Red Alert
Author Archive
You could see it coming
Posted by Darien Fenton on March 7th, 2012The Ports of Auckland has decided to contract out its stevedoring jobs on the Container Wharf by firing its existing staff and hocking off the work to three competing contracting firms.
The decision is devastating for the wharfies and their families, but you could see it coming.
Firstly, there was the charade from PoAL that they were bargaining in good faith for a collective agreement, while at the same time they were seeking tenders from contractors to take over the work.
The second charade was that they were going through a “consultation” process, when in reality, the decision was already made.
The third and latest charade is that the workers can apply for jobs with the contractors. That’s nice of them.
But of course the contractors have no obligation to employ any of the existing workers and any who do get jobs will be required to accept pay and conditions decided by the contractors. Previous pay and conditions fought for over years will disappear. The only guarantees are minimum wage, annual leave and statutory holidays.
Contracting out is an effective way to casualise a workforce and drive down their wages and conditions.
Yes, you could see it coming.
We’re seeing unprecedented industrial disharmony in New Zealand and you could see that coming too when National was reelected.
The Ports dispute isn’t over. I will be at the rally in Saturday. I hope you come too.
Shhhh – that wasn’t the real BIM
Posted by Darien Fenton on March 5th, 2012National is planning a raft of changes around immigration that somehow seem to have been ‘left out’ of last month’s Briefing to the Incoming Minister of Immigration (BIM).
There’s a post-BIM BIM – a secret Briefing titled Issues and decisions for the first 100 days, which was prepared for new Immigration Minister Nathan Guy and Associate Minister Kate Wilkinson.
It reveals, among other things, Government plans to tighten up requirements for family members seeking residency in New Zealand, with preference to be given to the better off. Parents seeking residency in New Zealand to be with their children will face tougher tests according to the income levels of both themselves and their children. Parents whose families have higher incomes will go straight to the front of the queue in a ‘Tier One’ category and face less stringent eligibility tests, while those less well off will be ranked ‘Tier Two’ and will face tougher conditions and longer waiting times.
There are already tough measures around the parent category. They have to be sponsored and supported for at least five years. There’s a waiting list and defined numbers. National made it even harder last year with its new “Parent Retirement Categories” which allows rich people to retire in New Zealand and be given preference over others.
The Adult Child and Sibling Category will be abolished altogether. These changes were signed off by Cabinet in May 2011, yet there was no mention of them in the publicly released Briefing to the Incoming Minister.
It seems that only those with pot loads of money are welcome in our country. We roll out the red carpet for people for them, to the extent we are prepared to change our laws and sell off our land.
There’s much more required for family reunification and good settlement outcomes than money, but that’s becoming the only criteria that matters.
But shhhh, it’s a secret, and you will only be told when the Minister decides you should be.
Now it’s aged care workers
Posted by Darien Fenton on February 29th, 2012Tomorrow morning 1500 nurses, health care assistants and support staff employed by the 20 facilities in the Oceania chain of Aged Care Facilities are striking. Some of the residents they care for will join them in the protest.
Caregivers do magnificent work caring for members of our families as they get older and less able to look out for themselves. But they are underpaid and undervalued. I know. I was privileged to be a Rest Homes organiser and advocate before I became an MP and I have nothing but admiration for the work that aged care workers do and the commitment they make.
This isn’t an easy job. Looking after older people in aged care facilities requires skill and intensive responsibility for people with enormous support needs.
There’s been a change from “mum and dad” owned rest homes or Religious and Welfare homes, where older people could have a sedate and dignified retirement, to “ageing in place” where older people stay in their homes with support from Home Support Services. I support this approach, but it means our aged care facilities have been taken by corporate interests, looking to cash in our growing population. Oceania is a private equity firm, whose parent company is Macquarie Global Infrastructure.
While much of New Zealand’s aged care support comes from our health budget - funded by you and me, corporates are shipping off the profits to their overseas shareholders.
I also know how much former Labour Ministers did to try to address the problem of low pay in this burgeoning industry, and how much it was resisted by the industry. They seem to be more interested in discussing their return on investment rather than the terrible state of the workforce and the crises that keep occurring through low-paid workers caring for very vulnerable old people.
Some Oceania workers are paid as little as $13.61 an hour. They shouldn’t have to strike.
But that’s all they can do.
Not the Kiwi way
Posted by Darien Fenton on February 26th, 2012Talley’s-AFFCO have told their 750 odd unionised meat workers in its plants in Moerewa, Manawatu, Imlay, Horotiu and Wairoa that they will be indefinitely locked out from Wednesday, unless they agree to significant casualisation of their jobs.
We’re not talking highly paid or privileged workers here; meat workers are already seasonal workers, who have to fill the gap with other bits and pieces of work in between seasons. Just visit any small town where the meat works is a major employer and driver of the local economy – and you will know what I’m talking about. It’s grim.
A long term lockout saw 100 ANZCO CMP workers forced to take cuts to pay and conditions last year, and Mr Talley isn’t slow to learn.
But I reckon it’s about more than that.
The climate is now ripe for employers who can’t accept the role of unions in their workplaces to try to smash them. The National Government has promised to further weaken workers’ collective bargaining rights, and any pretense at its support for decent work is rapidly disappearing. The lip service we saw paid to the role of unions in engagement and economic change in the first term of the National Government is now on the back burner.
Union or non-union, this isn’t the Kiwi way.
Port dispute not about eggs
Posted by Darien Fenton on February 24th, 2012The start of an extended strike today by Waterfront workers over the Port of Auckland’s determination to casualise or contract out the jobs of its workforce means everyone loses.
Port workers and their families will lose incomes, businesses will be disrupted, other workers will be affected and the Auckland economy will take a hit at a time when we least need it.
Last week, there was a call from a group of influential Auckland business interests and the CTU for a modern approach to employment relations which maintains an efficient and productive Port, retains decent jobs and is not part of the race to the bottom. This was refreshing and gave hope of a solution.
But I wasn’t that impressed with Council CEO Doug McKay’s comments at the recent Council meeting where he said :
But I keep reminding Len, and I have been in a commercial environment in this sort of situation a few times over the years, that you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette, and the people have to feel like they can almost go to the brink and look over it before they come back.
This isn’t about making omelettes or brinkmanship, although Doug McKay’s done plenty of it in his time.
Resolution of this dispute needs good will, determination and good faith bargaining. And it will require compromise.
Auckland Council should reconsider its unrealistic demand for a 12% return on capital, Ports management should withdraw their take it or leave it plans to contract out or casualise jobs and the union has repeated its offer to make changes to work practices and its collective agreement that will improve labour utilisation rates.
Broken eggs won’t do it.
Uptitling
Posted by Darien Fenton on February 17th, 2012As we’ve gone through three decades of painful economic change, a whole new language has emerged as part of the managerialist efforts to soft soap hard decisions.
Along with “human resources” and “people management” (as if working people are cattle that need to be herded in the right direction), we’ve also got the deceptive language of the destruction of decent work.
We have “re-engineering, “right-sizing”, “right fit,’’downsizing” and other euphemisms designed to sugarcoat the harmful and very human outcomes of firings and job losses.
Productivity has become another word for expecting a whole lot more for a whole lot less.
And the latest fad is “Uptitling”, where having a fancy title for a job is supposed to compensate for lousy pay and insecure work.
The term “Associates” came to New Zealand a few years ago. Caterair and Marriott introduced this at Auckland Airport for their highly casualised catering staff, as if being given a fancy title meant the workers had some stake in a business, where they really had no say or control.
Uptitling is rampant overseas and it’s becoming a trend here too.
Receptionists have become “Heads of Verbal Communications”, Staff in Call Centres are “Client Liaison Officers” and the local rubbish collector is an “Environmental Facilitation Officer.”
Toilet cleaners are ”sanitation consultants” and leaflet delivers are “media distribution officers”.
From a financial perspective, uptitling is appealing to employers. They believe that rather than increasing somebody’s pay, all they have to do is give them a new fancy title. Employees will feel validated by their new status and maybe won’t pester their bosses for a raise for a little longer.
We’ll see.
What it takes
Posted by Darien Fenton on February 16th, 2012It’s great to see the formation of a new group of businesses and the CTU working together to find resolution to the PoAL issues.
The group, which includes Mainfreight Group Managing Director Don Braid, Heart of the City, CEO Alex Swney, CTU President Helen Kelly and Michael Lorimer, Director Grant Samuel & Associates, say they believe there is a demand from a range of groups in Auckland for a
“new approach that balances the need for the Port to make a return and the Port’s role as a service to business, in Auckland, employer of Aucklanders and guardian of the beautiful Auckland space it occupies”.
They have called a meeting in early March to develop a Charter for the Port that calls on the Council to take a broader view of the Port’s future and a vision of a triple bottom line approach to the Port , which includes :
- A Port that meets the needs of both those onshore (the importers and exporters of New Zealand) and offshore (the shipping companies) now and in the future;
- A Port that shares its land with the public, protects its environment and sees itself as part of the development of Auckland including encouraging use of the waterfront and harbour for recreation; and
- A Port that adopts a modern approach to employment relations which maintains an efficient and productive Port including retaining decent jobs and is not part of a “race to the bottom” in employment practice.”
Yes to all that.
Michael Lorimer says :
“The current approach means the Port Board is being forced to cut costs and capital expenditure. This impacts on us all. Now is the time to put up a new vision for the Port that recognises its primary role as a service to this City and New Zealand and its return to the Council must be based on a longer term understanding of its unique role in the City.
The need to increase earnings is being used to justify the current plans to reduce working conditions on the Port including contracting out labour. We support decent work conditions and oppose casualisation in the manner being proposed by the Port. Not only is it unnecessary but it could cause major disruption to its customers and contribute to increasing inequality.”
I’m heartened to hear this from major Auckland businesses and the CTU. We’ve got some smart people working together here who understand that the key to a productive Auckland port isn’t as simple as selling off jobs to the lowest bidder.
I congratulate them all.
Minimum Wage misery
Posted by Darien Fenton on February 8th, 2012The 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.
The Precariat
Posted by Darien Fenton on February 4th, 2012The 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.
From social partners to bit players
Posted by Darien Fenton on February 3rd, 2012The 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.
Techno slavery
Posted by Darien Fenton on January 31st, 2012I 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?
Paying attention
Posted by Darien Fenton on January 29th, 2012The 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.
Bon voyage to more whanau in 2012
Posted by Darien Fenton on January 19th, 2012There’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.
Labour and the POA
Posted by Darien Fenton on January 18th, 2012There’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.
More sorrow
Posted by Darien Fenton on January 7th, 2012Very 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.
New portfolio – tell me what you think
Posted by Darien Fenton on January 2nd, 2012As 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 :
- Have we got the balance right between the need for skilled workers, and the growing skills gap among New Zealanders?
- When we bring skilled migrants to New Zealand, do we treat them fairly? (Lianne wrote an excellent piece on this last year)
- 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?
- Are our schemes, such as the RSE scheme working well, or are there things we could do better?
- Have the government’s schemes such as Immigration Plus or the Immigration Retirement Package for wealthy immigrants delivered?
- 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.
Lockouts, layoffs and livelihoods
Posted by Darien Fenton on November 23rd, 2011The 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.
Yellow Ribbons
Posted by Darien Fenton on November 19th, 2011Today 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.
Meanwhile, in Rangitikei…
Posted by Darien Fenton on November 15th, 2011While 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.
