More attacks on workers coming?

Written By: - Date published: 8:11 am, September 10th, 2010 - 12 comments
Categories: workers' rights - Tags:

Yesterday in the house Pansy Wong claimed the government was not ruling out further reductions of workers rights including “workplace flexibility” (a term Noam Chomsky describe as “a fancy way of saying you don’t know when you go to sleep at night whether you have a job tomorrow morning.”) and changes to collective bargaining.

The following coverage brought a belated response from Labour Minister, Kate Wilkinson, claiming that “no further consideration” had been given to the advice.

But as I understand it Wong’s response was to a written question which means there was ample time to get the story straight.

The rumour around the traps is that the Nats are working on a set of aggressive anti-worker policies to roll out quick smart if they win another term.

Unfortunately I can’t see anything in Pansy’s answer or Kate’s qualified denial that counts that prospect out.

12 comments on “More attacks on workers coming? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Draco T Bastard 1
    10 September 2010 at 12:10 pm

    Worth watching the video of Question Time.

  2. ABC 2
    10 September 2010 at 4:35 pm

    Where could they take an Anti-worker attitude, without shooting themselves in the economic foot, except into union/collective territory?

    Worst case?

    90 day trials extended to all businesses; no mutual agreement between parties needed to begin one.

    Even that would be hard to pass and effectively gaurantee Labour was elected 2011. Even on an economic footing, employers need some kind of stable staffing to make plans for the future. I can\’t imagine who or what this scenario would benefit. The only people/thing at risk now is the union body/organisation. Any further tilting towards employers from individuals becomes counter productive to operational concerns.

  3. peterlepaysan 3
    10 September 2010 at 8:54 pm

    the nats owe huge debts to the business roundtable and roger kerr.
    ideologically it is where they want to be. playing with the big boys.
    bugger the rest of us.

  4. Anne 4
    10 September 2010 at 9:49 pm

    “the nats owe huge debts to the business roundtable and roger kerr”.

  5. Graeme 5
    11 September 2010 at 9:31 am

    as an employer, i feel the balance is just about right. i like the 90 day trial bill but wouldnt want it to go any further. there are shit bag employers out there that would take advantage of it for sure. i come from a family of unionists and have seen how destructive they can be, but i have also seen how good they are. it is a fine line and neither side will ever be entirely happy.

  6. Alexandra 6
    12 September 2010 at 9:11 am

    “…it is a fine line and neither side will ever be entirely happy.”
    The inherent power inbalance between employers and workers is not a fine line but a massive gulf. The 90 day trial further strengthens the power inbalance in favour of employers. Its wrong and if know employers will exploit it how can you like it?

Links to post

  2. thestandard: posted on 9 September 2010 at 8:11 pm

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.