PARLIAMENT | PARTY | GRASSROOTS

Red Alert

Archive for the ‘union’ Category

Key forgets about US FTA as he reduces worker protection for Warner Bros.

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 31st, 2010

When I was Minister of Labour we signed up to two big trade deals China and P4 (NZ, Chile, Singapore and Brunei.

Both pretty big deals – the associated memoranda were designed to protect us from undercutting – the competitive race to the bottom of the wage/skills spectrum. CTU and Business NZ both played a positive role because they saw our future heading up that spectrum.

Since then both organisations have been supportive of the work both governments have been doing on a NZ/US FTA. The CTU have worked with the AFLCIO whose support will be vital especially but not only for Democrat members of the house who must approve any agreement or at least give the President permission to negotiate with particular conditions. And Democrats and US unions don’t naturally support free trade. Nor for that matter do a significant proportion of Republicans.

The Memorandum of Understanding between China and New Zealand is very clear :-

4. The Parties recognise that it is inappropriate to encourage trade or investment by weakening or reducing the protections afforded in domestic labour laws, regulations, policies and practices.

As is the P4 Memorandum of Understanding

5. The Parties recognise that it is inappropriate to set or use their labour laws, regulations, policies and practices for trade protectionist purposes.

6. The Parties recognise that it is inappropriate to encourage trade or investment by weakening or reducing the protections afforded in domestic labour laws.

The important point for this blog is that it is inappropriate to reduce protections to encourage investment.

Which is exactly what the government did in order to secure the Warners Hobbit investment.

I don’t think it is likely that anyone will take a case against us – but one thing is for certain, any plans we had to work with the AFLCIO towards a US free trade deal died when Key gave Warners the pen on our industrial relations legislation.

Tags: ,
Filed under: Employers, Skills, coalition management, economy, regulation, sick leave, union, value of work, workforce
40 Comments

A Shortcut to Disaster

Posted by Damien O'Connor on October 28th, 2010

I have learnt today that the Food Safety Authority in collaboration with the meat Industry are about to conduct a trial on a new system of meat inspection at freezing works without the assistance of Meat Inspectors.

It is an interesting contradiction and my fear is that industry self regulation is the object of the exercise. Such ideals have proven all too often to be disastrous from international experience. At a time when the meat industry is under extreme pressure at every level from farmer to marketplace the risk is that inadequate inspection leading to any form of contaminated export meat would cripple our meat exports and reputation as a quality food producing nation.

Apparently no details have been made available to the meat inspectors so the assumption is that chain workers will carry out assessment of the health of the carcasses and the Vets will sign off the consignments for export. If you presume no skill is necessary to be a meat inspector we might be ok. But as I know to get the inspections spot on takes training, skill and experience. One mistake identified by our trading buyers and we are doomed.

The question is, does the risk justify the cost savings if any over time?? It is also ironic that in Select Committee today the Food Safety Authority was trying to convince us of the importance of robust systems for food safety under the new Food Bill.

There will be a few hard Questions for them at the next meeting !!!

Filed under: Consumer Affairs, Uncategorized, agriculture, jobs, labour, rural, trade, union
21 Comments

Hillside and the Hobbit

Posted by Clare Curran on October 24th, 2010

For months, an unlikely group of people has been meeting weekly in Dunedin to try to build a case to convince the government and Kiwirail to spend in New Zealand part of $500 million it has allocated to build electric trains for Auckland.

The Chamber of Commerce, unions reps, the Hillside engineering workshop (in South Dunedin), engineering companies, the Dunedin City Council and all of Dunedin’s MPs (except the new Act one who is certainly now invited) are committed to this issue. Maintaining a strong rail engineering industry in NZ (Hillside in South Dunedin, along with the Woburn workshops in Lower Hutt).

There is a strong case. A report by Berl paid for by the rail union and the DCC and supported by the CTU revealed there would be a significant flow on effect to the NZ (and Dunedin) economies by keeping this work in NZ.

But it seems increasingly obvious that despite their best efforts there’s an equal determination by Kiwirail and the government to have the trains produced offshore. The bottom line is cost. Lowest cost. Possibly influenced by one of our major trading partners.

There is a distinct smell building over the contract process for these trains. In July, four companies were shortlisted by the organisation contracted to do this work. Inexplicably on 3 September, when the RFP was announced, Kiwirail changed the goalposts and six more companies were included (several of which had been excluded first time round).

There’s been a lot of behind the scenes consternation since. There is a mounting belief that one of those companies has been given the nod and that the contract process which will cost the bidders millions to participate in is a farce. I will have more to say on that soon.

The point is, that this issue is about jobs. Jobs for Kiwis and keeping a viable rail engineering industry alive. Kiwirail and the government are intent on making sure that doesn’t happen.

And tomorrow, which is Labour Day, we see rallies being organised to keep The Hobbit movie in NZ. We see a manufactured case being made against a small union supported by the Screen Producers and one of our most prominent citizens Peter Jackson. We are meant to believe that a group of actors asking to negotiate their wages and conditions in NZ has de-railed such a big project.

I don’t think the unions have handled the issue particularly well. I’ll say that upfront. But it’s all about perception. And demonising a small union. Meanwhile the people of NZ are supposed to believe that this govt will do everything it can to keep the Hobbit in this country, when it’s likely that all the movie company really wanted was a bigger tax break. The union is the pawn in this. There will have been a deal stitched up already and the government will be able to announce it has “solved” the problem early next week.

Kiwiblog is now running adverts for the rallies. A clear sign that there’s a bigger play happening.

The Govt will say this issue is about jobs. Hypocrisy is what I call it. And union-bashing.

We want to keep The Hobbit in NZ. We also want the government to be consistent and honest. And we’d like the government to show the same concern for other important industries and jobs in NZ that it is showing for The Hobbit.

Disclosures: Hillside Workshops is in my electorate of Dunedin South. I am a former member of the MEAA and from 1992-93 sat on the MEAA NSW executive (Update: Actually I think it was the Australian Journalists Association, AJA, Union Executive then as it had yet to become the MEAA  but I’d need to check)

Tags: ,
Filed under: economy, jobs, union
184 Comments

Fairness at work demanded

Posted by Carol Beaumont on October 20th, 2010

DSC02890 (4) (2)Along with Green MP Keith Locke I attended the CTU rally in Auckland today.  7,000 wage and salary earners gathered in Manukau to express their anger and concern at the actions of this National government.  They were part of actions in 30 locations throughout New Zealand with 22,000 people participating.

The Auckland rally was a very powerful gathering. Strong statements were made against the removal of rights – the right to challenge unfair dismissals, the right to see your union representative on site, the right to rest and meal breaks, the right to have holidays.

At the end I was asked by a journalist whether I thought the Government would listen.   I responded that while they should listen I expected that they would not.  This Government is going to force through this backward looking suite of attacks on working people.  These changes will not lift workplace productivity, lift wages or close the wage gap with Australia – quite the contrary!  We will all be worse off as a consequence.

The speakers today reflected concerns that I am hearing throughout the community.   These attacks are not well received in the community and for many this is further evidence of a Government out of touch with the views and reality of many New Zealanders.

Filed under: labour, protest, union, workers rights
40 Comments

Labour supports wage and salary earners

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 20th, 2010

IMG00006-20101020-1311

About 4,000 wage and salary earners turned out today in Wellington (and more than 20,000 nationwide) to show the Key government that they oppose their proposals designed to cut wages in a direct contradiction to their promise to bring our wage level up to Australia’s.

Labour has made it clear we will reverse the laws that allowed people to be fired for no reason in their forst 90 days, that prevent someone asking their union rep to look at a dangerous machine and that requires people to give a medical certificate for one days absence.

More than that we will have labour relations legislation which means individuals will have an ability to join a collective agreement even when they are in a small firm.

Filed under: labour, union, value of work, workers rights
43 Comments

Chch MP Lianne to feature on Back Benches this week

Posted by Trevor Mallard on September 14th, 2010

SURE OR UNSURE INSURANCE: Canterbury has begun the rebuilding process which is going to run into the billions. The Earthquake Commission will be giving up to $100,000 for repairs while private insurance will pick up the rest. But what about those who don’t have private insurance? Does the Government pay for the uninsured—partially or in total? And how do we prioritize the rebuilding process? And how do we ensure people are paid quickly?

OUT ON STRIKE: Radiographers and Lab Techs have recently hit the picket lines over pay and doctors may be next. The strikes have contributed to the already long backlog of patients. Critics say, “How dare they strike?!” and that patients’ safety is being put at risk? But what negotiation options do the medical professionals have besides the picket line? Do we need to pay more in order to keep them?

LIVE pub politics from the Backbencher Pub: Wednesday, 15th of September. Broadcast on TVNZ7. Sky 97 @ 9pm.  Drinking from 7ish. The  Panel: Green MP Catherine Delahunty, Labour MP Lianne Dalziel, and National MP Nicky Wagner.

Tags:
Filed under: union
5 Comments

Radiographers v DHBs = System failure

Posted by Trevor Mallard on September 3rd, 2010

Spent more time than normal listening to National Radio today.  A parade of medical professionals all declining to discuss “industrial issues” but dumping on colleagues who are asking to work 5 hours longer a week and get time in lieu for a couple of days professional development a year – the way others at the hospitals do.

A DHB paid liar made a hash of attacking the union.

But the whole situation is horrible. Patients are caught in the middle and while there won’t be life lost delays will cause pain and add to the the waiting lists for elective procedures for months to come. And the costs of private Xrays and scans are too high for most families.

It is a classic case of an uneven relationship leading to out of proportion consequences when labour is withdrawn.

Similar to situation pre 1893 when we introduced legislation that included arbitration.  Law based on fairness and ability to mount a case – not out muscle the other side.

Maybe it is time to revisit arbitration as a tool for sorting disputes.

Filed under: health, union, wages, workers rights
24 Comments

Cleaners get a reprieve

Posted by Darien Fenton on September 1st, 2010

Last week, Grant Robertson wrote about the Massey Uni cleaners who were facing massive cuts to hours or dismissal due to redundancy which was due to happen today.

Yesterday, Chief Judge GL Colgan issued a judgement which requires the parties to bargain for redundancy “entitlements”, but not including monetary compensation for redundancy.  He has also said that the cleaners should not be dismissed today so that the statutory processes arising from their entitlement to redundancy can take place.

It’s an interesting judgement.  It confirms that workers have an right to redundancy entitlements, despite there being specific requirements in the cleaners’ agreement that there be no redundancy compensation.

Of course all of this could be avoided if there were minimum redundancy entitlements in law.  But that’s a story for the next Labour Government (and a sorry tale about redundancy under the NACT government).

Filed under: Tertiary education, jobs, redundancy, union, workers rights, workforce
15 Comments

Strike One, Strike Two….

Posted by Grant Robertson on August 30th, 2010

The news that secondary teachers are set to strike within the next two weeks sets up an interesting situation. The Ministry of Education do the negotiating on behalf of the government with teachers. My sources tell me that industrial action is looming in the Ministry of Education itself, with pay talks stalled and the mood souring.

Will Anne Tolley soon have on her hands not only the teachers on strike, but her Ministry staff out as well? And will the negotiators for the Ministry of Education be able to come back to the table if there is movement from the teachers, or will they be on strike as well?

Tags: , ,
Filed under: education, labour, public services, union
54 Comments

Massey Uni Cleaners deserve a fair go

Posted by Grant Robertson on August 24th, 2010

DSCF0030

Yesterday I visited a group of cleaners at Massey University’s Wellington campus. (apologies for poor photo quality). Along with their colleagues on the campuses in Palmerston North and Albany they are employed by OCS Limited to do the cleaning. OCS took over the contract for cleaning a couple of months ago and are pushing through changes to their employment conditions that are just shocking.

OCS have decided to move the workers from largely full time jobs to new jobs that will guarantee them only 25 hours a week for the 31 weeks of peak university time, and no guarantee of hours for the remaining 21 weeks of the year. The way they are doing this is by making the workers redundant and offering them new contracts with the reduced hours.

This is unfair and unjust. It will equate to a 35% drop in wages. These people are not well paid. They get just above the minimum wage. Many of them travel from Porirua to Wellington to work. While OCS as the contractor has the responsibility for the contracts it is concerning that this is happening on a publicly funded university campus. I have written to Steve Maharey as Vice-Chancellor expressing my concern.

The Service and Food Workers Union are taking the redundancy proposal to court on Thursday, as OCS are offering no redundancy pay. Anyone interested in supporting the workers I understand that some of them hope to be at the High Court in Wellington tomorrow from 9am onwards.

Tags: ,
Filed under: Tertiary education, jobs, labour, union, workers rights
28 Comments

Is this the poster boy for good employers?

Posted by Darien Fenton on August 23rd, 2010

Saturday’s Herald had a feature on the biggest shake-up of employment laws in 20 years and gave an example of a Fijian carpenter, Basa Jal, who apparently owes his job and his New Zealand residence to the current 90-day trial period law.

To the rescue came Sean Robertson-Welsh, who owns New Zealand’s biggest fencing supplies company, Effective Fencing in Penrose, who agreed to give Mr Jal a job under the 90-day trial law, and support his application for a work permit. Mr Robertson-Welsh said he wouldn’t have taken on Mr Jal without the 90 day trial period.

So far, good story for those who claim the 90 day trial period is providing jobs for those on the “margins”.

But then, this.

Mr Robertson-Welsh, an English immigrant who bought the company in 2008 after running a similar business in Britain for 15 years, is a bitter opponent of the current employment laws allowing sacked workers to seek compensation for unjustified dismissal.

“It’s so bloody archaic here. I’ve never seen anything like it,” he said. “I’ve been in the Employment Court seven times in three years. In Britain I was in business 25 years and never went to the Employment Court once, which shows you the culture.”

What? Is he serious?  In the Employment Court seven times in three years!  That’s got to be a record for any employer, let alone one that employs less than 20 people.  It’s hard work for a worker to get a case to the Employment Court and this suggests to me that this employer has some real problems in his employment practices.

I also wonder whether he thought some of the other laws in the UK were “archaic”, such as working time regulation, meals and rest breaks, and minimum redundancy entitlements – which New Zealand either doesn’t have or is in the process of wrecking.

But hardly a poster boy for good employers.

Tags:
Filed under: Employers, union, workers rights, workforce
54 Comments

Another worker’s story

Posted by Darien Fenton on August 16th, 2010

Heather is another worker who has come forward to the CTU about being unfairly sacked under the 90 day trial period law. Here’s her story. Now watch the righties go hunting for a conspiracy.

Tags: ,
Filed under: Employers, justice, labour, union, workforce
40 Comments

Florence and her 90 day trial

Posted by Darien Fenton on August 16th, 2010

This is the latest CTU video about the 90 day trial period.

Tags: ,
Filed under: Employers, union, value of work, workforce
88 Comments

Old fashioned employers

Posted by Trevor Mallard on August 9th, 2010

John Key seems to want to take the law back to favour old fashioned employers like those in this link.

These are a few of the lines which he no doubt wants us to hear more of.

“Idle conversation and gossip in this office among employees will result in immediate termination. Don’t talk about other people and other things in this office. DO YOUR JOB AND KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT!”

“Do not speak to me when you see me. If I want to speak to you, I will do so. I want to save my throat. I don’t want to ruin it by saying hello to all of you sons-of-bitches.”

“Per Edward Mike Davis’ orders, there will be no more birthday celebrations, birthday cakes, levity, or celebrations of any kind within the office.”

Hat tip whaleoil

Filed under: humour, union, workforce
33 Comments

Trade Me Jobs for 90 days

Posted by Darien Fenton on August 5th, 2010

job-ad-90-day

After a quick trawl through the Trade Me and Seek sites, we found six advertisements for web developers and designers, pet groomers, sales staff and a structural engineer, all of which say “the 90 day trial period will apply” (emphasis added in sample image above – click for a larger view).

Funny that.  John Key and his Minister of Labour, Kate Wilkinson have been insisting that 90 day trial periods are subject to discussion, good faith negotiation and agreement between employers and prospective employees.

These advertisements show that employers are already breaking the existing 90 day trial legislation by making a 90 day trial a pre-condition of employment.

This will spread if National goes ahead with its plan to extend the 90 day trial period to all employers and employees.

The government keeps insisting that employees can’t be forced into trial periods – but these advertisements plainly break the law.  The only answer the Minister could come up with at question time today was that employees “don’t have to apply for these jobs”.

Weak, Minister.

Tags:
Filed under: Employers, labour, union, workforce
37 Comments

Key’s lie puts free trade deal down US agenda

Posted by Trevor Mallard on July 31st, 2010

I don’t agree with her emphasis but Fran O’Sullivan has highlighted a less obvious outcome of John Key’s employment relations reform.

Helen Kelly last year initiated contact between Tim Groser, the Nact Trade Minister, and Richard Trumka, President of the AFL-CIO, in an attempt (and in itself a risk on Kelly’s part) to get the US union support necessary for a free trade deal through congress and to push it up the Obama agenda.

Trumka, who is not a natural supporter of free trade, agreed to visit NZ and talk with unionists as well as politicians.

Kelly’s intervention was based on a fairly co-operative arrangement with the Key government, involving a large degree of trust. It resulted from some undertakings – especially relating to consultation.

Key broke his word, co-operation finished and Trumka was told that the positive working relationship no longer existed and he pulled the pin on the visit.

Nice one John.  Just to be seen to give wage and salary earners a bit of a kicking at your party conference.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: agriculture, business, coalition management, national, union
24 Comments

A breach of trust

Posted by Grant Robertson on July 28th, 2010

I have known Helen Kelly, the President of the CTU for quite a long time now. I admire her greatly. She has been, and is, an exceptional and passionate advocate for workers in New Zealand, and indeed internationally. I can appreciate the position she was in when National was elected and called on the union movement to be part of their Jobs Summit. I was a bit surprised when the CTU had John Key speak at their conference, but they felt this was a PM and the government that they should, and could, work with.

Just how let down Helen, and the workers she represents, are now feeling is clear from the letter that Helen has sent to the PM.

It is easy to feel the sense of betrayal in her words

She said he had breached his undertaking to consult her if the Government was going to move on union access and non-union collective bargaining.

“You also said you wanted to work with the unions,” she wrote. “And you portrayed yourself as a moderating influence in employment law matters. That has changed.”

I saw Helen at a function last night and I can report in person she is every bit as aggreived.

While the on-going debate will be and should be about the substance of the changes to workers rights and conditions, the role and the approach of the PM should not forgotten here. He led the union movement to believe he was their friend, but as soon as his perception of the political environment dictated a change, he moved swiftly to go against his word. That is a serious breach of trust, and one that I think the PM will live to regret.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: labour, union, workforce
31 Comments

Holiday entitlements restored

Posted by Grant Robertson on July 26th, 2010

Interesting, and good, to note that the EPMU have negotiated in their Metals MECA to make up one of the two holidays lost next year for workers, this being the one with ANZAC Day and Easter Monday falling on the same day next year.

As previously discussed here I think that something needs to be done to ensure that we protect the integrity of ANZAC Day and Waitangi Day, but also give workers the holidays that they should be entitled too. I am still working through the best legislative approach that takes account of those who do not already work Mondays. But as Andrew Little says in the story linked above if the provisions to make up for lost holiday entitlements appear in enough agreements this will increase the impetus for a law change. Well done to the EPMU.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: Holidays, jobs, labour, union
6 Comments

Plain old fairness

Posted by Clare Curran on July 25th, 2010

I’ve been thinking a lot about the Government’s proposed new Labour laws. And why they are being introduced. There’s no evidence, other than anectodal, from employers to change the way sick days are handled. There’s no evidence of more jobs being created through the 90 day law, there’s no evidence that making it harder for unions to enter workplaces and talk to members will make workplaces more productive.

There’s no evidence that suppressing wages and working conditions for all New Zealanders who work will make New Zealand a more productive country.

In fact, there’s more evidence that shows it will make us less productive, more fearful and inhibited and less innovative.

And leaving aside the fact that it makes a complete mockery out of the “aspirational” goal to close the wages gap between NZ and Australia.

It’s basically about fairness. Lack of fairness. That’s what’s touched a cord with people. And that’s why Labour has to fight.  A strong sense of what’s fair, what’s right and decent lies at the heart of what it means to be a New Zealander. Everyone gets that.

Why then is this government making working people feel as if they’re a bunch of slackers who are taking advantage of their employers?

Why, are they deliberately changing the dynamic between employer and employee to give employers a lot more power, particularly when a worker is at their most vulnerable; starting a new job.  Why would this government be promoting insecurity and fear within our nation?

What possible benefit will this bring?

Tags: ,
Filed under: labour, productivity, union
14 Comments

John Armstrong has a point

Posted by Darien Fenton on July 24th, 2010

I love a good protest. I come from a union that was often left with no other option other than to protest.  It makes you feel like you are doing something, it certainly helps with the anger and gives some hope that there are still people in the world who care about others.

I went along to the protest outside Skycity last Sunday to show my support for my union.  I left when the storming of the wrong building began, feeling pretty certain that the pictures that were showed later on TV would actually help the National Government, rather than deter it.

And in the week since, I’ve had numerous conversations with people about how they view proposed changes to employment law and why they will affect everyone’s ability to earn and make a decent living. I’ve also talked with a lot of workers (of all kinds) about the protest.

So John Armstrong’s piece in the NZ Herald today makes a lot of sense, especially where he says :

The storming of the hotel might have fitted the finest tradition of the labour movement – and McCarten warned of more to come. But it is not itself that the labour movement needs to communicate with if it is to roll back National’s planned changes to employment law.

The Labour Party has worked that out. If the debate is only about what the unions think and want, then it is all over before it has begun. The strategy is going to have to be a little more sophisticated than that.

I can hear the radical left calling me a sell-out already, but I  remember the 1990’s and the Employment Contracts Act and the glorious defeats of those years.  There were many in the union movement then who thought that if workers were treated badly enough, the flag would go up and there would be fight back. There wasn’t. Workers got screwed, and New Zealand has never recovered.

There will be radical protests, the CTU will mobilise their members and take action. That’s fine – that’s what they should do.

But Labour has to reach out to the hundreds of thousands of workers who aren’t in unions, who don’t get why everyone is so upset about the proposed labour law changes, and who have no experience of the 1990’s.

John Armstrong’s right about that needing a lot more sophistication than we’ve seen so far.

Tags:
Filed under: Labour Party, labour, sick leave, union, workforce
46 Comments

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »