As Labour Members of Parliament we are very concerned that cleaners working inside Parliament are being paid just a few cents above the minimum wage.
These cleaners are employed by a private contractor (Spotless Services Limited – SSL), and are paid as little as $12.55 an hour.
We believe this reflects badly on this place, especially given that cleaners within other parts of the state sector such as schools and public hospitals are already being paid $14.62 an hour by the same contractor.
We think Parliament has a responsibility to set an example, and should not support poverty wages for the people who work so hard to make the lives of MPs run more smoothly.
Cleaners should be paid a living wage, and this should be at least $14.62 an hour, in line with other state sector cleaners.
We are aware that cleaners are currently negotiating their Collective Agreement and while those negotiations are directly with their employer, as the “client” we think that a message from yourself and MPs urging the contractors to pay a fair living wage to all cleaners could assist.
Yours sincerely,
Darien Fenton and other Labour MPs
Excellent work Darien!!!
Good on you Darien, for drawing attention to it, I will contact my MP.
Well put Darien.
I think you make a good point about the responsibility of Parliament to make sure that the cleaners get a minimum $14.62 state sector wage.
Too often I hear building owners and tenants blaming the cleaning contractor when they have the power to force them to put the pay rates up.
This letter has gone to the speaker with Labour MP signatures on it, along with Jim Anderton from the Progressives. I’ll let you know the response.
“along with Jim Anderton from the Progressives” oh you mean the other Labour MP right?
I can’t help but see this as a publicity stunt by Labour. You were in power for three terms. What were the cleaners getting paid in 2008 before the election?
Let’s hope they clean up their act.
@ Luke
“What were the cleaners getting paid in 2008 before the election?” A darn sight more than 2000 – just after the Nats were last in government.
Anne- sorry, the correct answer you were looking for is either- A- The same as they are now or B- less than they are now.
Simple question – how much were they being paid 15 months ago when you guys were in charge?
Didn’t seem like much of an issue to you at the time obviously.
@ Anne – thats not the point – the only number is what did labour thing a cleaner was worth 15 months ago – and how can they justify them being worth so much more now ($15) simply because they are not in power.
@ Luke
Given some of your juvenile claims in previous posts, I take most of what you say with a grain of salt.:)
Interesting argument; Let me see if I have it right;
IF Labour didn’t increase cleaners wages in 2008, or to $14.62 then National doesn’t have to?
Can the people who profer this kind of ‘argument” let the rest of us know at what point/date we can hold National’s feet to the fire for anything at all? Thank you.
national voted against the minimum wage increases throughout the term of the Labour Government, a time, according to National and others of surplus’ and rosy economy. Spotless has returned a profit of $24m so they will neither lose their competitive edge nor go bankrupt if they moved beyond the minimum wage. They are representative of a National ACT mentality which hides behind “market forces” when in fact they believe that workers should be paid as little as a company can get away with.
“@ Luke
Given some of your juvenile claims in previous posts, I take most of what you say with a grain of salt.:)”
Oh, so you’ve gone with option C- ignore the inconvenient truth that Labour actually did no better?
“Can the people who profer this kind of ‘argument” let the rest of us know at what point/date we can hold National’s feet to the fire for anything at all? Thank you.”
Well I seem to recall Ministers answering question in 2009 blaming the previous National administration for problems in 2009… I don’t think we will stoop to that level though.
[...] posts by Rick, Clare, and Darien. « Anti-mining [...]
15 months ago? March 08 Labour led Government signed a Principles Agreement for btter cleaning idustry with all the major stakeholders. Wages for cleaners then was $11.30/hr. 08 ended with cleaner on $12.55. the biggest pay rise they ever got. When cahnge of Government came about Labour had already set in place provisions to deliver $14.62/hr to School cleaners. another major rise. Unfortunatedly with the cahnge of Governement, this rate could be delivered for cleaners outside Hospitals and Schools, thus the cry for fariness. school cleaner gets $14.62, but cleaner cleaning Min of Ed National office gets $12.55/hr. where’s the fairness J Key talks about? This is why the present Government has to be consistent and fair. Labour did what? Labour acted on its promises to us cleaners, that’s what happened when they were there!
Luke this term has been riddled with blaming Labour, and you didn’t actually answer my question.
Tracey, try looking up some hansard docs of pre election 2009 and you will see that National were still being blamed for Labours problems in 2009. Of course some problems that the present Government faces are caused by Labour, heard of ACC recently?
As for when it will stop… who knows? I will start to get annoyed with it if it is still going on three months from now.
PS what is the deal with all my comments going into auto-moderation? ( Not sure Like, will look into it, Grant)
@ Mea’ole Keil
Thanks. That should have cleared things up in Lukes head.
@ A Mother
If you go back and look at some of his comments on previous posts you will see that Luke doesn’t know the difference between fact and fiction. Poor fella
Hi Anne
Hi A Mother 
“Thanks. That should have cleared things up in Lukes head.”
Ahh… no, raises more questions than answers…. “15 months ago? March 08 ” 15 months ago was November 08… pretty sure Labour did not have the power to do anything then.
“@ A Mother
”
If you go back and look at some of his comments on previous posts you will see that Luke doesn’t know the difference between fact and fiction. Poor fella
So Anne, you have settled for option C or are you going to go for option D now? – play the man rather than the ball?
Oh, and to be fair… bikerkiwi is no better.
{All on this thread, Let’s try to focus on the issues folks rather than the personalities, thanks, Grant}
Awesome work! Definately full support here!
Are the Labour Party going to put their money where their mouth are, dip into their own pockets and top up the cleaners’ wages to a level they consider appropriate? Or is charity something extracted from productive people at the point of a gun?
@Grant.
I accept your request totally but it makes me angry when commenters like bikerkiwi and Luke use the plight of some of the lowest paid workers in the land to indulge in inane political point scoring.
@ anne – I have been asking fair questions. attacking the person is not particularly nice and I thought red alert was better than that.
Well, let’s talk about why we blamed National. The effect of their policies in the 1990’s were devastating to cleaners and other low paid workers. They lost pay, hours, conditions and rights. Unemployment went through the roof, and the minimum wage increased by just 75 cents in nine years. They caused devastation for families and communities, and I, for one, will never stop reminding them. They need to be held accountable for the havoc they caused to so many people’s lives.
Labour went to huge efforts to fix the issues for low paid workers. Firstly, we had to get rid of the evil Employment Contracts Act and replace it with something fairer – and what a fuss about that from National, even although they’ve now largely accepted Labour’s changes, apart from some fiddling around the edges. Next we had to stop the situation where repetitive contracting was driving down wages (where it didn’t matter what the wages were with the first contractor, because a second contractor could come in and drive those wages down, either through pay cuts, or cuts to hours, or by sacking all workers). That happened under National again and again and again. That took more legislation in 2004, which again was opposed by National. Next problem : addressing the three way relationship where workers are contracted out and figuring out how to deal with this. What had been happening is that government buildings and parliamentary services were shoving off responsibility for low wages to the contractor – saying in effect “its not our problem, we don’t employ these people”. What the Principles Agreement Mea’ole refers to was about the state, as the client for cleaners in government buildings, (including parliament), along with the contractors and the union taking responsibility for delivering higher quality and better wages in the industry. Labour signed up to this. National, as the government is also party to it, but has chosen to ignore it and nothing’s changed since they became the government.
In Hospitals and Schools, Labour provided additional funding and targeted to ensure the cleaners wages were increased. Cleaners were next on the list for a pay jolt, but they’ve been in bargaining for a year under National and what’s happened? Nothing.
How long does it usually take for the Speaker/his office to reply?
“Well, let’s talk about why we blamed National. The effect of their policies in the 1990’s were devastating to cleaners and other low paid workers.”
Yet Tracey pulls me up for holding Labour to account for not having improved the plight of the workers in their last term!
Darien, lets face it. Labour had from 1999 to 2008 to sort this out. Harking on about what National did in the 1990’s just makes you look petty and rather opportunistic!
It is my understanding that the cleaning is provided by a private contractor, not employees of Parliament. What can the Government do to a private company to make them raise wages (aside from the obvious of raising the minimum wage).
As an aside, surely Parliament is big enough to justify employing its own cleaning staff?
@James – sorry don’t know the answer to that but will let everyone know.
@Luke – I’ve tried to explain how this works. What the government can do is provide additional targeted funding for parliamentary services, who contract with Spotless and make it a condition the cleaners are paid more – just as Labour did in hospitals and schools. The Speaker is the Minister in charge of parliamentary services. Of course parliament could employ its own cleaners along with catering staff and others who are employed by contractors. Wish that would happen, but not holding my breath.
Go Darien!!!!!!!!! Dear Luke did you actually read what Darien said? Under National the minimum wage increased by 75cents over 9 years! Darien and her fellow Labour MPs in Government did more for low paid workers than any National Government would ever ever do and of course it took time. National and their supporters instead probably wish the ECA was still in place and that the minimum wage was still $7 something. Yes there is more to do however sadly some voters decided they wanted a “change’so the momentum stopped. Change is coming alright now we have had a year of Mr Nice Guy Key the true colours will emerge and NZ is not going to like it.
““Well, let’s talk about why we blamed National. The effect of their policies in the 1990’s were devastating to cleaners and other low paid workers.”
Yet Tracey pulls me up for holding Labour to account for not having improved the plight of the workers in their last term!”
Luke, not quite the same thing, but point taken. Not quite the same thing because although Labour may be seen to be blaming National for needing to raise wages, Labour did respond by, actually raising wages over its term while balancing that with other economic factors (I assume). WFF I assumed helped improve the plight of workers in the last term?
Whereas you seem to be saying National doesnt need to give the cleaners a pay rise because Labour didnt give them a pay rise up to $14.62 despite significantly raising their wages (with opposition from National every time).
Given the actions of labour, resulting in an increase for the cleaners to $14.62 – HAD NATIONAL GONE THROUGH WITH THE PREVIOUS AGREEMENT WHEN IT BECAME GOVT – it seems natural and consistent it would berate National for essentially reneging on an agreement to bring the cleaners into line with other public service workers?
Essentially you are arguing that National can do nothing and not be criticised for it, because labour didnt do enough of what they DID do?