Pansy Wong was answering questions for the Minister of Labour today in the House. I hope Kate wasn’t listening because she will be tearing her hair out. Pansy confirmed that the government is considering changes to collective bargaining and refused to rule out either a move to contracting out of personal grievances or the reintroduction of a youth minimum wage. We haven’t even begun the select committee submission process on the current proposed law changes to the Employment Relations and Holidays Act – and now Pansy has let the cat out of the bag about the next round of draconian law change wage and salary earners can expect from the NACTs.
Great
Lucky NZ 
First I discover that Anne isn’t speaking to me anymore 
And now this! 
It is always easier to let a cat out of a bag than put it back in! So this will play out for sure. Political activists and union delegates have had preparatory rallies and it is now time for a community wide effort to MOBILISE on October 20 for the NZCTU day of action. The important task is to try and involve non union workers, and correct me if I am wrong, the public sector unions. The PSA for example should have run a ‘not one more job’ campaign a year ago. I take no joy from criticising workers organisations but deja vu all over again (1991) is not what we need.
So refusing to rule now = confirming..?
Hardly…
@Jeremy M Harris – well the real Minister of Labour will be able to clear this up won’t she?
I love how often she says “for economic growth”. Yet another example of National’s real priorities – the dollar signs before the people
Hopefully… Put in a written question…
Voodoo economics at it best,
The national Cargo Cult.
I doubt fiddling with labour laws with have that much of an impact. National forgets in needs to create conditions for more (new) jobs to appear instead of making harder to keep/get the jobs we already got. Maybe they could try to help create conditions so people want to start new business or expand there current ones.
Even if the start up is just some person who self-employed, its better than the dole.
So really this is just changing laws so it can satisfy national rich business backers and john keys friends.
If they where really interested in economic growth they wouldn’t be peddling this rubbish.
Things like cutting business taxes and RMA reforms..? Those types of things..? Both of which I disagree with I might add…
You do realise they didn’t actually announce anything right..?
Darien
Show some compassion. It really should be illegal to link to anything that has audio of Pansy. Especially on a Thursday afternoon.
Umm… way off subject but I’m speaking to you Spud
Been sick with flu so must’ve missed something.
Does Kate (or Pansy) actually have any background in employment relations? Perhaps on the employer side somehow?
@Darien – your prediction at 5.10 seems optimistic.
@Ella – Agreed!
@Kate LOL
“Does Kate (or Pansy) actually have any background in employment relations? Perhaps on the employer side somehow?”
Snigger
“You do realise they didn’t actually announce anything right..?” I know but they are
“considering changes to collective bargaining and refused to rule out either a move to contracting out of personal grievances or the reintroduction of a youth minimum wage.”
So they haven’t announced anything yet, but they going to try and see much they can get away with.
But they looking in the wrong areas. It all done simply to satisfy national backers. To put it bluntly, they not any better than labour at running the economy.
Darien: Would you support a change to the law which allows workers to engage in collective bargining without having to join a union?
Hi Anne and Spud.
Why doesn’t this kind of thing suprise me anymore?
Hi A Mother!
Long time no see, it’s good to have you back! 
!
Just been busy with study Spud
Goodluck with your work
@ Nick C : No I wouldn’t support non union collective bargaining. Saw too much damage done by that supposed “freedom” and “choice” last time that was allowed.
What does non union collective bargaining look like?
tracey… it looks like de facto union bargaining. nick is just playing semantics again.
by definition, a group of workers banding together to negotiate wages/conditions is a union,no matter what name you give it.
thanks bbfloyd, was wondering how it would be different to a “union”, because everyone doesnt negotiate with the employer, someone/s would be appointed to represent etc
I noticed the Minister did issue a denial that the changes Darien has said are now defacto confirmed are not going to be happening…
well that’s good to know, the confusion resulted in a stated position, like GST and stuff
Flip flop?
@Jeremy M Harris : yes, funny that one Minister had to contradict another. I knew Kate wouldn’t be happy – but don’t NACT Ministers talk to each other? But also quite sweet how you always defend the NACTs no matter what. I will definitely be checking that the Minister has ruled out considering Part 6A, flexible workplaces and collective bargaining as in PW’s answer to the primary question; because I think you will find these things are definitely under review.
@Tracey : A union under the current ERA requires a society to have 15 or more members who have registered and to have democratic and accountable rules – not such a huge hurdle, but necessary to be able to bargain a collective agreement on behalf of others. What happened in the past was an employer could present a “collective contract”, get two or more workers to sign it and then say that took primacy over any other collective contract ; and therefore refuse to bargain with genuine unions.
Thanks Darien
I saw that blonde hair, and thought, that’s Heather Roy!! LOL. Seriously. But then I realised it was Darien.