Update on Employment Law Changes

Posted by: Helen Kelly

You will all be aware by now of the employment law changes announced at the weekend.

 It is our understanding that all these changes are subject to the full select committee process but they can at any time invoke urgency as they did in December 2008. 

These changes come on top of the original 90 day law in December 2008 rushed through under urgency, the limits being proposed to how unions conduct strike ballots, the requirement to agree on meal and refreshment break times, the axing of the Pay and Employment Equity Unit, the cut in union education funding, and the cuts in ACC entitlements.

Below we briefly summarise the changes announced which, in almost all cases, unions will oppose.

 

  • Extending 90 day period with no right of appeal against unfair dismissal to all workplaces.
  • Employers will be able to ‘communicate’ directly with workers during collective bargaining.
  • Union access will require employer consent, which ‘cannot be unreasonably withheld’.
  • Reduced focus on procedural fairness in personal grievance cases. The Government will ‘ensure that an employer's processes are not the subject of pedantic scrutiny’.
  • The Employment Court will have less ability to question the reason for dismissal as the test is changed from what a reasonable employer ‘would’ do, to ‘could’ do.
  • Removing reinstatement as the primary remedy in dismissal cases.
  • The Employment Relations Authority will be able to ‘filter out vexatious or frivolous claims at an early stage’.
  • There will be penalties for delaying behaviour at the Authority.
  • Up to one week's annual holidays can be traded for cash.
  • For those workers whose hours of work and pay are irregular, their payment for sick leave, bereavement leave, public holidays and alternative holidays will be calculated by averaging gross earnings for the preceding 52 weeks or whatever lesser period the employee has been with that employer.
  • Workers can agree to transfer the observance of public holidays to another (identified) working day.
  • Employers will be able to ‘ask for proof of sickness or injury within three consecutive days of an employee taking sick leave, but will have to cover the employee's reasonable costs in obtaining proof’.
  • The maximum penalties for non-compliance with the Holidays Act will double from $5,000 to $10,000 if the employer is an individual, and from $10,000 to $20,000 if the employer is a company or other body corporate.
  • Early mediation services without representation, prior to any formal mediation.
  • The Government intends to make some other changes ‘to improve the way the Employment Relations Authority works, including moving to a more judicial mode of operation, with the right to cross-examine witnesses’.
  • A code of ethics for employment advocates.
  • Formal definition of the role of Labour Inspector.
  • Allowing Labour Inspectors to issue improvement notices.

The 90-day law is a charter for unfair dismissal and, it appears, was a Trojan horse for a larger attack on basic democratic workplace rights. To borrow from Diane Ravitch - it is an attempt to pander to "those who command by the power of money, not wisdom".

(Helen Kelly is President of the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions (NZCTU) PPTA is affiliated to the NZCTU)

Comments (1)add comment

Tui said:

Wilkinson's original answers to the Questions
90-Day Trial Period extended to all employers http://beehive.govt.nz/release...+employers

Why is the 90-Day trial being extended?

So that more of my mates have the benefit of the threat of terminating employment without penalty to weaken the bargaining position of applicants for jobs and get rid of cheap employees before they begin to generate costs for the employer - like sick leave, or move from youth rates to adult rates.

How successful has it been?

It must be working!! The employers love it! The 40% of people who had positions they had to fill but say they wouldn't have filled them otherwise wouldn't be lying now would they? Only 12 workers of the 13 workers surveyed objected as I understand it. They were just union stooges anyway.

Why not extend the trial period from a maximum of 90 days to six months or a year, as is the case overseas?

We think we can get away with 90 days til next term, then we can increase it because the survey we do then will say that 40% of bigger companies need more time to assess their workers. I know cos I have seen the report already.

Why are some of the rules relating to personal grievances being changed?

The employers contribute to National Party funds, the workers don't. Who cares if the piper is a bit rough on the rats! No, not that rat Anne.

What is being done to address problems with ‘no win no fee' and other advocates' behaviour?

This will stop those poor workers from risking going to court. Oh, I meant the workers who don't earn a lot - wouldn't want you to think I'm going soft on Labour voters!

Why will reinstatement no longer be the primary remedy in dismissal cases?

What employer wants to have to look at those bastards again if they win in court! Where's the fairness in that???

Why is the role of Labour Inspectors being redefined?

The role of Labour Inspectors will be defined as being to show that worker complaints are groundless and to support businesses to achieve a compliant workforce.

Why are Labour Inspectors' powers being increased?

We can encourage employers to avoid the mistakes which cost them money in court and make it easier for them to get away with lots of extra shit when they fire the workers they don't want hanging around anymore!!

Why are the rules relating to union access to workplaces being changed?

Who want union organisers in their workplaces, I mean, come on - have you met any of them? And they get your workers all upset about health and safety, their pay (and they should be working for free if you ask me - they don't know how lucky they are just to have a job I can tell you) and silly things like being hit when you are in a bad mood or hit on when you're in a happy mood. Poor Mr David Garrett.

What is behind the clarification of rules relating to employers communicating with employees during collective bargaining?

Nothing like having a bit of a chat with the workers to remind them about who will be losing their jobs if they don't accept your charity eh?

What happens next?


OOOOH, wait til they see what's coming next!!!!

Will I have a say?

The workers can say what they like! Ha ha - that's funny eh? I think its called a pun.

When are the changes likely to become law?

In by lunchtime, eh Don?
 
July 22, 2010
Votes: +0

Write comment

busy