PARLIAMENT | PARTY | GRASSROOTS

Red Alert

Author Archive

Minimum Wage misery

Posted by Darien Fenton on February 8th, 2012

The government’s announcement today of a 50 cents an hour increase in the minimum wage has left me feeling both relieved and depressed.

I’m relieved because at least the increase is 50 cents an hour, rather than the miserly 25 cents an hour in last year’s minimum wage increase –  even  if it still leaves a minimum wage worker only 20 cents an hour better off in real terms than they were after National’s first minimum wage increase in April 2009.    

But I’m depressed because of another lost opportunity to do something tangible about soaring income inequality in New Zealand.

The government, despite its crocodile tears and phony concern about poverty and the impact on families and children has ignored what would have been a significant step in addressing income inequality.

But I’m relieved that there is almost a majority in parliament for increasing the minimum wage to $15 an hour, with Labour, the Greens, Maori Party and NZ First all condemning the government’s short sighted decision today.  The only party that stands in the way of that happening is the one man band ACT  Party – whose only comment today has been to criticise the government’s increase in the new entrant and trainee rate to $10.80 an hour. (Sorry, United Future could be a game changer on this, but don’t hold your breath).

Should be an interesting one to watch.

Tags: ,
Filed under: Workers, low pay, minimum wage
8 Comments

The Precariat

Posted by Darien Fenton on February 4th, 2012

The term “precariat”, although not new, has become more visible in recent months as a result of a book, The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class, by Guy Standing, Professor of Economic Security at the University of Bath.

Standing asserts that the precariat are a newly emerging social class, in part created by globlaised trends towards creating a flexible workforce that has resulted in a growing number of people across the world living and working precariously, usually in a series of short-term jobs, without recourse to stable occupational identities, stable social protection or protective regulations relevant to them.

This is not just a matter of having insecure employment, of being in jobs of limited duration and with minimal labour protection, although all this is widespread. It is being in a status that offers no sense of career, no sense of secure occupational identity and few, if any, entitlements to the state and enterprise benefits that several generations of those who saw themselves as belonging to the industrial proletariat or the salariat had come to expect as their due……….

So, according to Standing the social ladder of today looks something like this:

  • Elite: the absurdly rich global citizens, the transnational capitalist class, global power elite, fewer than the 1%;
  • Salariat: those still in stable, full-time employment, pensions, paid holidays, employer-provided benefits often subsidised by the state;
  • Proficians: or “professional technicians”, those who have skills they can market as professional consultants, freelancers, etc and who might actually enjoy moving around, from job to job;
  • Working class: as in the traditional working class for whom the welfare state and employment law was built but whose ranks have been decimated;
  • Precariat
  • Unemployed and Socially marginalised

Standing describes the precariat as “primitive rebels” – people who know what they are against, but are not sure what they are for.  But, nevertheless, a class in the making, approaching a consciousness of common vulnerability and therefore the “new dangerous class”.

The precariat is not a class-for-itself, partly because it is at war with itself. One group in it may blame another for its vulnerability and indignity. A temporary low-wage worker may be induced to see the ‘welfare scrounger’ as obtaining more, unfairly and at his or her expense. A long-term resident of a low-income urban area will easily be led to see incoming migrants as taking better jobs and leaping to head the queue for benefits. Tensions within the precariat are setting people against each other, preventing them from recognising that the social and economic structure is producing their common set of vulnerabilities.

Ring any bells?

This video will give you a good idea of Standing’s thesis and then you can decide if the book is worth reading.  I think it is.

Filed under: Book Reviews, Work and Wages
22 Comments

From social partners to bit players

Posted by Darien Fenton on February 3rd, 2012

The emphasis of the Department of Labour Briefing to Incoming Ministers has significantly changed in 2011.

In the 2008 Briefing,  the Social Partners (Business NZ and Council of Trade Unions) were referred to frequently. Not now.

The notion of social partnership and tripartism is one that our government initially signed up to.  The Jobs Summit, early in John Key’s new government was an example.  Kate Wilkinson, Minister of Labour described this in her speech to the International Labour Organisation in 2009, saying  :

….”We are setting out a credible road to economic recovery, so we can emerge stronger from the recession than we went into it. ….. In this, we’ve taken an inclusive, tripartite approach, recognising that the problems arising from the current situation affect all New Zealanders. In late February, our Prime Minister, the Honourable John Key, hosted a national Jobs Summit which saw unions, business and Government united by a common desire to do as much as possible to keep New Zealanders in work during this recession….”

The 2008 BIM described the purpose of the portfolio as  :

  • productive, rewarding, and safe employment relationships, including bargaining, mediation and dispute resolution
  • setting, communicating, promoting, inspecting, and (where necessary) enforcing minimum standards of health and safety, and employment conditions
  • raising the value and quality of work, by promoting good practice and positive change in workplace cultures and practices
  • cooperation and interaction with other interested parties – including industries, sectors, and regions – in collaboration with social partners (Business New Zealand and the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions)
  • ensuring New Zealand both benefits from, and contributes to, international labour standards and fora.

But the slimmed down description of the role of the Labour portfolio in the 2011 BIM says the focus of the Minister and the Department is ensuring :

  • the labour market regulatory system is effective
  • employers and employees understand their rights and comply with their obligations
  • workplaces follow effective and sustainable employment relations and health and safety practices
  • New Zealand benefits from, and contributes to, international labour standards and forums.

Businesses are mentioned 43 times. Unions are mentioned once. Social partnership is over, it seems.

And significantly, there’s no mention of low pay, of addressing the ever-growing wage gap with Australia and the issues for self-employed and vulnerable contractors. All are workers trying to make a living and have the right to expect more from their government.

I’m looking forward to hearing Kate Wilkinson’s explanation on her annual trip to Geneva this year.

Tags:
Filed under: CTU, Employers, Workers, business, labour
3 Comments

Techno slavery

Posted by Darien Fenton on January 31st, 2012

I missed this on Stuff, but heard it on RadioNZ today.

Workers who find themselves answering work emails on their smartphones after the end of their shifts in Brazil can now qualify for overtime under a new law.

The new legislation was approved by President Dilma Rousseff last month.

It says company emails to workers are equivalent to orders given directly to the employee.

Labour attorneys told the Folha de Sao Paulo newspaper the new law makes it possible for workers answering emails after hours to ask for overtime pay.

Judging by the vox pop comments of Brazilian workers on the RadioNZ piece, this isn’t necessarily a popular move. I can understand that. Turning off the emails after hours is a hard thing to do.  It has become such a way of life for many working people, but even more so for those who believe their job depends on it.

This issue has started to emerge in several corners of the world. In May 2011, Chicago policeman Jeffrey Allen filed a class action suit against the city, asking for unpaid overtime compensation.

In December 2011, German carmaker Volkswagen agreed to deactivate e-mails on German staff Blackberry devices out of office hours to give them a break.

German telco Deutsche Telekom and consumer goods maker Henkel have also introduced measures to curb after-hours emails to reduce the pressure on workers to be always on call.

Remember the “work life balance” stuff we used to talk about?

Am I just old-fashioned in thinking that working lives are important, but so are our families as well?

Tags:
Filed under: family, jobs, technology, work life balance, workers rights
8 Comments

Paying attention

Posted by Darien Fenton on January 29th, 2012

The government has been asked to explain the inconsistency between the decision in Kim Dotcom’s residency application (which was granted) and his application to buy more than five hectares of New Zealand land (which was denied). Some might say that Jonathan Coleman should have paid more attention when  he was advised by Immigration NZ of their decision to waive the good character requirements for Mr Dotcom’s Investor Plus residency application. Others might say that alarm bells should have rung when Ministers Maurice Williamson and Simon Power overturned the decision by the OIO to enable Mr Dotcom to purchase properties in New Zealand because he didn’t meet the good character test.

John Key says it’s an “anomaly” and he’s looking into that.  Okay.

But here we see Key telling us in this video that the first time he’d heard of Kim Dotcom (who lives in John Key’s electorate) was when the Solicitor General advised him of the pending raid the night before.

However, some of his constituents, who live on the same road as Kim Dotcom say they contacted John Key’s Huapai office several times to complain about the dangerous driving of  Kim’s mates on their road and to express concerns about his residency and the OIO approval. Another neighbour of Mr Dotcom’s requested a meeting with John Key to discuss his concerns, but got absolutely nowhere. They’re a bit confused about John Key’s response.  Either their concerns weren’t passed on, or they were ignored.

I know our Prime Minister’s a busy and important man, but he also has responsibilities to his constituents and they were entitled to expect his interest.

Sometimes paying attention matters, even when you are the Prime Minister.

Filed under: Immigration, technology
27 Comments

Bon voyage to more whanau in 2012

Posted by Darien Fenton on January 19th, 2012

There’s been a lot of baloney in the media recently about the role (or control) of unions in Labour and a view that by supporting fairness at work means Labour must be anti-employer or anti-business. Mind you, none of this is new, but it’s reached a new peak of hysterical comment from some on the right with the PoAL dispute.

There’s no mystery about Labour’s values when it comes to working people. Our  founding values are about decent Kiwi jobs, the right to a fair day‘s pay for a fair day’s work, the right to join unions and bargain collectively, the right to have a voice at work and the right to be protected from unfair or unsafe treatment at work. We believe that there must be a balance between work demands and family/community responsibilities.

This doesn’t mean business is harder to do – in fact decent wages and effective employment relations should enable New Zealand business to lift productivity, to perform well and to grow.

Labour supports decent work (which is also supported by the National government at the ILO) and fair incomes for all New Zealand working people  - whether in low or middle income jobs, dependent contractors or self employed.  I know that constructive workplace relationships are important and good management is crucial. I don’t believe all employers are “bad” and all employees “good”.  You may be surprised how much sympathy I have with sole operators and small business who can barely make ends meet.

Some of the workers who get the rawest deal are those who are not in formal employment relationships, or in unions, such as self-employed and dependent contractors. Labour has been active in trying to make improvements for these Kiwis, but there’s nothing on the government’s agenda that makes any difference to them and a whole  lot that will impact on all working Kiwis.

Consider these comments from backbench National Party MP Jami-Lee Ross :

Unions still occupy a privileged position in New Zealand’s employment law; a relic of the last Labour administration which has not seen significant overhaul for some years. Few non-government organisations can boast clauses in legislation specifically designed for their benefit. Despite only 18 percent of the nation’s workforce being unionised, trade unions can look to whole sections of the Employment Relations Act written exclusively to aid union survival through legislative advantage.

My question to Jami-Lee is whether the Minister of Labour, Kate Wilkinson, who likes to present her government’s approach to employment relations as “pragmatic” and “what works” agrees with Jami-Lee’s views.  I want to know if she thinks unions are “privileged” and “relics”.  If she does, she better tell Kiwi workers soon, and fess up to the ILO at her annual sojourn in Geneva this year that she doesn’t believe that unions are social partners anymore, leaving only employers and government – and that our government is opposed to international labour conventions and human rights conventions. That will be interesting.

National’s manifesto already boasts “reforms”, such as :

1. Minimum wage : consultation on the annual review has been completed and we can expect an announcement in February.  $15 an hour?  Don’t think so.

2. The government’s plan for a “starting out” rate for 16 and 17 year old workers and also for 18 and 19 year olds who have been on a benefit may be one of the early pieces of legislation in front of parliament.

3. National’s policy commitments to weaken collective bargaining – no requirement to conclude, no requirement for workers to be on the terms and conditions of a collective agreement for 30 days where one exists, and the effective abolishing of multi employer agreements, along with allowing pay reductions for “partial” strikes – such as go-slows, work to rule etc and a review of constructive dismissal.

Then there’s all of the rest :

Bills carried forward from the last parliament : Meals and rest breaks legislation (Kate Wilkinson said this was urgent a couple of years ago, but it’s been bumped) and Tau Henare’s Secret Ballot for Strikes members’ bill, which is neither needed nor wanted. The hardy annual of Easter Sunday Shop Trading will also be up again, via a National members’ bill.

The inquiry into the treatment of workers in Foreign Crewed Vessels in NZ waters and the Pike River Mine Commission of Inquiry will report back this year  - both shameful NZ scandals that arose because of deregulation and declining standards for workers.

The ACC portfolio and the “opening up to competition” will be a big issue; Labour MP Andrew Little will take that on for Labour.

And I’m becoming more suspicious about another agenda – not spelled out in the National Party’s manifesto.  The recent productivity commission report, for example, made some recommendations that, if taken up by this government, would have a huge impact on New Zealand working people.

Bottom line : none of this will help the wages of Kiwi workers catch up with Australia. None of it will stop the weekly exodus across the ditch.

I’m sorry, but unless we see some something other than the old hoary chestnuts of cutting workers’ rights and pay from National soon, you should get ready to say goodbye to more of your whanau.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: ACC, Employers, Health and Safety, Work and Wages, Workers, jobs, union, value of work
16 Comments

Labour and the POA

Posted by Darien Fenton on January 18th, 2012

There’s been some chatter around about Labour’s position on the Ports of Auckland dispute.

At our core Labour believes that all Kiwis deserve decent jobs with fair pay, that they should have certainty around their work hours and conditions and their families need to know that they will come home safe and sound at the end of the day.

And while I’m at it, Labour will strongly oppose any suggestion that the Ports of Auckland be privatised. It is a public asset belonging to the people of Auckland, and needs to be kept for the benefit of future generations.

Sure, employers can seek reasonable efficiencies, effective labour utilisation and a fair return on investment. The Ports are an important part of our transport infrastructure and they need to be operating as productively and efficiently as possible.

But good faith bargaining and working together to find common ground is the way to achieve this, not wholesale redundancies and contracting out.

Labour is concerned about the increasing casualisation of the workforce in New Zealand. What this does is create uncertainty and stress for workers and their families – and, as we have seen, can cost lives.

Surely, we’ve learned something from the Pike River Mine tragedy about the folly of recruiting inexperienced workers and contractors into highly dangerous jobs and cutting corners on health and safety?

I’m worried that the pursuit of greater returns at the Ports of Auckland through contracting out will mean we could all be learning another tough lesson in a couple of years.

Stevedoring is difficult and sometimes dangerous work, and that should be recognised.

Three deaths at the Ports of Tauranga in the last 15 months should make us all question the safety of contracted out stevedoring firms who compete with each other for business.

No worker has died at the Ports of Auckland for 18 years.

Contracting out and competitive tendering is often used as a means to lower labour costs, through cuts to wages, reduced staff numbers, casualising work hours and cutting “red tape” such as health and safety.

Deregulation, short cuts and disregard for safety has already taken a terrible toll in some of our workplaces.

Let’s learn the lessons.

Tags:
Filed under: Health and Safety, Work and Wages, Workers, privatisation
32 Comments

More sorrow

Posted by Darien Fenton on January 7th, 2012

Very sad to hear about the horrific hot air balloon accident in Carterton this morning.

Another tragedy for our small country. Almost too much to bear.

Our thoughts are with the families and friends of the eleven people who were killed.

May they rest in peace.
Tags:
Filed under: Uncategorized
4 Comments

New portfolio – tell me what you think

Posted by Darien Fenton on January 2nd, 2012

As you will have seen from Labour leader David Shearer’s recent reshuffle, all MPs, ranked or not, have been given significant portfolios.

I’ve got two portfolios – one I’ve had for the past year (labour) and a new one (immigration), both of which I am pleased to have been given.

Immigration is closely associated with labour market issues, so there are many questions.  For example  :

  1. Have we got the balance right between the need for skilled workers, and the growing skills gap among New Zealanders?
  2. When we bring skilled migrants to New Zealand, do we treat them fairly? (Lianne wrote an excellent piece on this last year)
  3. Are we taking the easy option in cases when it seems too hard to get Kiwis to work in low wage jobs – ie aged care and other caregiving work?
  4. Are our schemes, such as the RSE scheme working well, or are there things we could do better?
  5. Have the government’s schemes such as Immigration Plus or the Immigration Retirement Package for wealthy immigrants delivered?
  6. And the biggie : why does Australia continue to attract skilled migrants from New Zealand and what should be done about it?

Let me make it clear.  I’m not into attacking immigrant communities, or doing a Winston Peters. Immigration has been an essential part of New Zealand history and the building of our nation. We all came from somewhere else, whether it was in the last two centuries, or hundreds of years ago.  We all have family stories, some recent and some from times past.  They all contributed to who we are as Kiwis today, and will continue to do so.

But I am interested in how we do things better, more openly, more fairly and more transparently.

So your views are very welcome.

Tags:
Filed under: Immigration, Portfolios
43 Comments

Lockouts, layoffs and livelihoods

Posted by Darien Fenton on November 23rd, 2011

The lockout of more than 100 workers at ANZCO CMP Meatworks in Marton is now in its second month over the employer’s demand for 20% paycuts and increased workloads. Efforts by the workers’ union to reach a compromise so far have been rejected. The local community, food-banks and workers from around the country, many of whom are already struggling from the impact of cost of living increases,are digging deep to help these workers feed their families. That can’t carry on. Families are hurting, the local economy is suffering and New Zealand’s international reputation is being affected.

Predictably, there’s been silence from the Minister of Labour and John Key in this very serious situation, and they’ve left their hapless and inexperienced Rangitikei candidate to deal with it.

Then there’s the almost daily announcements of lay-offs. Today it’s Milton Woollen Mills. Yesterday, it was Sleepyhead.

The National Party Industrial Relations policy for this election will encourage more of the hard-line tactics being used by ANZCO CMP. They want to give employers the right to veto multi-employer collective agreements, refuse to conclude collective bargaining, and put workers on individual agreements when they start work.

National’s priorities for early legislation, announced today, include cutting pay for young workers and privatising the ACC work account. How sad is that?

The last time a National government tried these race to the bottom ideas, the wage gap with Australia grew enormously, workers lost long-held conditions, low pay became endemic in many important industries and we lost a generation of skilled workers.

John Key insists that he will build a brighter future (actually, I thought he promised that last election).

There’s no brighter future for laid off or locked out workers, or those who only got a 25 cents increase in the minimum wage this year.

Clear choice Saturday.

Filed under: Unemployment, Workers, jobs, redundancy, workers rights
24 Comments

Yellow Ribbons

Posted by Darien Fenton on November 19th, 2011

Today we remember the men and families of Pike River Mine.

Twelve months ago, 29 men went to work in the Pike River Mine and never came home. Their families and community are still waiting for answers. The whole country is.

On the anniversary of their deaths, we join together with the families and the wider West Coast community to commemorate their loss.

Phil Goff says it has been a particularly difficult time for all those affected as they wait to see whether their loved ones can be recovered and it is important that we do everything humanly possible to give them closure.

“I have had the privilege of spending time with some of the families over the past year and I know today will be extremely difficult for them.

“On behalf of Damien O’Connor and all of my Labour colleagues, I would like to pay our respects to all those affected in this time of grief.

“I know the process of the Royal Commission investigating the disaster is a terribly difficult one for all involved. But I hope that it will allow us to learn from what has happened and avoid a tragedy of this nature occurring again.

“On this day, our thoughts and our hearts are with those affected by the terrible loss of the men and the impact it has had on the lives of all those who knew them.”

Two minutes silence at 3.44pm.  Mourn the dead, but together we must resolve to fight for the living so this never happens again.

Tags:
Filed under: Health and Safety, Mining
No Comments

Meanwhile, in Rangitikei…

Posted by Darien Fenton on November 15th, 2011

While John Key spins to prevent us knowing what he and John Banks really said at the tea party, 111 workers are into their third week of being locked out at the CMP Meatworks in Rangitikei.

The union and the company have been negotiating to renew the collective agreement at the plant since April 2011 but have not been able to reach an agreement as the company is seeking significant cuts in pay and allowances.  Their stated goal is to remove 15% of the costs from the time a lamb enters the plant to it leaving, which means significant cuts of more than 20% in overall pay for the workers.

On 3 October the company issued a lock-out notices to 300 members of the meat workers union. The notice said that to return to work the workers had to agree to the employers claim for a new collective agreement incorporating the new rates of pay and proposed changes to shift organisation.

Before the lockout , the company put all the workers on annual leave for a week. During this week they contacted many workers one at a time and offered them individual agreements with the pay cuts and told them that if they signed the lock out notice would not apply to them. They were also required to resign from the union.

Over 100 workers signed without union advice and returned to work. Many were migrants who would have been afraid for their jobs.  These workers now on individual agreements, and because the season is not yet in full swing the company is able to continue to operate and leave the remaining 111 workers locked out (since 19 October).

The annual income of these workers varies but on average they range from $43,000 to $46,000 with the bottom earnings as low as $23,000 and a top income of $53,800 which includes additional shifts. The workers have offered to take a 10% pay cut which is extremely significant on these low wages – but this has been rejected by the company.

Not a good situation for the workers or the community to be in .  John Key should pay attention, or is this a precursor of the “balance and fairness” we could all be up for under National’s  Employment Relations policy?

If you want to help these workers and their families go here.

Filed under: Workers, workers rights
7 Comments

National’s Cold War

Posted by Darien Fenton on November 12th, 2011

National’s policy on “Employment Relations” has all the language of the days of the Cold War  – it’s going to ruin us; it’s taking us back to the bad old days, there will be strikes on the waterfront, unions will be in control, blah, blah, blah.

They devote a whole page to Labour’s plan to lift wages (and at least Labour has a plan). They try to position it as a return to 1970’s industrial relations, with a whole lot of rubbish about strikes and awards. Most people can hardly remember that far back, but we do know that New Zealand wages are too low and something works better across the ditch – and guess what?  It’s a centralised wage fixing system, where wages are set by a Fair Work Commission – a system that goes well beyond the changes Labour is proposing.

Try telling an Aussie worker  they have a 1970’s industrial relations system and wait for the snorts of derision – and the 100,000 plus New Zealand workers who’ve gone for good to work in Australia because the wage gap is now 38% .  All they know is National has no plan.

My favourite bit of the policy is this, written by the National Party Cold War Propaganda Unit (aka Steven Joyce) :

(Labour will ) “Choke the economy by reinstating 1970s national awards and create a bureaucracy to centrally fix wages – a step back in time by more than 30 years, and a recipe for strikes and industrial action. In times like these, the last thing we need is an economy controlled by a small cadre of union leaders.

Cadre?  That is so funny. All that tells me is that National is completely out of touch with the New Zealand of today, where the majority of Zealand union members in New Zealand are women, working in public services, health, education and the community services sector.

Nek minnet : Dancing Cossacks.

Tags:
Filed under: Workers, union
50 Comments

Poor people don’t need much to live on?

Posted by Darien Fenton on November 5th, 2011

CTU’s Vote Fairness video :

Tags:
Filed under: CTU, Elections, Fair Share, humour
148 Comments

No more tick the box on health and safety

Posted by Darien Fenton on November 3rd, 2011

I’m on the West Coast today with Damien O’Connor talking about the high rate of death and injury in New Zealand workplaces, and what Labour intends to do about it.

We announced our policy on mine safety back in August, where we will re-regulate the industry along the lines of the Queensland system, and reinstate check inspectors.

But this is not just about Pike River Mine, awful though that was. The loss of life in the Onehunga Gas explosion, the Tamahere Coolfire and the fact that 85 New Zealand workers lost their  lives last year in workplace accidents is a real wake-up call. Then there’s the nearly 500 extremely serious injuries and the tens of thousands of other workplace injury claims every year.

For every person who is killed or injured at work the loss and impact on families, workmates and friends are enormous, but why don’t we talk about it?  Not only does it cost families, but it costs New Zealanders in health, ACC, and productivity.

Despite improvements in workplace technologies, including safer machinery and equipment and greater employee involvement in workplace health and safety following Labour’s amendments to the Health and Safety Employment Act, New Zealand’s workplace accident rate remains far too high.
Self-regulation has too often led to a lack of standards and recent funding cuts to key health and safety inspectorate positions means even less oversight of the limited regulations that we do have.
We need to ensure that workers and employers are encouraged to be open and honest about workplace safety. The introduction of workplace experience ratings in ACC is a step backwards which will discourage accident reporting.
There needs to be a fundamental change in how we approach workplace health and safety. It has to be more than just a ‘tick-box’ exercise for employers.  It must become part of our everyday thinking and planning. It should be part of the national conversation in the same way the road toll is talked about and campaigned on.
Labour is committed to creating safer workplaces, preventing accidents by raising standards and ensuring that injured workers are entitled to compensation and assistance.
Labour will elevate public awareness and responses around workplace deaths and injuries to where they are taken as seriously as our Road Toll.
Labour will establish a Commission of Inquiry into New Zealand Workplace Health and Safety, which would be tasked with examining why New Zealand’s record of workplace accidents and injuries is not improving, what measures are needed to them, how other comparable countries are able to have a lower per worker rate of injury and death and how changes should be implemented.
This could mean moving to a regulatory framework where legislated standards are required, but as a minimum, worker participation, involvement of recognised health and safety representatives and effective enforcement in the workplace will be fundamental to any change.
Labour will also ensure that any regulatory framework provides for a properly resourced occupational health and safety inspectorate that has the technical expertise to enforce the legislative requirements.

While there’s been improvement in workplace technology, safer machinery and equipment and greater employee involvement in workplace health and safety following Labour’s amendments to the Health and Safety in Employment Act, New Zealand’s workplace accident rate remains far too high. Our system of self-regulation is falling short and recent funding cuts to key health and safety inspectorate positions and training of health and safety reps means even less oversight of the limited regulations we do have.

There needs to be a fundamental change in how we approach workplace health and safety. It has to be more than just a ‘tick-box’ exercise for employers. It must become part of our everyday thinking and consciousness in the same way the road toll is talked about, campaigned on and targeted for real improvements.

Labour’s Health and Safety policy, released today, is about elevating public awareness and responsiveness around workplace deaths and injuries to where it gets the attention it deserves.

We will establish a Commission of Inquiry into New Zealand Workplace Health and Safety, who will examine why New Zealand’s record of workplace accidents and injuries is not improving, what measures are needed to improve them, how other comparable countries are able to have a lower per worker rate of injury and death and how any changes should be implemented.

This could mean moving to a regulatory framework where legislated standards are required, but as a minimum, worker participation, involvement of trained health and safety representatives and effective enforcement in the workplace will be fundamental to any change.

We will also ensure that any regulatory framework provides for a properly resourced occupational health and safety inspectorate that has the technical expertise to enforce the legislative requirements.

Bottom line. Self regulation isn’t working. If that takes more prescriptive legislation, Labour will do it.

Something has to change.

Filed under: Health and Safety
10 Comments

Same old National

Posted by Darien Fenton on October 28th, 2011

National’s announced its employment relations policy. Youth rates, slashing collective bargaining … Nothing about how to get wages up and close the gap with Australia. Everything about their undying belief in the unfettered free market, trickle down and perpetuating a low wage economy. But then I shouldn’t be surprised – Bill English says our low wages are a competitive advantage.

I’m on the move today, talking with workers. More than 100 locked out in Natland Rangitikei. Several hundred more in an iconic “kiwi” firm, being squeezed out by Labour Hire workers on $13 an hour.

Will write more when I can.

Filed under: #ownourfuture
10 Comments

TINA’s back

Posted by Darien Fenton on October 21st, 2011

Since Labour announced its Work and Wages Policy, there’s been the editorials repeating the “TINA” (There is no Alternative) lines of yesteryear and arguing for trickle down. Then there’s those who have an in-built opposition to anything that might improve the lot of working people, and an aversion to those dreadful organisations called “unions” – the 370,000 New Zealanders who are part of today’s unions.

This is old National at their worse.  It’s they who haven’t changed and who are out of touch. They need to catch up with the reality of work and wages for most New Zealanders and they need to tune into the debate that’s happening around the world about the failure of the orthodoxy of the last 20 years.

When Labour introduced the Employment Relations Act (ERA) in 2000, we heard the same rubbish from some National MPs who are now Ministers and others best forgotten.  The ERA was going to be the end of the world, while today, most will concede that it was very modest regulation indeed.

Eleven years ago, this is what Jenny Shipley, Max Bradford, Gerry Brownlee and Richard Prebble said in Parliament.

Rt Hon. JENNY SHIPLEY (Leader of the Opposition):  Welcome to Jurassic Park. This is a step backwards for New Zealand…… Taking New Zealand back to ideas that most people thought were extinct is no way to forge the future for this country. I do give notice here that the Government would have been far better to build on the strengths of the Employment Contracts Act, rather than destroy them and try to reintroduce some notions that most people thought had seriously gone 50 years ago, or more.

Hon. MAX BRADFORD (NZ National): …  why is the Labour-Alliance Government digging up all the old processes, the old institutions, the old dinosaurs of the past in order to get it? One of the reasons that the Employment Contracts Act was introduced in 1991 was the old system under the industrial relations legislation, the Labour Relations Act, was not working. Yet here we have a grand march backwards into the past to try to assert—because that is all it is; an assertion—that somehow or other employment relationships will improve, growth will improve, and we will get more jobs out of this approach to industrial relations……. there are people who are waiting to leave this country because it will be too difficult under this legislation to employ people and to invest.

Hon. RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT NZ):…. Who do the Alliance, the Labour Party, and the Greens think they are fooling? This bill is compulsory unionism by the back door. We know what the consequences will be. It is well known that the country’s port unions have already been meeting. They have already agreed that they will be asking for a collective agreement. When this bill comes into effect on 1 August, they will be making a demand to every single port in the country for a collective agreement—in other words, a national award. They are prepared to go on strike to get it. It is already well known that the North Island freezing works sheds—the unions—have already met. They have already agreed on their collective agreement, and the moment this law comes into effect they intend to exercise industrial muscle to get that agreement.

GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam): ……  This bill, dressed up as a herald of integrity and individual choice in industrial relations, is nothing more than another step on the long march backward that this Labour-Alliance Government is determined to inflict on New Zealand. This bill rips out any element of trust and mutual respect from industrial relations in this country. It is based on the premise that the employer is always wrong. It is based on the premise that there is an intrinsic, irreconcilable difference between employers and employees. Always it is the employer who is the guilty party, regardless of the circumstances. This bill is the most unbalanced legislation that could ever have been introduced in the industrial relations area.

Eleven years ago, according to the National Party, employment law change was going to be the end of the world. Did the world end?  No, of course it didn’t. In fact we had good growth, low unemployment, no debt and an improving social outlook.

Thank goodness there are some real thinkers contributing to the modern conversation about how we build a better and fairer economy and society.

Here’s a good piece on wages from Bill Rosenberg today.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: #ownourfuture, Work and Wages, Workers, economy, low pay
17 Comments

Everyone’s talking about it

Posted by Darien Fenton on October 19th, 2011

A good read from Ann Salmond, anthropologist and author weighing into the debate on inequality in the NZ Herald yesterday.

The international rating agencies have done all New Zealanders a favour. The double downgrade of the country’s credit rating makes it clear that the policies and philosophies promoted by successive governments are not working.

The “invisible hand” of the market, first conceived in the Enlightenment but coupled at that time with notions of justice, human dignity and “the rights of man”, has failed to deliver prosperity and happiness, in New Zealand as elsewhere.

The problem, it seems, is a loss of balance. In the pursuit of profit, everything in the world – the earth itself, other species, knowledge and indeed, other people – has been turned into a “resource” to be exploited, often without care or conscience.

In the process, ideas of justice, truth and the common good have been undermined. Without these bulwarks, democracy falters, capitalism fails to share wealth and the distribution of income shifts dangerously out of kilter.

Since the 1990s, income inequality in New Zealand has soared. In the midst of successive financial crises, the hand of the market still harvests wealth for the wealthy. While the richest avoid taxation, billions can be found to shore up the corporate sector, but not to deal with child poverty, third-world diseases, high rates of youth incarceration and suicide, and other indicators of suffering and failure.

The philosophies that persuaded many Kiwis to betray their own best values are bankrupt, and our future is at risk. A nation that does not care for its children has a death wish. A society that destroys the environment that sustains it will fail.

She questions why people support policies that are not in their own interests, or of future generations.

Some suggest this is because the middle 40 per cent of income earners aspires to join the top 10 per cent and does not want the bottom 50 per cent to displace them. This may help to explain the rise in consumerism and household debt, but it is only part of the story.

People also have to be persuaded that there is no alternative to the policies that beset them, or that external factors are to blame, or the likely impacts on their lives are misrepresented. Here, the freedom of the press is vital. If the independence of the media is compromised, the flow of information is in danger and independent voices are silenced. The press becomes a tool in the politics of diversion, with stories about celebrities and scandals displacing reporting on serious issues.

Even in economic life, when collective values collapse, failure is likely. In New Zealand, recent research indicates that arrogant, greedy and unilateral styles of management result in loss of productivity and profits, as good employees leave for other businesses or countries.

Salmond concludes by saying that more than a change of government is needed. What is needed in New Zealand is a change of heart.

Good stuff.

Filed under: inequality, politics
50 Comments

Labour’s plan for lifting wages

Posted by Darien Fenton on October 18th, 2011

There’s been a lot of debate and hard thinking in the Labour Party about the current Employment Relations framework and how it could be part of a cohesive whole in building a high wage, high skill, high productivity, high value economy. The Global Finance Crisis has provided, if nothing else, a chance to rethink the last 20 years of our Employment Relations system, which if we are honest, is still pretty deregulated in New Zealand. The IMF, the OECD and a myriad of economists both here and abroad have, in recent times, pointed to low rates of collective bargaining in first world countries, including New Zealand, as a contributor to the global financial crisis and the high ratios of household debt to income.

Despite Labour’s changes to the Employment Relations Act in 2000 (which were pitched as being “extreme” by some in business at the time), only 9% of New Zealand’s workforce in the private sector are covered by collective agreements. Our government, the Minister of Labour and Labour Department officials go merrily off to the International Labour Organisation every year, confidently asserting that New Zealand’s labour laws provide for the freedom to join unions and collective bargaining rights, yet they know that that reality for the vast majority of workers, accessing these rights is high risk and for many, simply not realistic. So, while the Employment Relations Act theoretically provides for collective bargaining as a means of recognising the inequality of bargaining power, the truth is that most workers’ wages and conditions are still set unilaterally by their employer.

Labour’s wages policy reasserts our founding values of fairness at work as fundamental to a fair society. We aim to help lift wages in New Zealand across the board and to help stem the drift to Australia of our workforce. New Zealand’s economy must be lifted from a reliance on low wages and longer hours to an investment in more productive workplaces where high trust, high skill and high wages are the success indicators of New Zealand business and jobs. And we cannot truthfully talk about social policy and tackling poverty unless we talk about low wages and how to deal with them.

A critical first step, and one which will help the lowest-paid workers directly, is an increase in the minimum wage to $15 an hour, which Labour has long signalled.

But it will take more than improvements to the minimum wage to deliver decent wages for all New Zealand workers. The experience of the past twenty years shows that New Zealand’s current labour market arrangements have led to lower pay for New Zealand workers. Lower pay means New Zealand businesses face fewer incentives to lift productivity and lift investment in workplace, or in workers’ skills and education. It’s a vicious cycle: low wages and low productivity, with New Zealand families bearing the consequences.

Labour’s plan will tackle this long-standing problem. We will amend the Employment Relations Act 2000 to implement a new framework where better pay and standards can be extended through Industry Standard Agreements –  a new form of agreement under the Employment Relations Act (ERA) – that builds on the the existing individual, collective and multi-employer collective agreements that the ERA currently provides for.

An industry union or employer will be able to apply to a Workplace Commission for an Industry Standard Agreement. The Commission would determine the “norm” of the standards already applying in collective agreements in the industry and “extend” those to all those workplaces in the industry where there is no collective agreement.

Employers and unions will still be able to negotiate collective agreements for their enterprise as an alternative to the Industry Standard Agreement. Individual Agreements can still apply, but cannot be less than the Industry Standard. Workers will not have to join unions to be part of an Industry Standard Agreement, but unions will have access to workers in the industry to talk about the standards and other rights, as they do now.

This model of “extension” is widely used in successful economies and the adaptations in Labour’s policy will continue to enable unions and employers to bargain directly with each other when that is the most effective approach. It’s nowhere near the centralised wage fixing approach of Australia.

Industry Standard Agreements are about improving the pay of New Zealand workers. It is part of the wider structural change that needs to occur in the New Zealand economy. Labour has already signalled other changes such as tax, monetary policy, research and development and our yet to be announced savings policy.

There’s a lot more detail to our work and wages policy,  but that will have to wait for further posts.

Tags:
Filed under: Fair Share, policy, value of work
61 Comments

“We need more cheap foreign fishermen”

Posted by Darien Fenton on October 17th, 2011

An outrageous submission (and in the current Rena situation, unfortunate) from SeaFIC on the first day of the hearings of the Ministerial Inquiry into the treatment of crew on Foreign Chartered Vessels in the Fishing Industry.

New Zealand’s fishing industry needs more cheap Asian labour not less, the Seafood Industry Council (SeaFIC) told a ministerial inquiry into the use of foreign charter vessels (FCVs).

SeaFIC says New Zealand-flagged fishing boats cannot get local crews and they now want to import low wage labour as well. Despite high unemployment it was hard to get New Zealanders to work on fishing boats.

SeaFIC says FCVs hiring Asian crews was no different to companies going to low wage countries.

“Many New Zealand businesses have exported jobs previously done in New Zealand to other countries with wage rates considerably less than minimum wage rates in New Zealand.”

New Zealand was seen in other countries as a source of cheap skilled labour and pointed to Qantas hiring New Zealand crews at rates lower than Australians would get. The New Zealand film industry was based on cheap labour, SeaFIC said. (hah, funny that!)

SeaFIC say there is no evidence that FCV companies are failing to pay their crews according a code of practice which requires crews to receive the New Zealand minimum wage.

New Zealand’s reputation is not a function of compliance by the companies, but the result of public opinion.

“The intensity of comment in the media, whether based on fact or allegation, may present risk to international reputation.”

Yeah right.

Tags:
Filed under: Foreign Affairs, low pay, trade
10 Comments

« Older Entries