Strike breaking Bill in trouble

Written By: - Date published: 3:24 pm, June 18th, 2013 - 28 comments
Categories: capitalism, class war, national, Unions, workers' rights - Tags: , ,

Nat MP Jami-Lee Ross’ Employment Relations (Continuity of Labour) Amendment Bill is a nasty piece of work. It is supported by John Key, of course. But it doesn’t have many other friends. From last week:

Employers group wary of strike-breaking Bill

A leading business lobby warns a strike-breaking bill to come before Parliament will prove ”divisive” and could be a bridge too far. …

Kim Campbell, chief executive of the Employers & Manufacturers Association, said the bill appeared to be a good idea ”at first flush”, but this did not take into account unintended consequences. “While its principles are worth exploring it could prove very divisive,” Campbell said. “New Zealand communities place a high value on fairness and the Bill could have consequences that would be considered unfair. …

Campbell added that employers did not want employment law to change every time there was a change of Government ”and we can foresee law based on this Bill may not last”.

In related news, Peter Dunne got back to work today, and reminded us all that while he may be an unusually vacuous politician (and a foolish popinjay to boot), he is at least better to have in Parliament than yet one more Nat lobby-fodder back bencher. Bravo Peter Dunne:

Dunne not backing crack down on strikes

The United Future leader says he won’t support National MP Jami-Lee Ross’s members’ Bill that would allow employers to hire contract workers when their employees go on strike.

Mr Dunne says it is a step to far and he thinks the right to strike is an important part of industrial law.

Let’s hope it’s another win for workers and for MMP.

28 comments on “Strike breaking Bill in trouble ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. vto 1
    18 June 2013 at 3:33 pm

    .
    This should be a wake up call for the fools in this government that they really genuinely seriously do not know what they are doing.

    They think they will help employers but the employers themselves say “no thanks, not right”.

    HA

  2. McFlock 2
    18 June 2013 at 4:11 pm

    “at first flush”?

    Is that tory policy development – produce a motion, and it it twirls around the bowl without disappearing, keep it?

  3. Darien Fenton 3
    18 June 2013 at 4:34 pm

    It’s good Peter Dunnes not voting for this stupid bill, but he’s supporting the ERA Amendment bill which will have far a bigger impact on workers.

    • Te Reo Putake 3.1
      18 June 2013 at 4:50 pm

      Indeed, Darien. This would just have been the icing on the cake. The effect of both proposed bills is to end the pivotal role collective bargaining has in setting wage rates for all kiwis. But Ross was proposing the dry right’s holy grail; the unfettered right to lock out employees during negotiations and to employ scabs to do their work until the workers come back begging.

    • Rogue Trooper 3.2
      18 June 2013 at 4:54 pm

      wtf is going on with your front benches re this Box affair? Have they got no freakin’ idea? Thank the good Lord I support the membership. The Leadership, goodness gracious me, although, David Shearer is improving imho.

    • Bearded Git 3.3
      18 June 2013 at 5:36 pm

      Yes one easy populist call cannot obviate all the other nasty legislation Dunne has supported.

      • Hayden 3.3.1
        18 June 2013 at 6:31 pm

        Pretty sure he voted against Charter Schools too. So, two easy populist calls.

    • Rogue Trooper 3.4
      18 June 2013 at 5:38 pm

      Do the Best that you can Darien, we are watching every flutter

  4. Tiger Mountain 4
    18 June 2013 at 4:50 pm

    With the pressure of high unemployment, underemployment, precarious employment, people always wanting more hours, ‘internships’ and a miserly minimum wage, what more do these tory bastards want? Workers chained to work stations? Fire exits locked?

    The scab bill should be in trouble for a number of reasons. I look forward to meeting Jamie-Lee on a picket line some time, heh.

  5. chris73 5
    18 June 2013 at 5:01 pm

    Popinjay? why not Flibbertigibbet 🙂

  6. Kevin Welsh 6
    18 June 2013 at 5:33 pm

    Is this just another NACT ‘mad-as-a-snake’ idea that they know won’t fly, but is a cover for something more sinister in the ERA Amendment Bill burbling away in the background?

  8. Lanthanide 8
    18 June 2013 at 6:20 pm

    JLR is a jumped up little oik of a yes-man who was gifted a safe seat and doesn’t have an original thought in his head. Pity Dunne didn’t say that.

  9. Yes 9
    18 June 2013 at 9:14 pm

    Quite amazing you are celebrating jump to the left on voting against the bill by dunne. He is trying to connect with the left to score some points. Lol he one of yours now

  10. Helen Kelly 10
    18 June 2013 at 9:25 pm

    The Employment Law changes still in front of the Parliament and supprted to date by Peter Dunne outlaw striking for 60 days during which current collective agreements expire and no new negotiations can take place. This provides a “window” for employers to directly negotiate with employees for invidiual agreements – if Peter Dunne thinks the right to strike is important in industrial law – then this is the most important time – when a collective has expired and workers are seeking a new one. The replacement labour law during a stike is very bad law – but it is being used as a distraction from the major changes going through the Parliament. The EMA position is to use the strike breaker Bill to pitch the other law changes as moderate – they are anything but. No need for the strike breaker bill if you cant strike at all!

    For those of you who want the detail I will write a full blog on this issue in the next few days.

    • r0b 10.1
      18 June 2013 at 10:05 pm

      Thanks Helen.

    • Darien Fenton 10.2
      18 June 2013 at 10:51 pm

      What Helen said.

    • Colonial Viper 10.3
      18 June 2013 at 11:19 pm

      Shareholder capitalists are consistent in wanting to defang or even completely remove labour’s last remnant right to strike.

      Have any counter proposals been discussed to significantly broaden and strengthen labour’s right to strike beyond the (somewhat weak and narrow) status quo which has been in place for many years under both National and Labour Govts?

      I am wondering if the Left is ready to move decisively beyond increasingly desperate rear guard status quo preserving actions, once they take the Treasury benches next year.

    • Skinny 10.4
      20 June 2013 at 7:11 am

      So does the CTU sit on it’s hands or are you planning a campaign ‘like a day of action’ ??

  11. chris73 11
    18 June 2013 at 11:00 pm

    I knew Key wouldn’t have the nuts for this…bring on Collins!

  12. KJT 12
    19 June 2013 at 2:59 pm

    Unfortunately this is SOP for NACT.

    Put forward a extremely radical proposition as a smokescreen, and then pretend to be moderate by watering it down a bit.

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