Parliament’s cleaners are taking industrial action and good on them. They shouldn’t have to, they work hard during antisocial hours late at night, they deserve more than the minimum wage of $12.55 an hour. They arrive about mid night and commence the onerous task of cleaning up the mess left by all who visited and work here.
Cleaners have a tough job, make no mistake about that. People are generally tidier at home where they have their family to keep them in check, sadly often the standards slip when they are at work.
Having worked as a cleaner for four years to put myself through school I have first hand experience of cleaning in hospitals, government and commercial buildings and can vouch for the poor pay for the work done, often filthy work.
Of the many disgusting messes I was confronted with one will suffice to make the point; the men’s toilet at one place always had a soiled pan, always the same one in the line, which had hardened onto the back of the bowl evidence of the individuals handiwork. It took at least half an hour per day to clean from the two hours for cleaning the whole building. Everyday it was the same. It can not have gone unnoticed by the person concerned.
Frustrated by being paid for 2 hours and working 2 and a half I left a note saying ‘would the person who lives on a diet of black liquorice and glue aim for the water not the bowl, please, the cleaner.’ It worked. Every cleaner will have similar stories of just how messy and inconsiderate people can be.
Short hours are another hazard for cleaners. Crothall’s, my employer at the time suffered a dip in profits and responded by cutting all our hours in half for every job, regardless of the work to be done. We cleaners were all living on the edge, these cuts if given effect to would have been devastating. At 17 and still at school I organised my first strike for the reinstatement of the hours. We won most back but lost some. We won the ability to shuffle the hours around to support those most in need.
The third hazard for a cleaner is the pay, universally bad, but need not be. When I started, bad as the pay was, it was well ahead of the minimum wage. Regrettably today, the minimum wage has too often become the maximum wage for cleaners.
Parliament is not a place that can credibly claim poverty with an inability to pay. Selected MPs have received a substantial increase in their support budgets for their electorate work. The there is the obvious of the increase for a certain MPs house rental that was cut back, not because there was no money, but because of public outrage.
The public would support cleaners being paid more than $12.55 an hour for cleaning up Parliament and working from midnight to the small hours of the morning.
If anyone disagrees I am sure a job swap can be arranged. A month or more on 12.55 an hour will be a reality check for anyone.
I am for the cleaners, the hours are short, the work is tough and the pay is bad.
Good old Spotless eh Rick, still wringing every drop out of its workforce for the minimum wage required. Good story that many can relate to, but as well as trying to introduce a better mimimum wage, how about you MPs, or some of you anyway, clean your own rooms for a week, just to give the cleaners on your floor an opportunity to sit down with feet up and feel appreciated; perhaps with a box of chocs or bunch of grapes to share? Just a thought…(I know your busy)
Rick, the market place will always determine the value of labour always has always will.
Parliment is precisely the place that can credibly claim poverty, it produces nothing adds value to nothing and therefore
“EARNS” no income, I would have thought you would be obligated to obtain the cleaning services required at the best possible rate, remember its the taxpayers money that is being spent here.
If the rate being paid for cleaning was too low cleaners would leave the industry,thus driving the rate up, it would appear that there is no shortage of cleaners, hence the pay rate.As you have noted in the above post, if an artificially high rate is set, then the number of work hours will be decreased, for an increase in value of labour to occur there must be an increase in productivity.
Sideoiler
One of the many things that Australia has over us are strong unions. This is one reason they have a higher minimum wage. I never see any advocates of “close the gap” suggesting we ought to strengthen our unions. It would be interesting to see how the market operated in that situation? Oh we can, glance west to Australia.
Your example is somewhat obtuse
“If the rate being paid for cleaning was too low cleaners would leave the industry,thus driving the rate up, it would appear that there is no shortage of cleaners, hence the pay rate.”
Cleaning by definition is low skilled. We live in a time of high unemployment.
The irony is that one reason we live in high unemployment is the failings of those driving the capitalist system (the money men), when they were riding high, the minimum wage was low, when they are low, the minimum wage is low.
It is possible for a market driven system to have some decency. At least it is while we have a Democracy (Super City sees the erosion of that)..
Well put Rick and good on you for supporting the cleaners.
Sideoiler reckons that the market determines wage rates. How does this work with politicians? Do we tender out the work and employ the lowest bidder? No, we regulate a rate of pay for them as we think it is important for them to get a socially-acceptable minimum.
Why shouldn’t we do the same for parliamentary cleaners? If Parliamentary Services can accept that the cleaning of Bill English’s Wellington house is worth $20.00 an hour then why can’t they pay another couple of dollars an hour for the ones who clean his office.
Tracey
New Zealanders really need to get past comparing them selves to Australia,not all states in Australia have strong unions.
Australia has an abundance of high value minerals that are relatively easily extracted,traditionally Australian governments have not been ideologically opposed to mining.
Australia has a population of approx 20 million people 4 to 5 times that of New Zealand and thus a larger tax base, it also has personal tax rates greater than NZ, food is expensive electricity is dearer property taxes are more expensive payroll taxes capital gains taxes.
I can recall a time in this country when the unions were a powerful force,at that time you could not go to a bank and buy overseas funds.A new car tyre would nearly break the finances of a working man.
Cars were expensive because union car assembly jobs were protected by import tarifs.inter island ferry crews would be on strike during holiday periods with monotonous predictably.
Boiler makers union were on strike for 6 weeks because they wanted triple stitched jeans not the double stitched jeans that the employer had supplied.
New Zealand was shut at 5pm on a friday evening.
I dont think I want to go back to that. All the perks and conditions have to be payed for by some one.
When it comes to closing the gaps I have yet to hear some one say lets tax the workers and producers less lets lower compliance costs lets make it easier to employ people.
I agree with you cleaning is a low skill job so it is never going to pay a doctors salary.
Im not certain what you are driving at with your super city comment regarding democracy perhaps you could enlighten me further.
Equity in pay is about balance in bargaining. I don’t agree with the comparisson to Australia, it’s just that most who keep trotting out that argument choose to only compare is to the parts of the gap that further their aims.
Australia has also been pro-active rather than reactive during the recession, our Government has been reactive, when acting at all. Again, they haven’t alerted people to the large difference between us and Australia on this matter.
Sadly those who refuse to acknowledge the minimum wage is too low, also argue that too many people don’t want to move off the dole. Perhaps one day they will see that it’s a big deal (and kudos to those who do it) to work 40 hours every week for bugger all rather than telling them to be grateful that “market forces” pay them anything at all.
The “truth” is that our economic system DEMANDS there be a large number of unskilled workers, it simply doesn’t work if there are not. Therefore many mechanisms are in place to ensure that pool remain.
So, accepting all that I won’t expect them to be grateful for the $12.75 per hour gross they receive, and nor will I BS them by telling them that the way out is entirely in their hands, when I know they exists within a system designed to keep a majority of people in that very position.
I am NOT advocating socialism per se, rather capitalism with compassion. I won’t hold my breath.
Oil, it’s easy to not object to mining when the landscape and eco system you disrupt to extract it is a big red desert. NZ and OZ are apples and oranges on mining too.
A Democracy ensures that even the unskilled have a voice, and in this way we can determine minimum wages which almost allow them to live, but not thrive. However, the SuperCity concept, and the proposed legislation dilutes that very process by passing over huge assets to appointees of the Minister of Local Government and Transport. Those Ministers will appoint the majority of Directors, leaving elected Directors a minority. Assuming those selected by those two Ministers share those two Ministers views on property and services in relation to people, we will see “market forces” dictating. The same reps of market forces that believe the cleaners should be happy to even have a job… let alone a liveable wage.
The question is, NZ’s largest city is first… then what?
I will have NO fundamental representation on the use of the assets of my city but I bet I still have to pay my rates over?
Thought for the day… Aucklanders who object to the un-democracising of Auckland… STOP paying your rates.
“When it comes to closing the gaps I have yet to hear some one say lets tax the workers and producers less lets lower compliance costs lets make it easier to employ people.”
I have heard just that in the Prime Minister’s speech a week or so ago. Especially vis a vis taxing workers and producers less. Although interestingly the Nats dont seem to be talking about compliance costs. Perhaps they finally read the reports they ignored when in opposition which shows us to be a very business friendly environment, easy to set up business in etc etc.
Tracy,
Then you agree on some things then, comparisons with Australia are of little use.
“Australia and New Zealand are apples and oranges”Exactly my point,we can not expect to live well if we are not prepared to use the resources we have. we will not be able to have our cake and eat it as well.
As to your assertion that our economic system demands there be a large number of unskilled workers for the economy to function,were that so New Zealand should be in an enviable financial position,we have no shortage of unskilled workers yet the economy is in very poor shape.
The Australian economy was in better shape when the recession began.I cant think of anything the Australian Govt did that I would call proactive and made any difference to the economy in Australia the cash hand out kept money going around and some widescreen televisions got sold and some in the retail sector kept their jobs a little longer.
No body should be “grateful” for the hourly rate they receive regardless of the dollar value, the customer (employer) has agreed to pay a price for a service or a skill set provided by the supplier (worker)and the supplier (worker) has agreed to provide it at that price,
The supplier (worker) may increase the price at any time However the customer (employer) will still decide whether to purchase the service or skill.
Should the govt decide to increase the price of this service then the customer (employer) will still decide whether to purchase.
I also have a great respect for any body that gets out and works a forty hour week for bugger all, it saddens me that people can choose not to work and be financially better off than those who do work.
It beggars belief that unemployment benefits are paid in areas where fruit crops go un picked and orchardists must employ seasonal workers from overseas.
Rick,
Well done you have hit the nail on the head with your comments.
No worker should be expected to perform the duties or work the hours they do for the wage they are paid.
Look forward to your ongoing support/ comments in support of these workers and their campaign
Did they not see the contracted wage when they signed their contract?
Did they not agree to do the cleaning job for that amount of money?
Its a bit lousy striking after agreeing to do x job for y money.
If they dont like it – they could get an education or work harder and get a better paying job – pretty easy really.
Rick
Your wake up call to the inconsiderate well to do sitting on the throne is well over due. $12.55 as a wage for cleaners is unacceptable, considering the hard work they do. I don’t see anyone saying ita an easy job. It’s about time we got back to a fair and equal soiety, not tooth and claw market forces. Give cleaners a fair wage, $15 and hour.
Great to see that we have people in parliament who know what the lives of real people, people like those who clean up the messes of others for a living, are like.
The likes of John Key and his mates who pretend they are the workers’ friends see only the profits they extract from the work of cleaners and others who work for wages.
The changes to ACC, the attacks on Kiwi Saver, the threat of a GST increase, the miserable 25 cents rise in the minimum wage rate, the de-facto wage freeze in the public sector, the cuts in social services ….. these are the acts of a government driven by money, not people’s needs.
[...] posts by Rick, Clare, and Darien. « Anti-mining [...]
Boring. Had to check it wasn’t spam. have an original relevant thought or get lost. Deleted. Trevor