Leading Employment Platform Urges New Zealand Businesses To Prepare For ‘Wage Secrecy' Changes
'The legislation is designed to promote greater pay transparency and equality, helping to identify and address unjustified pay disparities. While it's a welcome change that will bring New Zealand in line with countries that have implemented similar measures, such as Australia and the UK, employers should take proactive steps now to prepare for if the Bill passes,' said Sanam Ahmadzadeh Salmani, Employment Counsel at Employment Hero and workplace law commentator.
'This is an opportunity for employers to drive better pay transparency and better outcomes for both businesses and employees. Aligning with the legislation will not only ensure compliance if and when required but can also improve employee satisfaction and retention. Employees want to know they're being treated fairly and businesses that embrace this change will likely see stronger engagement and loyalty.
'By preparing and making any changes before the Bill passes, employers will be on the front foot and can avoid being caught out later down the track,' added Ahmadzadeh Salmani.
Ahmadzadeh Salmani highlights three key actions employers should take to prepare:
Conduct a pay review
'Start by reviewing your current pay structures - look for any discrepancies and understand the reasons behind them - whether it's due to role differences, experience or something else. Being proactive here will help you not only stay compliant, but to spot payroll red flags early,' advises Ahmadzadeh Salmani.
Review employment contracts
'Employers should also review employment agreements for any clauses that restrict pay discussions. These might not be labelled as 'pay secrecy' and they could be buried under general confidentiality or remuneration clauses. Having a clear plan of what needs updating now puts you in a better legal position once the Bill is passed,' adds Ahmadzadeh Salmani.
Prepare clear explanations
'Transparency doesn't stop at removing secrecy clauses. Employers need to be ready to explain how pay is determined and what data or criteria is used, how performance factors in and how employees can progress. This builds trust and reduces confusion or resentment,' she adds.
Employment Hero provides free resources to New Zealand businesses on employment law updates and compliance via its website. The latest resource, including Employee Remuneration Disclosure can be found here.
About Employment Hero
Employment Hero is revolutionising the world of work with the introduction of the world's first Employment Operating System (eOS), a solution designed to address the $20 billion problem of inefficient employment processes globally.
eOS is the next generation of employment technology, a revolutionary system that simplifies and automates complex employment processes, allowing businesses to streamline workflows, reduce administrative burden, and focus on growth
Employment Hero services over 300,000 businesses globally and its core platform reduces admin time by up to 80%. By launching employers toward their goals, powering more productive teams and taking employment to rewarding new heights, Employment Hero is revolutionising the employment marketplace.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
13 hours ago
- Scoop
Last Chance For Hunters To Have Their Say On Big Game Bill
The Game Animal Council (GAC) is calling on hunters to speak up for the future of big game hunting in New Zealand, with submissions on the Game Animal Council (Herds of Special Interest) Amendment Bill closing Thursday 24 July. 'This is a crucial moment for New Zealand,' says GAC CEO Corina Jordan. 'The Bill is a major step forward in recognising the value of New Zealand's big game herds and giving them the legal protection they deserve, particularly in areas like national parks where their future is currently under threat and where some of the best hunter-led management is currently occurring. The Bill will allow the Minister for Hunting and Fishing to exempt a Herd of Special Interest from section 4(2)(b) of the National Parks Act, which currently calls for the extermination of all introduced species 'as far as possible'. 'This change would enable management of high-value big game herds, like deer, tahr, and chamois. It would mean that instead of elimination, a proactive and practical approach can be taken, where they are managed for conservation, recreation and economic outcomes. 'It's about taking a balanced and sustainable approach,' Jordan says. 'Hunters have a real chance to shape how New Zealand manages valued introduced species. 'This isn't just a technical legal change. It's about the role of big game animals in our national identity, our recreation and the rural economy. 'Hunters care deeply about these herds, and the environment. It's time to show that by making a submission,' Jordan says. The GAC has published a fact sheet to help hunters understand the Bill and submit before the deadline. Submissions close at 11.59pm on Thursday 24 July. Visit for more information and a step-by-step guide to making a submission. Submissions can be lodged via the Parliament website or by emailing The NZ Game Animal Council is a statutory organisation working to improve the sustainable management of game animals and hunting for recreation, communities, commerce and conservation.
Scoop
16 hours ago
- Scoop
Putting Patient Need Ahead Of Treaty Ideology
Welcoming the first-reading passage of the Pae Ora (Healthy Futures) Amendment Bill, ACT Health spokesperson Todd Stephenson says: "We fund the health system to deliver services, not ideology. But Labour saddled Health New Zealand with Treaty provisions that effectively divided patients by race and distracted from quality, timely care. "ACT says services should be delivered on the basis of patient need and value-for-money – not race. We scrapped the Māori Health Authority, and now we're patching up the rest of Labour's Treaty-obsessed health reforms. "We're stripping out requirements for health entities to be focused on Māori health outcomes, mātauranga Māori, and 'cultural safety'. These settings have led to compliance nightmares where even Chinese acupuncturists are required to demonstrate expertise in tikanga. "Perhaps most importantly – and incredibly, forgotten by Labour – we're introducing an objective for services to be effective and timely. And we're restoring accountability to taxpayers with a requirement for specific targets in the Government Policy Statement on Health. "Kiwis waiting for a hip operation or stuck in the emergency department don't care whether their practitioner has a tikanga-centric worldview. They just want quality healthcare, quickly. That's what we're delivering."
Newsroom
20 hours ago
- Newsroom
From modern to modular: the revolving door of open-plan classrooms
Analysis: Last week, headlines hailed the end of modern learning environments, following a press release from the education minister saying the Government 'calls time on open-plan classrooms'. While the Government might want parents – and schools – to believe this is the end of open-plan classrooms, that's not quite what's happening. It might have been more accurate to say the Government is sending a strong signal to schools that when they eventually build new classrooms or undertake upgrades to their existing school property, the Government would prefer they opt for one of their kitset, modular spaces now being offered by the ministry rather than completely open-plan classrooms. But without a law change, or at least a change to regulation, the Government is unable to direct schools – and communities – on exactly how their classrooms should be configured. And the education minister says she hopes it won't get to that point. The announcement comes off the back of a long-running discussion about the merits – or lack thereof – of innovative learning environments, which are also known as modern learning environments or open-plan classrooms. While Education Minister Erica Stanford has made comments about these so-called 'barnyard classrooms' since early in the parliamentary term, the move to try and phase out open-plan classrooms comes as the Government also announces a new crown entity to manage school property, off the back of major cost blowouts, poorly maintained classrooms, and a lack of transparency. Innovative learning environments – or what Stanford is calling open-plan classrooms – have been around since the 1980s, but more recently experienced widespread uptake under former National Party education minister Hekia Parata. Parata made a push for the classrooms that were more open, allowing for more flexibility regarding student-teacher ratios for schools under staffing pressure, more seamless use of digital devices, student-led learning, and collaborative teaching methods. In the wake of the Canterbury earthquakes, rebuilt schools were being fitted with these modern learning environments and Parata vowed to revamp every primary and secondary school – all 38,000 classrooms at the time – to the new modern learning environment standards by 2021. New Zealand wasn't the first to adopt these environments, with Australia and (of course) the Finnish also doing away with single-cell classrooms where the teacher stands in front of the rows of desks and students are expected to absorb knowledge. But it didn't take long for parents and teachers to revolt against the push for open-plan. In some cases, the dislike appeared to be that which always comes with change – especially in education. But over time parents, teachers, experts and officials raised issues with the noise in the classrooms. Parents of children on the autism spectrum or with neurodivergence were particularly concerned. Not all spaces were initially fitted with the right materials for acoustic cushioning and furniture that helped diffuse the higher noise levels that sometimes comes from the style of teaching and learning, where several conversations or lessons can be taking place at the same time. Meanwhile, some teachers had these new classrooms foisted on them without the appropriate professional development and training. They did not know how best to operate in the space, the modern pedagogy that aligned with collaborative teaching and learning, and general best practice. According to the secondary schools union PPTA – modern learning environment sceptics: a flexible learning environment is not an innovative learning environment. 'For a space to be innovative, the pedagogy needs to be innovative. Without innovative teaching practice, it is only an 'open plan' environment.' Under this Government and the last Labour-led Government, there has been a push to pull back from these types of classrooms. Some schools have taken it upon themselves to re-introduce walls, or at least sliding doors, to close up the space. And some have gone as far as to label classroom design as a notable contributor to New Zealand's educational achievement woes, citing noise, distraction, students feeling overwhelmed, and general behaviour issues. Just last week, Pāpāmoa College in the Bay of Plenty sent out a note announcing the school – built in 2011 – would be re-configuring all its open-plan spaces into single-cell classrooms. 'Our board considers this current layout as a significant barrier to educational achievement at Pāpāmoa College,' the online notice said. 'The school completed its own due diligence over the past few years and, amongst other things, trialled relocating senior students from the open plan spaces into our temporary relocatable classrooms. This initiative has resulted in positive achievement outcomes for the students and the school.' But it does not appear to be that simple. The research is unsettled, if not contradictory. The PPTA has long been calling for more research in this area, raising concerns that without evidence to support the rollout out of modern learning environments students were essentially being used as guinea pigs. (Primary teachers union NZEI Te Riu Roa doesn't have a position on the classrooms.) A similar message has come from libertarian think tank the NZ Initiative, which has written a report and pushed the message that there is no evidence to support the roll-out of these classrooms, and therefore they are bad. Following public discussion, political discourse, and the continued lurch from single-cell to open-plan and back again, the Ministry of Education did finally commission some research. In 2017, the study carried out at the University of Melbourne found 'open plan learning spaces lead to higher teacher mind frames and student deep learning'. Overall, the results were ambivalent. This report also called for further research. A 2019 study of English-medium primary schools from the NZ Council of Educational Research produced some similar findings, with teachers saying they enjoyed teaching in collaborative, open-plan environments. 'Sixty-two percent of those who taught in an innovative learning environment enjoyed teaching in such an environment, and 55 percent thought their teaching had changed for the better,' the survey report said. However, most of the teachers surveyed said some students found the spaces and way of learning overwhelming. Two years later NZCER carried out another study on secondary schools, which found secondary teachers also believed some of their students were overwhelmed and that teachers had not received the necessary professional learning and development required to teach effectively in these spaces. Meanwhile, New South Wales started to do away with the classrooms and a Senate inquiry also questioned their efficacy, saying many of the classrooms were designed by architects without proper knowledge of education or consultation with educators. One local example of this was at Grey Lynn School in Auckland, which was fitted with open-plan, collaborative learning environments, designed by architects. While there was some consultation with the board and previous principal, the school found it needed to retrospectively create a transition strategy, which helped staff understand the links between pedagogy, space and design. While much of the blame for the wholesale move to open-plan has been dumped at the feet of Hekia Parata, a former government source told Newsroom there were reasons to move in that direction at the time. Some schools were under staffing pressure and this design allowed for flexibility. It also coincided with a time when schools were increasing students' tech literacy and many were moving towards one-to-one device use. Moreover, it was being used in countries that were at the forefront of educational success. The source admitted it wasn't going to be the right fit for every learner or every teacher, but doing away with innovative learning environments without the research to prove they were detrimental was a short-sighted move. The anti-collaborative space debate was already bubbling away under the previous Labour government, and property was a feature of the 2018 Tomorrow's Schools review. The independent taskforce recommended removing school property decisions from boards, for a variety of reasons, including a lack of capacity and expertise when it came to design and project management. Ultimately, it was decided the Ministry of Education would provide advice on the feasibility and cost of taking on more property related responsibilities from boards over the next five to 10 years, while ensuring schools and communities continued to have significant input into the design of their physical spaces. Former education minister and Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has also been known to refer to the open-plan approach using the pejorative 'barnyard' description, but he says schools and communities should retain choice in the matter. When asked about the Government's so-called scrapping of open-plan classrooms last week he managed to synthesise the through-line from much of the inconclusive research: 'It comes down to the quality of teaching,' he said. 'It will all come down to whether you know that's actually being properly supported by professional practice. The quality of teaching is what makes the single biggest difference in schools, not the size of the classroom.' Questions about whether teachers have received the appropriate training and professional development to make the most of open-plan, collaborative spaces to enhance their practice and lift student outcomes have been canvassed by the research. But there's been little discussion about those barriers to lifting the quality of teaching, which has nothing to do with open-plan classrooms. This Government has identified the need for improvement in initial teacher education, ongoing professional development, non-contact time for planning classes, and support for students with additional needs. If these issues are addressed, it is more likely teachers will have the necessary expertise and capacity to make the most of innovative learning environments. Crucially, the research also fails to make a causal link between innovative learning environments and poor student achievement. While there is undoubtedly a lack of research to prove these environments are better for children, there is also nothing to prove they are worse. It is easy for school leaders, parents and politicians to point towards a simple, tangible thing as the reason for falling achievement. Especially when it's something that can be physically altered and sold as a fix. What educational research is clear on is that the single biggest factor affecting educational achievement in the classroom is the quality of teaching. But beyond that, societal factors, including a household's economic circumstances and structural racism in the education system are have the biggest influence on student outcomes. So, while the Government might like parents to think they're going to secure their children's future by doing away with open-plan classrooms, it's not that simple. And perhaps more to the point: they can't. While some schools – like Pāpāmoa College – are taking it upon themselves to upgrade or reconfigure classrooms back to single cells, under the current law the Government can't compel them to ditch open-plan. The Education and Training Act (clause 161) lays out what the Secretary of Education can specify, including minimum health and safety standards. Beyond that – without a change to regulations or this part of the law – the secretary (or the minister) can't direct a school what to do. This is why Hipkins has referred to last week's announcement about open-plan classrooms as 'virtue signalling'. But what the minister will be hoping is that it sends a strong signal to schools and communities that when they do come to do maintenance or upgrades on classrooms that they will think about whether to add in sliding doors that allow for partitioning and single-cell learning. Meanwhile, the raft of schools currently on the list to get additional classrooms to deal with roll growth will be offered the kitset, modular classroom design that are no bells and whistles, and can be used primarily for teaching in a single-cell configuration, with the ability to open into a wider space for certain activities, like assemblies, physical education, art or music classes. Essentially, she's looking for a phase-out. But if a school says they want to remain open-plan, or have new classrooms built in this collaborative style, they retain the power to do so. Stanford says she hopes they won't go that route. 'Overwhelming feedback I've received from schools across New Zealand is open-plan classrooms aren't meeting the needs of students. 'While open-plan designs were originally intended to foster collaboration, they have often created challenges for schools, particularly around noise and managing student behaviour,' she says. 'In many cases, open-plan classrooms reduce flexibility, rather than enhance it. We have listened to the sector and new classrooms will no longer be open plan.' The open-plan announcement came the same week Stanford unveiled a $120 million growth plan for Auckland schools that need to build more classrooms to account for new students in their area. This came alongside an announcement that a new crown entity, led by former National Party minister Murray McCully, will be set up to manage school property. When this Government took power it discovered a list of unfunded school property projects, big builds where the prices had blown out, and a general lack of transparency and mismanagement. Stanford set up a ministerial advisory group and commissioned an inquiry. At the time, an architecturally designed classroom was costing as much as $1.2 million, meaning some schools were missing out on new buildings because the funds weren't there. By focussing on kitset and modular designs, finding efficiencies of scale, and removing duplication, the cost of a classroom is now down to $620,000, Stanford says, adding that she thinks it can drop further still. Next in her sights is improving the maintenance programme for classrooms, meaning they'll last longer overall. One of the key priorities of this school property overhaul – and the new agency – is to increase transparency and accountability.
