethical considerations within its business model at some stage. For a company which relies on slave labour  for production, has been convicted for mislabeling and selling highly flammable children’s pyjamas,  wallows in tax-payer funded corporate welfare,  profits from sexualising children,  and already has serious form for ripping off its local staff,  it would certainly be a welcome change. Then again, window dressing is an essential skill at Cotton On.

 

14 comments on “Kiwis Stand Up To Corporate Bully ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Rosie 1
    25 March 2015 at 9:20 am

    Aw, don’t ya love the hypocrisy of global corporates!

    Thanks for your investigation into the behaviour of Cotton On BLiP. Learnt a new term too, “people and culture” a euphemism for the vileness that is “human resources management”.

    Dilbert would approve.

    • BLiP 1.1
      25 March 2015 at 9:51 am

      ‘

      Yeah, the HR field just lurrrves camouflaging its core function with touchy-feely lingo and empowering euphemisms. “People and Culture” is a beauty but the best one I’ve heard lately is “Transition and Transformation” – tat for short, I guess.

      🙂

      • Rosie 1.1.1
        25 March 2015 at 12:02 pm

        Oh god, TAT. Mr R has informed me that they no longer have a human resources dept at their work, they have a “People and Development” dept.

        Since they had a sweep through of their HR policy last year, the result has been even greater disengagement between staff and management and even lower morale. They do get a laugh out of the new acronym’s though.

    • Sable 1.2
      25 March 2015 at 10:03 am

      HR are really little more than capitalist cheerleaders….

  2. Sable 2
    25 March 2015 at 10:02 am

    Suffice to say I wont be buying anything from this mob anytime soon.

  3. Melanie Scott 3
    25 March 2015 at 11:07 am

    Never bought from them and now, never will. Do they have slides for their employees to use to get down to lower levels? They should install them, after all they are promoting having fun aren’t they?

  4. McFlock 4
    25 March 2015 at 11:31 am

    That’s the thing about shit employers – the nats remove some worker protections, and a shit employer doesn’t find itself more “flexible” or with “less red tape” or any of the other justifications for removing worker protections.

    The shit employer just breaks the remaining worker protections.

    I’m not talking about the good employers, who are universally loved by their staff and give them a bright shiny sovereign every birthday, and maybe a goose for christmas dinner. Nope. I’m talking about the incompetent or amoral employers who cannot follow the law and do not understand expressions like “good faith”, “fair”, or “reasonable”.

  5. Skinny 5
    25 March 2015 at 11:37 am

    Oh bugger we were all set to picket their local store on Friday, guess we still can just to give the other retail stores the message not to play silly buggers, be a good recruiting excise too lol.

  6. Wensleydale 6
    25 March 2015 at 1:17 pm

    Looking at that photo of Pippa Grange, I can’t help but recall the words of the White Witch in The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe…

    “Would you like some turkish delight, Edmund?”

    Don’t eat it, Edmund! It’s laced with arsenic!

    I think a pertinent question is, who purposefully chooses a career in Human Resources? I mean, at what point during adolescent development does someone actually think, “You know, that Human Resources gig looks pretty good.” I’ve met one or two HR people who seem vaguely decent (or are well-versed in appearing so), but the remainder seem to be universally awful, and about as comfortable to be around as a pissed off rattlesnake. It seems to be one of those occupations where you essentially get paid to be a professional bastard.

  7. Wreckingball 7
    25 March 2015 at 3:54 pm

    Why should Cotton On pay people while they have meal breaks? Also, the union goes running the media, is that not a breach of good faith?

    • Murray Rawshark 7.1
      25 March 2015 at 11:37 pm

      “Why should Cotton On pay people while they have meal breaks? ”

      In this case, because they’ll be facing a huge consumer backlash if they don’t. Generally, because slavery has not yet been reintroduced.

  8. aerobubble 8
    25 March 2015 at 4:08 pm

    Crickey. Green MP response to govt answers at QT. The govt, in answer to pay inequality responded that min wahes were higher here in nz compared globally. Then in reply to a further question stated tat international comparision were misleading.

    Crickey.

  9. Puckish Rogue 9
    25 March 2015 at 4:12 pm

    “The union wanted to preserve the current entitlement to a 15 minute paid tea break and a 30 minute paid lunch break and he was not clear from Cotton On’s statement that both would be retained.”

    Yeah Cotton On sounds like a horrible place to work

  10. tc 10
    25 March 2015 at 7:09 pm

    No surprises here having watched HR get gutted of those who actually looked after employees from the 90’s for soldiers like Dr grange who jackboot over the workforce with a spin and a smile.

    Had a family member work for one of their akl stores, no cover staff so no breaks and expected to do store banking on what breaks there were and this was back in 2008.

    Shudder to think what it’s like now after 6 years of team shonkey enabling even more worker exploitation having heard blow by blow what it was like then.