web analytics

Michael Woodhouse: a fool or a liar?

Written By: - Date published: 12:00 pm, April 14th, 2015 - 88 comments
Categories: boycott, employment, Unions, workers' rights - Tags: , ,

Over a month ago I asked what Michael Woodhouse has actually got right on employment relations in New Zealand.

I don’t think it’s too much to expect the Minister of Workplace Relations and Safety to understand basic concepts related to his portfolio. Like the fact that he can, in fact, legislate for good employer practice (that’s the whole point of laws.) Or the fact that zero hour contracts are not the same as casual employer contracts.

But he’s still trotting out that very line – accusing the Labour Party of trying to do away with all forms of casual employment agreement – and it’s very heartening to see (or rather hear) Labour leader Andrew Little name that for what it is: lying.

“Lying” is such a taboo word in politics. You can’t use it in Parliament at all – every member is an honorable member even when they’re full of crap.

Yet sometimes, there is simply no other logical conclusion. Either Michael Woodhouse is deliberately confusing the two types of employment agreement to obfuscate the issue – i.e. is lying; or Michael Woodhouse is utterly ignorant of the basics of employment and has literally no one around him who understands the difference and has thought to advise him of it.

I don’t think anyone believes Michael Woodhouse is that stupid. Nope, he’s just following the National Party playbook, and it goes all the way back to their exploitative 90-day trial legislation, first passed in 2009.

90-day trials are not the same as the probationary periods which our laws already allowed for – probationary periods which still protected workers’ basic rights. Under a 90-day trial your boss can fire you for getting injured on the job. Or calling in sick. Or joining the union. Or rebuffing sexual harassment. All things which it would be illegal for someone to fire you for in any other circumstances.

But as soon as anyone points this out, the rightwing spinners get all indignant: “but trial periods are useful! Why don’t you want young workers to get a chance to prove themselves?”

They know the difference. They’re lying about it. And they’re depending on our decent Kiwi nature – our dislike of confrontation and our assumption that everyone is acting in good faith – to get away with it.

~

If you’re in Auckland tomorrow, Unite Union are holding an action against zero-hours contracts as part of a global day of action for fast food workers. Check out the event Facebook page for details.

88 comments on “Michael Woodhouse: a fool or a liar?”

  1. mickysavage 1

    Thanks Steph.

    And Congratulations to Maccas for also agreeing to end zero hour contracts. Only Burger King and Wendys to go.

    It is funny that multinational corporations with generally poor workplace practices are quicker at outlawing anti worker contractual provisions quicker than this Government …

    • Lanthanide 1.1

      McDonald’s didn’t, and Unite are going to strike on Wednesday.

      McDonald’s agreed to give people 80% of their rostered hours, but the point is people on 0-hours contract routinely work significantly more than their rostered hours.

      If you’re rostered for 10 hours but work 30, then being guaranteed 8 hours in the future (and still working 30) doesn’t change anything.

      Restaurant Brands (KFC, Pizza Hut etc) agreed to 80% of hours worked, which is meaningful.

    • Skinny 1.2

      Mc Donalds are being tricky as per usual. Unite keep holding a blowtorch to their arse
      and is in my opinion the best Union in the Country. Pity they don’t expand out the cover other industries. They leave the trade unions for dead as they recruite activists from within.

      • dukeofurl 1.2.1

        Isnt that a demarcation thing, from the days when the pantyhouse workers union didnt poach members from the socks and underwear union

        • Skinny 1.2.1.1

          Demarcation lines?

          There are plenty of idiot Unions these days that poach workers into unions outside their sector (broad coverage approach) undermining the sector union and then negotiate a weaker CA. The bosses love it. It amazes me when someone says yeah my union is such & such, I think what the heck would they know about that industry compared to a more specialist union I could think of. Let’s not even go into the thinking of 2 of the largest unions around the introduction of the ECA.

    • infused 1.3

      Burger King/McDs have been doing this since 2000 when I worked there. Why is this such a huge issue now

      • Lanthanide 1.3.1

        Were you on a casual contract, or a 0-hours? They aren’t the same.

        One clear difference is that if you’re on a casual contract, every time you work, you have to get paid the holiday rate in addition to the hours worked, because you don’t accrue annual leave.

        • infused 1.3.1.1

          Maybe it was. Too young to remember. I was never guaranteed hours though.

          • Lanthanide 1.3.1.1.1

            So it may have been a casual contract, which is fine.

            With 0-hours contract, you might be given say a 6 hour shift a week on an official roster, and then told that you might be needed on Friday and Saturday. When Friday and Saturday arrive, you wait for a phone call, but it never arrives.

            Or you’re given an official rostered shift, and then also told that you’d need to work on Thursday. Then on Thursday morning, you’re called and told that your shift is cancelled. But maybe you’ll get a shift tomorrow.

            Under a casual contract, the employee has full rights to decline any offered work. The key difference here is it means that you’re fully able to look for other employment. With a 0-hours contract, if you don’t come in when they expect you to come in (because you’ve got another job, or you had scheduled plans that made it impossible to attend work), they can write it up as an unexplained absence and start the process to dismiss you.

  2. Kiwiri - Raided of the Last Shark 2

    The Facebook page says there will be strikes in fast food restaurants other than in Auckland, i.e. in Wellington, Christchurch, Dunedin and Palmerston North. Hope that FB page will supply more details.

  3. vto 3

    Biggest ups of the year so far to Andrew Little for calling out Woodhouse’s lies.

  4. b waghorn 4

    It wouldn’t really surprise me if woodenhead wasn’t just pure and simply thick ,national proved in northland that they don’t want thinkers they just want good little puppets.

  5. Kiwiri - Raided of the Last Shark 5

    Michael Woodhouse: a fool or a liar?

    Both. And more. He has been known as a scoundrel since his schoolboy days.

    • left for deadshark 5.1

      great description scoundrel.He is loathed by most of us down here,except for the moneyed few. Thankful for small mercies he’s not Heath minister.
      good post SR. 😉

    • whateva next? 5.2

      Perfect successor for Key then.

    • Chris 5.3

      That face suggests he’s seen the bottom of a few bottles, too. Certainly not the sharpest knife as a result…

  6. dukeofurl 6

    On camera, when hes asked for a statement he acts like hes the guy from the mailroom and hes just leaving the ministers office

  7. NZJester 7

    “Michael Woodhouse: a fool or a liar?”

    Or is he simply both.

    • Rob 7.1

      He would appear to be quite clearly a liar
      As Andrew Little has shown
      As part of Steven Joyce’s National Govt he is probably
      also just a foot soldier following orders
      So I guess that makes him fairly dumb!

  8. DH 8

    “Under a 90-day trial your boss can fire you for getting injured on the job. Or calling in sick. Or joining the union. Or rebuffing sexual harassment. All things which it would be illegal for someone to fire you for in any other circumstances.”

    That’s not my understanding of it, can anyone clarify?

    My understanding is the 90day law just removed workers’ access to the employment court. That effectively makes it too near impossible for the average person to get any justice if they’re unfairly dismissed, they’d have to pursue a civil claim which is beyond the means of most people

    I didn’t think the actual laws on dismissal were changed and the above practices are still illegal. Or has there been new laws passed that I’ve missed?

    • Lanthanide 8.1

      You’re correct, the 90-day bill provision removed the ‘unfair dismissal’ recourse for a personal grievance, but didn’t remove any of the other protected provisions for a personal grievance.

    • The 90 day rule actually does allow for dismissal in the above circumstances. It removes the right of workers to take personal grievances if they are fired in the 90 days. So, no PG, no mediation, no employment authority, no employment court, no court of appeal. No nothing.

      Because the employer does not have to give a reason for the dismissal, it’s virtually impossible to build a case any other way. Most cases that have been won that involved the 90 day law have been on technicalities or where there was proven abuse such as witnessed harassment.

      The intent and effect of the law is to allow workers to be fired without penalty. It’s working exactly as designed.

      • infused 8.2.1

        Yes they do you tard. A process has to be followed. You can’t just say ‘you’re fired’.

        Jesus christ,

        • te reo putake 8.2.1.1

          Actually, that’s exactly what it means. The process pretty much boils down to ‘you’re fired’. That’s the intent, and that’s how its working in practice. As I wrote, the few successful cases have been mainly on process failure, most often forgetting to get the employment agreement with the 90 day provision in it signed before work starts.

          Still, if you think there is a more substantial process to dismissing someone, feel free to spell it out.

          • Lanthanide 8.2.1.1.1

            Employment lawyers advise that a proper process has to be followed. Presumably because they expect that sooner or later, the court will find a case where a proper process wasn’t followed and will find against the company.

            • te reo putake 8.2.1.1.1.1

              Well, yeah. But so what? The point of the legislation is to allow unfair dismissals. That’s what it says on the lid and that’s what it delivers.

              Happy to ask the same question again; what’s the process?

              Edit: I forgot to mention that National changed the law so that procedural faults don’t have to be a decider in employment cases. Get that? Even if bosses get the sacking process wrong, that doesn’t mean they automatically lose the case.

              • infused

                Why would I explain it to you. How about you go hire some people and then come back to us. It seems it’s only tools like yourself that are not actually employing people that seem to be confused about the 90 day trial.

                • So tell us what the process is, genius. Let me guess … you haven’t got a clue?

                  • Lanthanide

                    A proper process would at a minimum include a notice/warning that performance was not up to expectations, with an indication of what those expectations were. Then a time-frame for improvement and an assessment of whether the necessary improvement has occurred.

                    Given that there is a 90 day limit here, and obviously the law makes it easier to fire someone, it doesn’t have to be a robust and exhaustive process. But it should be more than simply “sorry, you’re fired”.

                    • Tracey

                      can you give me the clause/s in the Act which refer to the proper process for dismissal under 90 day clauses?

                    • Lanthanide

                      Tracey, a large body of best-practice has built up around employment law from employment law cases. This is called “case law”.

                      The case law tells how to the law should be interpreted and applied in real life.

                      The employment lawyers are making this recommendation based on case law, not the act-as-written.

                      Lawyers, being cautious and conservative people, want to give the best advice to their clients to avoid costs and hassles.

                      It doesn’t mean that you *must* follow a proper process, merely the opinion of the lawyers that if you don’t, you may be open to a legal challenge. Eventually these cases will come through to the court and some precedents will be set and we’ll find out whether the lawyers were correct to be cautious or not.

                    • Cheers, Lanthanide. The process you outline is fair and is pretty much what should be expected under a probationary period arrangement as allowed in law now and also prior to the 90 day rule. However, under a 90 day trial, none of that fairness is needed.

                      Ironically, if a dinkum employer actually uses the process you outline and then dismisses someone just using the 90 day provision, they actually do expose themselves to the risk of a successful PG on technical grounds. That is, having begun a performance improvement regime, they cannot definitively rely on the 90 day provision alone as a reason for dismissal.

                      To put it another way, an employer would be best advised to take no risks, and certainly give no advice to an employee that if they improve, their job is safe, and certainly give no reason at all for the dismissal other than you are dismissed under the 90 day rule. Fair? No. Legal? Yes.

                      edit, just seen your reply to Tracey. You are right that case law will develop in time. However, the courts always look at the intent of parliament in helping to form a judgement.

                    • Lanthanide

                      @TRP: according to the employment lawyers that talked to us, the previous 90 day probation law amounted to no additional powers for the employer.

                      The gist of it was you could ‘slightly accelerate’ the standard process, but you must still follow a fair process during the probationary period.

                      For our company, 90 days isn’t long enough to weed out underperforming vs acceptable performing individuals. It is long enough to weed out completely incapable performers, and under the 90 day provision we can get rid of them, but the previous probationary standards would still require us to treat an incapable performer as merely an underperformer.

                    • tracey

                      Gee, thanks Lanth

                      Case Law you say. Well, well, well.

                    • tracey

                      S 103A Test of Justification

                      i.For the purposes of section 103(1) (a) and (b), the question of whether a dismissal or an action was justifiable must be determined, on an objective basis, by applying the test in subsection (2).
                      ii.The test is whether the employer’s actions, and how the employer acted, were what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances at the time the dismissal or action occurred.”

              • tracey

                From MBIE

                Trial periods

                Employers can make an offer of employment that includes a trial period of up to 90 days.
                Trial periods are voluntary, and must be agreed in writing and negotiated in good faith as part of the employment agreement.

                An employee who is dismissed before the end of a trial period can’t raise a personal grievance on the grounds of unjustified dismissal. They can raise a personal grievance on other grounds, such as discrimination, harassment or unjustified action by the employer.

                Employees on trial periods are entitled to all other minimum employment rights.

        • tricledrown 8.2.1.2

          Shithouse is a groveling idiot .
          Claiming one of his grandparents was a W W1 hero!
          Low ranking liar.

          • Pasupial 8.2.1.2.1

            tricledrown

            Woodhouse is almost as much of a compulsive liar as Key. The twisting of words, about his; Anzac day great-uncle, were something to behold:

            The Minister of Veterans’ Affairs told the ODT last month Trooper Frank Woodhouse, of the Otago Mounted Rifles, was his great-uncle.

            He found the name on a memorial on the Gallipoli peninsula commemorating New Zealanders killed in the campaign.

            ”It was a profound experience and I do feel a little more connected now.”…

            However it has emerged that the trooper shared only the Woodhouse surname with the MP.

            Family spokesman Gareth Woodhouse told Fairfax media the trooper was his great-uncle and the family had his medals.

            He had emailed the minister who replied with a “semi-apology”.

            http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/303064/woodhouse-admits-gallipoli-gaffe

            Then the next day:

            Veterans’ Affairs Minister Michael Woodhouse says he cannot recollect whether he blamed the Otago Daily Times for publishing a case of mistaken identity…

            The Dominion Post yesterday… reported Mr Woodhouse as saying his conversation with the ODT on April 25 was off the record…

            When asked if he had told The Dominion Post that his conversation with the ODT was off the record, he said: ”I’m not sure if I used the words off the record.

            ”If I described it that way, it wasn’t accurate,” he said…

            also made the comment to APNZ reporter Sophie Ryan on Anzac Day.

            She was certain the conversation was ”absolutely not” off the record.

            ”Their press secretary said, ‘Here’s his number, he will be really keen to talk because … he does have a relative link to the war’,” she said.

            Mr Woodhouse said, although he ”prematurely speculated” that Tpr Woodhouse was his great-uncle, there was ”no doubt in my mind that I was related to this guy”.

            http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/303134/mp-unsure-whether-he-blamed-odt

            And just in case that’s not enough, there’s always Woodhouse’s changing his Donghua Liu story three times within a single day:

            June 19:

            • 2pm Mr Woodhouse denies telling Mr Key about the letters

            • 3pm Mr Woodhouse says officials from his office briefed Mr Key’s office on the letters.

            • 7pm Mr Woodhouse’s office says the minister himself told Mr Key’s office about the letters and his office also gave copies of the letters to Mr Key’s office.

            http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11277608

            • Tracey 8.2.1.2.1.1

              The thing that stands out for me, is how people seem reluctant to attribute this kind of behaviour, Bridges lie about bridges and the list of lies and back flips to the environment set by the leadership.

              If parents behave badly and without principles you find their children tend to behave that way. If a coach has no ethics, no moral compass, you find many players don’t either. So WHY in politics do some just go “they are human, not perfect” and in that statement we lowe rour expectations on our politicians and the result?

              Read this thread, read the Bridges bridge lie and his prior history, read Collins history, read Key’s litany of lies and misleading statements and so on.

              BUT this government and people on both sides of the political spectrum don’t actually demand higher levels of behaviour from our politicians. We set the law as the minimum and maximum standard and then wonder why they lie to us.

        • tricledrown 8.2.1.3

          Infused confused.
          That would be the intention of the law you would{house) think.
          All the employer does is not offer any hours inconvenient hr’s effectively constructive dismissal.
          Dismal Dickensian era employment law.
          These employers also are practising continual psychological abuse.

        • adam 8.2.1.4

          infused

          You again prove my point on the utter lack of morals, by the right wing in this country.

          You language is offensive.

        • millsy 8.2.1.5

          If you couldnt just say ‘your fired’ then the law wouldn’t be worth having (from a employers point of view)

        • tracey 8.2.1.6

          Interestingly most of the cases turn on whether the 90 day trial period was properly outlined and conveyed.

      • Skinny 8.2.2

        Interesting after seeing a lawyer from the EMA on TV news last night, having to try spin about the Zero hours contracts, her name was Jennifer I think, botox face to me. Anyway it reminded me of once listening to EMA lawyers on a conference call arguing that Nationals employment law changes like the fire at will Bill were a step too far and there was no need to meddle with Wilson/Labours ERA, that was quite a suprise.
        My partner at the time crossed over to the darkside and was a regional lawyer for them working from home, I was deliverying her a glass of wine. That old sexist prick (before the current snake Kim Campbell) that headed the bosses outfit said something I took exception too. I coughed out louder than meaning too ‘bullshit’ as I walked out the door, started laughing my head off when I could hear “what was that, who said that, then the not me who else is not this line.”

        My partner was furious, frantically waving her hands at me and mouthing all sorts of obscenities, which made me laugh harder, I couldn’t stop even knowing I was up for a tongue lashing when she got off the phone call, and I did 🙁

        Not too long after that incident we split up I told her it was never going to work me being a dirty old unionist and her taking on a job representing the bosses. Life panned out pretty good she goes out with an older business man and I have a younger women who shares a love of animals. 🙂

        • Tracey 8.2.2.1

          “her name was Jennifer I think, botox face to me.”

          Are you infused’s left-wing alter ego?

  9. infused 9

    Under a 90-day trial your boss can fire you for getting injured on the job. Or calling in sick. Or joining the union. Or rebuffing sexual harassment. All things which it would be illegal for someone to fire you for in any other circumstances.

    Can someone post some examples of this happening please.

    • tricledrown 9.1

      Infused my daughter has worked at 2 Zero hours jobs both international brands.
      The number of employment laws broken by these sadistic companies would astound you Infused.

    • millsy 9.2

      They could just get rid of you at the end of your 90 day period and just say that it was ‘something else’.

      You live in a day dream. If bossed really couldnt sack people under the 90 day law or doing the above, then they wouldnt be fighting to the death to keep it.

      • infused 9.2.1

        No, it just proves you don’t know what you’re talking about. Like most other people here.

        • thatguynz 9.2.1.1

          So “most other people here” have no idea what they’re talking about yet you are the enlightened one?? Why does this feel like a Tui billboard..

    • felix 9.3

      infused, the thing is they can fire you without giving any reason at all.

      So you might never know whether it was because you joined a union or not. Or because you took too long for smoko. Or because you just weren’t any good at the job. Or because you’re gay. Or because you’re not. Or because you called in sick. Or because you make a shit cup of tea and the boss is having a bad day.

      But all they have to say is don’t come monday.

      • infused 9.3.1

        It’s simply not the case and I challenge you to back that up with an example.

        • North 9.3.1.1

          “It’s simply not the case”. Tell us how it’s not the case. Examples have nothing to do with it. Tell us how the law proscribes that. Weakling.

        • felix 9.3.1.2

          An example of what, infused?

          I’m not taking the piss, I’m genuinely asking. Cos I don’t see how I could give an example of someone not saying something.

          Could you perhaps tell me which part of the law is in conflict with what I’ve said?

          Here’s the piece of legislation we’re talking about: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2000/0024/latest/DLM1867204.html

          The relevant bit states:

          (2)Trial provision means a written provision in an employment agreement that states, or is to the effect, that—
          (a)for a specified period (not exceeding 90 days), starting at the beginning of the employee’s employment, the employee is to serve a trial period; and
          (b)during that period the employer may dismiss the employee; and
          (c)if the employer does so, the employee is not entitled to bring a personal grievance or other legal proceedings in respect of the dismissal.

          It’s in pretty plain language, but here’s an even mopre plain version from the MOBI website: http://www.dol.govt.nz/workplace/knowledgebase/item/1517

          • Lanthanide 9.3.1.2.1

            From the MOBI website: “the employer can dismiss the employee without the employee being able to take a personal grievance for reasons of unjustified dismissal.”

            So you can still bring a personal grievance for reasons of constructive dismissal.

            • felix 9.3.1.2.1.1

              But not for unjustified dismissal.

              So walk me through it. You employ me on a contract with a 90-day trial.

              A month later you fire me. No reason given.

              My recourse is what?

              • Tracey

                THIS is what I would also like the answer to?

              • Lanthanide

                Determine if there is cause for a constructive dismissal claim. If there is, lodge one. If there isn’t, move on.

                The point is, the law *does not* say you can fire someone under the 90 day law and be immune to *all* legal recourse from the employee.

                • I don’t think that’s the right phrase. A constructive dismissal is where an employee resigns because of the actions or inactions of the employer. That is, the employer makes life so bad for the worker that they have no choice but to resign.

                  Are you thinking of something else in employment law?

                  • Lanthanide

                    Hostile work environment. Employee performance deteriorates. Employee is terminated under 90 day period for poor performance. Employee lodges PG for constructive dismissal – their poor performance was due to hostile work environment perpetuated by the employer.

                    • That’s not a constructive dismissal because its a firing, not a resignation. Even if it were, if the employer does not give a reason for the dismissal (ie poor performance) then no claim can arise.

                    • Lanthanide

                      I’d be interested to see how a “fired for no reason” will stand up in the court. Has there been any case law on this?

                    • Good question! Probably not, because there’s no point taking a case on that basis. The 90 day provision does not require a reason to be given. That’s kinda the point of the provision; to allow dismissal without good cause as well as dismissal with good cause.

                    • Lanthanide

                      It’s easy to see how case law could be made: someone makes a claim that they were dismissed based on a protected area, the employer claims that they fired them for “no reason as they are allowed to do under the law”.

                      Employment court says “no, you must give a reason, so we can determine if the reason for dismissal is a protected one or not, which is still protected under the law despite the 90 days provision”.

                    • tracey

                      assuming an employee can afford to take the case and that an employer wouldn’t appeal it and so on. My best guess, based on experience, is that it has happened, but if challenged has settled. Hence it hasn’t got to case law stage. Of course I am very new to case law, only learning about it today (joking), and have done a cursory search only.

                      Oh, and read the Stoke case.

                    • Lanthanide

                      The government website seems to be down, but I found this: http://www.conferenz.co.nz/whitepapers/90-day-trials-lessons-smith-v-stokes-valley-pharmacy

                      (b) The employer must treat employees fairly and in accordance with the employment agreement in all other respects during the trial period. In Smith, the employment agreement required the employer to address performance concerns, which it did not do.

                      (c) The ERA (s67B) only negates the normal requirement to give reasons for the dismissal in writing when subsequently and formally called upon to do so. The ERA does not preclude an employer being obliged (when asked) to provide an explanation for the dismissal at the time of giving notice of termination during the trial period. The s4 good faith obligations appear to require employers to give an explanation for the dismissal at the time of giving notice.

                      (d) Notice of termination must be given in accordance with the employment agreement. The decision in Smith appears to preclude summary dismissal, although a payment in lieu of notice seems allowable if provided for in the agreement.

                      So, there we go. The employment court has already said that you can’t fire someone for “no reason” under the 90 day provision.

                    • tracey

                      LOLOLOLOL

                      It’s even clearer if you read the actual case, and more besides. It answers every legal question raised in this discussion, incluidng an examination of the Parliament’s intent.

                      Click to access 2010-%20NZEmpc%20111%20Smith%20v%20Stokes%20Valley%20Pharmacy%20-2009-%20Limited.pdf

                    • The court has no actual right to demand an answer to that question and the employer has the absolute right to not say why. If they chose to answer, they could simply say “it wasn’t working out”. End of story.

                      It’s up to the worker to offer proof that it’s an unfair dismissal under the very limited alternatives (harassment etc.). The onus is completely on the person making the complaint and the employer does not have to say a thing.

                      Again, the point of the provision to allow unfair dismissals to occur.

                    • tracey

                      TRP

                      Have a read of the case. It is very useful for an insight into Court interpretation in this whole 90- day trial

                    • Cheers, Tracey. It’s a bit more forceful in the ‘reasons’ section than I remembered ( I read it when it first came out) and I note reference to what a reasonable employer ‘would do’ rather than the watered down ‘could do’ we have today.

                      All in all, a good summary of the rights and obligations of the parties.

                    • tracey

                      TRP

                      Yea i read it way back then too. I was also wondering how some parts would look now with the watered down employer onus aspect.

                      This decision wouldn’t ave pleased this government, imo.

                • You_Fool

                  In reality however this is a case where the courts are basically rewriting the law with case law. It is similar to Sue Bradford’s anti-child abuse law where the law eventually got changed to be in-line with how the courts were actually finding. However in the 90-day fire at will law it is more that the courts/law system have not changed with the law (because the law is shit)

                  Hence what Lath was talking about further up – lawyers are advising employers to follow due process because they know that the courts will side with the employee as long as there is a technicality to be pulled up on. So De Jure the situation is stupid and shitty, but De Facto nothing has really changed and the law should be repealed and put back how it was

                  it is also why there are no cases to provide to Infused, because the courts are interpreting the law to still be the same (as much as they are able.)

                  • tracey

                    As far as I can tell the definitive case of 90 Day Trial periods was dated 2009 and appealed to the Employment Court in 2010

                    Smith v Stokes Valley Pharmacy (2009) Ltd

                    Also, many cases settle before getting to a decision which can distort the picture of employer and employee behaviours.

  10. felix 10

    Do we really have to choose?

  11. ScottGN 11

    Radio NZ just replayed the Woodhouse/Little interviews from Morning Report this morning on their evening roundup. You get the feeling Kim Hill is having a great time!

  12. North 12

    Was good to hear Kim Hill on Morning Report today pointedly requiring idiot Woodhouse to explain WHY he didn’t know such and such – “You are the minister after all……WHY don’t you know ?”

    Surely its 101 stuff……how the fuck can a minister in a government cry off with shit like “That’s not a matter the responsibility of MY ministry therefore I can’t blah blah blah…..” ?

    It really is outrageous for ministers in a government which preaches ‘responsibility’ to behave like this. One thing’s for sure……try that shit in any of the bars and public gathering places I’m familiar with……well – bunch of fives stuff !!! Shows the contempt in which these mongrels hold us. Just say ‘something’……’anything’. As long as it’s denial.

    • tc 12.1

      Kim shows that simple questions about minister competency has woodhouse all at sea.

      It’s that simple and yet gluon, dunc, paddy etc etc all seem incapable of it because they are owned and not serving an independent role.

      Key will never ever front Kim hill as she is not owned unlike Suzy and gluon.

  13. millsy 13

    Do you value your workers infused?

    Or do just see them as expenadable?

    Do you begrudge having to pay sick leave, holidays etc?

    Are you going to not let them have breaks?

    Would you pay zero wages if you could?

  14. repateet 14

    Question: Michael Woodhouse: a fool or a liar?

    Answer: Yes

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Major funding boost for Predator Free Banks Peninsula
    A pest free Banks Peninsula/Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū is one step closer with a $5.11 million boost to accelerate this project and create jobs, announced Conservation Minister Eugenie Sage in Canterbury today. “This is a game changer for this ambitious project to restore the native wildlife and plants on Ōtautahi/Christchurch’s doorstep ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 hours ago
  • Major investment for indoor sports in Hawke’s Bay
    A Government grant of $6.4 million will expand the Pettigrew Arena in Taradale with new indoor courts of national standard. “The project is likely to take 18 months with approximately 300 people employed through the process,” Grant Robertson said. “The expansion will increase the indoor court space up to 11 ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 hours ago
  • New infrastructure for Far North tourist town
    The Far North tourist destination of Mangonui is to receive Government funding to improve waterfront infrastructure, open up access to the harbour and improve water quality, Infrastructure Minister Shane Jones has announced. A total of $6.5 million from the $3 billion set aside in the COVID-19 Response and Recovery Fund ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Government remains committed to Women’s Cricket World Cup
    The Government has re-affirmed its commitment to supporting the hosting of the ICC Women’s Cricket World Cup, which the ICC has delayed from 2021 to 2022. “This is obviously a disappointing decision for cricket players and fans around the world and for the White Ferns and their supporters here at ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Green light for Te Awa River Ride in $220m nationwide cycleways investment
    Cyclists and walkers will now have a safer way to get around Taupō, Tūrangi, and between Hamilton and Cambridge, with funding for shared paths and Te Awa River Ride, Associate Minister of Transport Julie Anne Genter announced today. “The Te Awa River Ride is the latest part of massive growth ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Six major ‘shovel-ready’ cycleways funded in Christchurch
    Six major cycle routes will be completed in Christchurch thanks to funding from the Government’s investment in shovel-ready infrastructure as part of the COVID-19 recovery Associate Minister of Transport Julie Anne Genter announced today. $125 million will be invested to kick-start construction and fund the completion of the following cycleway ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • New Police facilities for Whanganui
    Plans are underway for a brand new state-of-the-art hub for Whanganui’s justice and social agencies, following confirmation the ageing Whanganui Central Police Station is to be replaced. Police Minister Stuart Nash has announced $25 million in new infrastructure spending to improve facilities for the wider community, and for staff who ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Relativity adjustment for Waikato-Tainui and Ngāi Tahu
    An adjustment payment has been made to Waikato-Tainui and Ngāi Tahu under the relativity mechanisms in their 1995 and 1997 Treaty of Waitangi settlements, Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Andrew Little announced today. The latest payments to Waikato-Tainui and Ngāi Tahu are $2,700,000 and $2,600,000 respectively to ensure the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Auckland rail upgrades pick up steam
    Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters and Transport Minister Phil Twyford today kicked off the start of the Auckland NZ Upgrade Programme rail projects which will support over 400 jobs and help unlock our biggest city. Both ministers marked the start of enabling works on the third main rail line project ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • PGF support for Wairoa creates jobs
    The Provincial Growth Fund (PGF) investment of $3.78 million in Wairoa will create much needed economic stimulus and jobs, Under-Secretary for Regional Economic Development Fletcher Tabuteau announced today. PGF projects announced today include: $200,000 loan to Nuhaka Kiwifruit Holdings Ltd (operated by Pine Valley Orchard Ltd) to increase the productivity ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Public and Māori housing to trial renewable energy technology
    Tenants in public and Māori housing may be benefiting from their own affordable renewable energy in future – a fund to trial renewable energy technology for public and Māori housing has today been announced by Energy and Resources Minister Megan Woods and Associate Minister for Housing (Māori Housing) Nanaia Mahuta. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • $2.7m for Hokianga infrastructure
    Hokianga will receive $2.7 million to redevelop four of its wharves and upgrade its water supply, Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones has announced. Far North District Council will receive $1.8 million from the Provincial Growth Fund for the work on the wharves. “The work will include the construction of ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • New fund to support housing and construction sector
    A $350 million Residential Development Response Fund is being established to support the residential construction sector and to minimise the economic impact from COVID-19, the Housing Minister Dr Megan Woods has announced. “The Residential Development Response Fund will help to progress stalled or at-risk developments that support our broader housing ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Government investment to boost Auckland’s community recycling network
    As part of a broader plan to divert waste from landfill, the Government today announced $10.67 million for new infrastructure as part of the Resource Recovery Network across the Auckland region. “This key investment in Auckland’s community recycling network is part of the Government’s Infrastructure Reference Group ‘shovel ready’ projects ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Te Papa transformation starts at Cameron Road
    The Government is investing $45 million in the first stage of an ambitious urban development project for Tauranga that will employ up to 250 people and help the region grow, Urban Development Minister Phil Twyford announced today. Phil Twyford says the funding has been allocated out of the $3 billion ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Low-emissions options for heavy transport a step closer
    Getting low-emission trucks on the road is a step closer with investment in infrastructure to support hydrogen vehicles, the Energy and Resources Minister Megan Woods has announced. The Infrastructure Reference Group has provisionally approved $20 million for New Plymouth company Hiringa Energy to establish a nationwide network of hydrogen-fuelling stations. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • New training centre to upskill workers
    A new trades training centre to upskill the local workforce will be built in the South Waikato town of Tokoroa through funding from the Government’s COVID-19 Response and Recovery Fund, Education Minister Chris Hipkins and Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones have announced. The Government will contribute $10.84 million from ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Subsequent children legislation to change
    The Government has agreed to repeal part of the Oranga Tamariki Act subsequent children provisions, Minister for Children Tracey Martin announced today. “There are times when children need to go into care for their safety – the safety and care of children must always be paramount,” Minister Martin said. “But ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Funding to expand mental health support for Pacific peoples
    A $1.5 million boost to grow primary mental health and addiction services for Pacific peoples in Auckland, Hamilton and Canterbury will lead to better outcomes for Pacific communities, Associate Health Minister Jenny Salesa says.  Pasifika Futures has received funding to expand services through The Fono, Aotearoa New Zealand’s largest by ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Funding boost for sustainable food and fibre production
    Twenty-two projects to boost the sustainability and climate resilience of New Zealand’s food and fibres sector have been announced today by Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor. The $18m funding will deliver practical knowledge to help farmers and growers use their land more sustainably, meet environmental targets, remain prosperous, and better understand ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Mature Workers Toolkit launched on business.govt.nz
    Employment Minister Willie Jackson welcomes an initiative that assists employers to get mature workers into New Zealand small businesses. The disadvantages that older people face in the workplace was highlighted in the whole of Government Employment Strategy.  In order to address this, a Mature Workers Toolkit has been developed and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Trans-Tasman cooperation in a COVID-19 world
    New Zealand and Australia reaffirmed today the need for the closest possible collaboration as they tackle a global environment shaped by COVID-19, Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters said. “In these challenging times, our close collaboration with Australia is more vital than ever,” said Mr Peters. Mr Peters and his Australian ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Pike recovery efforts now in unexplored territory
    The recovery and forensic examination of the loader driven by survivor Russell Smith means the underground team are now moving into an area of the Pike River Mine that has not been seen since the explosion, Minister Responsible for Pike River Re-entry Andrew Little said. “The fifth and last robot ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Government confirms CovidCard trial to go ahead
    The Government has confirmed a community-wide trial of CovidCard technology as it explores options for COVID-19 contact tracing. “Effective contact tracing is a vital part of the COVID-19 response,” Minister of Health Chris Hipkins said. “While manual processes remain the critical component for contact tracing, we know digital solutions can ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Enhanced process for iwi aquaculture assets
    The government is proposing changes to aquaculture legislation to improve the process for allocating and transferring aquaculture assets to iwi. Fisheries Minister Stuart Nash has introduced the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Amendment Bill to Parliament. It proposes a limited new discretionary power for Te Ohu Kaimoana Trustee Limited (ToKM). ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Bill introduced to fix National’s Family Court reform failures
    The Minister of Justice has today introduced the Family Court (Supporting Children in Court) Legislation Bill – the next step in the ongoing programme of work to fix the failed 2014 Family Court reforms led by then Justice Minister Judith Collins.  The Bill arises from the report of the Independent ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • DOC takes action to adapt to climate change
    A new Department of Conservation (DOC) action plan tackles the impacts of climate change on New Zealand’s biodiversity and DOC managed infrastructure including tracks, huts and cultural heritage. Minister of Conservation Eugenie Sage says extreme weather events around the country have really brought home our vulnerability to changing weather patterns. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Reduced international Antarctic season commences
    A heavily scaled back international Antarctic season will commence this week, Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters and Research, Science and Innovation Minister Megan Woods have confirmed. “Antarctica is the only continent that is COVID-19 free,” Mr Peters said. “Throughout the global pandemic, essential operations and long-term science have continued at ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • New high performance sports hub for Upper Hutt
    The Government is providing up to $30 million to help fund the NZ Campus of Innovation and Sport in Upper Hutt - an investment that will create 244 jobs. “The sports hub is designed to be a world-leading shared service for a range of sports, offering the level of facilities ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Govt keeps projects on road to completion
    Transport Minister Phil Twyford announced today transport projects currently in construction will continue at pace due to extra Government support for transport projects to mitigate the impact of COVID-19. To keep the $16.9 billion 2018-21 National Land Transport Programme going the Government has allocated funding from the COVID Response and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • First project utilising $50 million ‘shovel ready’ fund for rural broadband announced
    $50 million for further rural broadband digital connectivity has been allocated from the $3 billion infrastructure fund in the COVID Response and Recovery Fund has been announced by Shane Jones, Minister for Infrastructure and Kris Faafoi, Minister for Broadcasting, Communications and Digital Media. The investment will go to boosting broadband ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Ultra-fast Broadband programme hits major milestone with more than one million connections
    The Minister for Broadcasting, Communications and Digital Media has congratulated the Ultra-fast Broadband (UFB) programme on its major milestone of connecting more than 1 million New Zealand households and businesses to UFB. “This milestone has been 10 years in the making and demonstrates the popularity of the UFB network. “Uptake ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Vaping legislation passes
    Landmark legislation passed today puts New Zealand on track to saving thousands of lives and having a smokefree generation sooner rather than later, Associate Health Minister, Jenny Salesa says. The Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products (Vaping) Amendment Bill regulates vaping products and heated tobacco devices. “There has long been concern ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Government repeals discriminatory law
    A discriminatory law that has been a symbol of frustration for many people needing and providing care and support, has been scrapped by the Government. “Part 4A of the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill (No 2) was introduced under urgency in 2013 by a National Government,” Associate ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • More competitive fuel market on the way
    Kiwi motorists are set to reap the benefits of a more competitive fuel market following the passing of the Fuel Industry Bill tonight, Energy and Resources Minister Megan Woods says.  “This Act is where the rubber meets the road in terms of our response to the recommendations made in the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Government delivers on rental reforms promise
    The Government has delivered on its promise to New Zealanders to modernise tenancy laws with the passing of the Residential Tenancies Amendment (RTA) Bill 2020 today, says Associate Minister of Housing (Public Housing), Kris Faafoi. “The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 was out-dated and the reforms in the RTA modernise our ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • New rules in place to restore healthy rivers
    New rules to protect and restore New Zealand’s freshwater passed into law today. Environment Minister David Parker and Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor welcomed the gazetting of the new national direction on freshwater management. “These regulations deliver on the Government’s commitment to stop further degradation, show material improvements within five years and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Foreign Minister announces new Consul-General in Los Angeles
    Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters has announced the appointment of Jeremy Clarke-Watson as New Zealand’s new Consul-General in Los Angeles. “New Zealand and the United States share a close and dynamic partnership, based on a long history of shared values and democratic traditions,” Mr Peters said. “Mr Clarke-Watson is a ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Rental reforms provide greater support for victims of family violence
    Victims of family violence can end a tenancy with two days’ notice Landlords can terminate tenancies with 14 days’ notice if tenants assault them Timeframe brought forward for limiting rent increases to once every 12 months Extension of time Tenancy Tribunal can hear cases via phone/video conference Reform of New ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Apprenticeships support kicks off today
    Two employment schemes – one new and one expanded – going live today will help tens of thousands of people continue training on the job and support thousands more into work, the Government has announced. Apprenticeship Boost, a subsidy of up to $12,000 per annum for first year apprentices and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago