Unions and commentators are saying that employers are growing more militant. It certainly feels a bit like it’s all on for one and all in the world of employment relations. In the last week or so, there have been three lockout threats, one of which is now underway at Bridgeman Concrete in Manukau, where all the workers asked for was to negotiate a collective agreement. Then there’s the bitter dispute being waged at Open Country Cheese where the workers are facing a six week lockout starting on 24 September and replacement labour has been brought in to do the work of the striking workers.
The NZ Bus dispute started with threats of lockout, where the employer completely overreacted to the union’s intention to “work to rule” and issued lockout notices. Work to rule, in case you don’t know, simply means doing the job a worker is paid to do, with no good-will overtime and extra service that workers so often give for nothing. Fortunately, the parties are making an effort to get resolution by using the facilitation tools in the Employment Relations Act.
Then we have the long-running dispute between Telecom’s contractor, Visionstream and the EPMU, which has descended into a new low with Telecom hiring a private investigator to spy on the picketing workers in Northland.
Telecom/Chorus/Visionstream’s tactics in this dispute include all the union-busting techniques we hear about from America in their determination to break the employment rights of their workers and force them into dependent contracts.
And there are the provocative refusals to bargain in a range of industries, 0% pay offers in the State and the private sector, and it’s looking like rocky times ahead for workers.
In my experience as a union leader, we always saw this kind of bad employer behaviour leading into an election when National was picked to win. Equally, there were predictions of widespread industrial mayhem from business when Labour was elected. Labour had to work hard to settle down the “winter of discontent” of 2000 and I thought that over the years there had been more of an acceptance of the value of good workplace relationships and collective bargaining.
Am I wrong? Are we just seeing a few renegade employers pushing out the boat to test the waters under a new government?
What I hope to see are strong statements from the Minister of Labour about this kind of bullying and unfair behaviour from these employers, particularly when none of the lockouts above involve highly paid workers. She needs to take a stand because coming up in the next year are the Nurses, Doctors and Teachers, who are not known to lie down and accept this kind of treatment. And after all, she was very quick to announce a law change in meal break legislation when it affected employers.
This is the time for Kate Wilkinson to show some leadership as the Minister of Labour.
I dare to hope she will.
I think that you are right on the button Darien.
Given the concerted push by the Government to impose a wage freeze on state sector workers, I think the green light has been given to private sector employers to follow suit, using whatever strategies (eg lockouts, contracting out, bringing in labour hire companies) in the process.
A lot more has happened since the “winter of discontent” with so called “tidying up” amendments made in 2004 that have effectively forced employers into collective contracts by the back door. National pledged at the time to repeal that part of the legislation and I expect they will.
I know a few “public servants” who won’t be joining any industrial action because they recognise that there is a strongly political aspect to it and most “public servants” are well paid, a year or two of 0% isn’t going to hurt them.
Employers becoming more miliant? Good.
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
I notice that with the Chorus/Telecom dispute, that the newspapers are calling the actions of the workers, a strike when in fact most if not all are actually redundant. What gives?
Swampy – Seriously? You’re deluded. You’re thinking of the top brass management surely because a public officer working on 48k, raising two kids who is over 95% of their “band” is not likely to agree with you.
Gooner – The employer has always had, currently has, and will always have the balance of power in the employment relationship. Refusing to allow collective bargaining through bully tactics is underhanded and puts paid to Super Gaffe Wilkinson’s claims that employers would continue to behave in an open manner and in good faith with their employees.
Finding savings through wage freezes and staff cuts is constipated thinking, smart employers seek opportunities to enhance productivity through process enhancements as a starting point, building brand loyalty and developing innovative cultures within the work place. Poor employers cut staff and freeze wages.
Honestly Swampy if you think $14.62/hour for Service and Food Service members in District Health Boards is “well paid” then you are obviously living on a different planet to these workers.
They are being told that there will be no pay increase this year and with the annual increases in Government DHB funding projected to be cut in half for the next two years then it could be some time before there is any pay increase.
It reminds me when the National Government was elected in 1990. Some workers said a pay freeze for a year wouldn’t be too bad, but after their pay remained the same five years later they wished they had done something about it in the first year.
National Radio has been running an anti union line all morning blaming Open Country workers for the sludge spill. Turns out it is a quote from the company but they are running it as uncontested fact in each news update. And this is public service radio.
Workers fight for there rights especially when a left wing government is in power.
Why should it be any different for employers when a right wing government is in power.
Employer militancy is probably more about survival than socking it to workers.
A lot of companies that were around last year wont be around next year.
Employers cant survive with out employees and vice versa.
More understanding is needed from BOTH sides
@Mark – it’s not a competition, or a my turn now, or at least it shouldn’t be. There are good employers who don’t think it’s okay to treat their workers like this; who are genuine in their efforts and who see the value of working with workers and unions. I don’t recall a rise in worker militancy during the Labour government of the last 9 years; actually, I think it was pretty stable, although many workers who had been denied the opportunity for good faith bargaining during the 1990’s ECA certainly took the chance to get back the millions taken out of workers’ pockets during that period.
@Swampy – National has not said it will repeal the 2004 ERA changes. That was their 2005 election promise. This time it’s much more muted and secret.
More wisdom from the Sunday Times here:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/business/2926685/Industrial-relations-a-striking-change-of-atmosphere
As the CTU’s Helen Kelly mentions in the article, the “the three biggies” currently in the news for industrial unrest “don’t involve companies fighting for their survival.”.
In particular, Open Country’s owner Talleys has had more run-ins with the Department of Labour in its existence, than the number of bullets fired in the Battle of Stalingrad. Talleys are an example of a company that behaves just like the 1970s-era unions it purportedly despises.
And the Synovate dispute earlier this year illustrates how easily a lockout can backfire on its management, in very French style.