Latest news with #EmploymentRelationsAct
NZ Herald
a day ago
- Business
- NZ Herald
Far North council staff ‘thrown under the bus' with restructure, union says
PSA Te Tai Tokerau organiser Athol Ringrose said workers were made to feel the change was because of their underperformance, lack of technical capacity and an increase in complaints. But when the union asked for data about this alleged underperformance, the council pointed to a 2023 review of the NTA. Ringrose said the information not only did not answer the question, it was provided after the council's consultation period. Ringrose says this was in breach of the Employment Relations Act - Far North District Council chief executive Guy Holroyd says the council has adhered to all requirements of the act. Despite the union's protests, the council continued, giving a date of August 4 for implementation. The workers have been left feeling angry, he said. 'They're really upset at being thrown under the bus. They're being painted as ineffective and unmanageable.' Some of the workers at Far North District Council's roading department have been working in the district for 20 years. Photo / NZME A council worker and union representative, who asked not to be named, believes the council has no data to show the in-house team has been underperforming. The workers have not only responded to complaints, they have planned out work for the next two years of the council's roading-focused Long Term Plan, she said. Another worry was the council's initial proposal named an incumbent service supplier as the 'winner' of the new professional services contract, the representative said. After concerns were raised by both the union and NZ Transport Agency, the council moved to an open procurement process. However, workers were told there would not be any opportunities for them to work with the external provider, she said. The union representative likened the restructure to the Hunger Games and said workers were left feeling 'absolutely gutted'. 'They're extremely disappointed and angry.' The job losses will result in a loss of expertise, with some working with the council and NTA for 20 years, she said. Far North District Council chief executive Guy Holroyd says the Employment Relations Act requirements were followed with the moves to outsource the roading department. Ringrose said the PSA's lawyers are considering legal action. Change driven by operational needs and market, council says FNDC chief executive Guy Holroyd said outsourcing the roading department was needed to improve efficiency and gain expertise not available in-house. 'The change is part of efforts to streamline operations, improve efficiency and provide better roading services to the community. 'Outsourcing certain functions will allow us to leverage specialised expertise and resources not currently available in-house.' Holroyd said communities and ratepayers can expect to benefit from improved service quality and cost-effectiveness. 'By outsourcing to specialised providers, we will achieve enhanced efficiencies and innovative solutions that better meet the needs of the Far North.' The council has followed a comprehensive process, including stakeholder consultations and risk assessments, and adhered to all requirements of the Employment Relations Act, Holroyd said. 'The council recognises the impact this transition will have on staff and is committed to supporting affected employees through this period.' The timing of the change was driven by operational needs and market conditions, he said. 'While it has only been a year since NTA was disestablished, the council identified an opportunity to enhance service delivery and achieve cost efficiencies in what is our single biggest budget line.' Holroyd said the council has been working with NZTA to ensure a fair and transparent procurement process is in place for the new professional services contract. Denise Piper is a news reporter for the Northern Advocate, focusing on health and business. She has more than 20 years in journalism and is passionate about covering stories that make a difference.
Scoop
16-07-2025
- Business
- Scoop
Parliament Considering Big Changes To Employment Law
, Editor: The House Parliament has kicked off a three-week sitting block this week, and the first legislative business was initial debates and votes on three new bills. Two are contentious, including a bill to amend current Employment Relations law. Among its measures, it would restrict or even rule out grievance claims, make it harder for contractors to argue they are employees, and remove various rules relating to new employees. The minister in charge of both the bills is ACT MP Brooke van Velden. She described the intent of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill using a variety of common euphemisms (rebalancing, flexible labour markets, greater certainty, competitive business settings), but also described the proposed changes. Below are the major changes, as described by the minister herself, along with comments by opposition MPs. Hindering contractors from being declared employees by the courts "Currently a contractor can challenge their employment status in law despite being a contractor … To give greater weight to the intention of the contracting parties, the bill establishes a gateway test establishing an exclusion from the definition of 'employee' in the Employment Relations Act." - Brooke van Velden (ACT) "At the moment, there is a test of the real nature of the job … 'is this actually an employment relationship or is it a contracting relationship?' That's what our judges can do at the moment. This bill takes that away. It says if you have the word 'contractor' written in a document, then you're a contractor. Well, this is against all the international examples, this [is] totally different to the common law that applies in many other countries that we compare ourselves to, and is an absolutely disgusting, unprecedented attack on workers' rights." - Camilla Belich (Labour) Changes to personal grievance 'remedy' settings "I'm introducing a suite of changes to address this imbalance, which are: removing eligibility for any remedies for employees whose behaviour amounts to serious misconduct; removing eligibility for reinstatement into a role and compensation for employees who contribute to the situation that led to the personal grievance; clarifying that the Employment Relations Authority and Employment Court have the full spectrum of remedy reductions - up to 100 percent - available to them; requiring the Authority and Court to consider if the employee's behaviour obstructed the employer's ability to meet their obligations to act as fair and reasonable employers; and increasing the threshold for procedural error to shift the focus solely to whether any errors in the employer's process resulted in the employee being treated unfairly." - Brooke van Velden (ACT) "In an employment relationship, often there is a situation where an employee may do something that is not 100 percent perfect; an employer might do something which is not 100 percent perfect. The situation that they're bringing in says if the employee is anything less than perfect, they can't get their remedies." - Camilla Belich (Labour) "It's going to heighten the workers' vulnerability to be unjustifiably dismissed. And it's great if you have employers that are good, but, unfortunately, this opens the doors, as it does for many situations, for those worst-practising businesses and employers. That's why employees' rights were put in place in the first place. …This gives the employers more power. When you're in a climate where there isn't a heck of a lot of work, that then creates an opportunity for employers to exploit the most vulnerable." - Debbie Ngarewa-Packer (Te Pāti Māori) No personal grievance option for the well-paid "This bill introduces an income threshold of $180,000 per annum, above which a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal cannot be pursued. … By making it easier to remove poorly performing managers and executives while giving new talent a chance, I expect to help improve management capability and thereby lift economic performance across New Zealand." - Brooke van Velden (ACT) "The first thing that they're doing is actually making it so anyone earning over $180,000 in New Zealand can be fired at will." - Camilla Belich (Labour) Employer obligations to new staff "Currently, if an employer is party to a collective agreement that covers the work of the new employee, an employee's individual employment agreement terms must reflect the terms of the collective agreement for the first 30 days of their employment. This is known as the '30-day rule'. …The bill removes the requirement that the terms of a new employee's employment agreement should reflect the terms of the applicable collective agreement for the first 30 days of employment. …The employer would still need to inform an employee that a collective agreement exists." - Brooke van Velden (ACT) "The 30-day rule acts as a lifeline. It gives kaimahi time to consider union membership before being pressured into an individual agreement. Without this rule, employers could use the divide and rule tactics, which is real - the peer pressure to keep Māori kaimahi, to keep Pasifika kaimahi, to keep those who are not savvy on what their rights are, on weaker contracts from day one. And that's a really tough position to claw back from. It allows employers to opt out of collective conditions on day one, and it creates a race to the bottom." - Debbie Ngarewa-Packer (Te Pāti Māori) Union sign-up The minister in charge of the bill, Brooke van Velden did not mention this aspect of the 30-day rule: that the new law removes any obligation of employers to inform new staff of the option of joining a union, or facilitating that option. "It removes the obligation to provide an active choice in which the employer asks the employee whether they want to join their relevant union and receive that advocacy." - Ginny Andersen (Labour) A note on international obligations "We have a regulatory impact statement where all of the information in relation to international obligations is redacted. And why is this? Because we have free-trade agreements with lots of different countries that state that our employment situation should not decrease - and I bet you that that's exactly what it says in this regulatory impact statement. They won't share it with the House." - Camilla Belich (Labour) The Employment Relations Amendment Bill will be considered by the Education and Workforce Committee, which will be asking for public feedback on the bill. *RNZ's The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk. Enjoy our articles or podcast at RNZ.
NZ Herald
13-07-2025
- Business
- NZ Herald
Gig economy on trial as Uber fights drivers' employee status
A gig is only as good as the contract and the client. Contracting traditionally offers fewer legal protections and financial security. We're talking no annual leave, KiwiSaver (another blow with the latest government contribution reduction slashed to $251 from $521 a year), sick days, maternity or bereavement leave, minimum wage, breaks, and few options for recourse if you're unfairly given the boot. Contracting can be a win-win for employers wanting to outsource the work without strings attached, but like any romantic 'situationship', power imbalances and lopsided cost-benefit splits can leave you out in the cold. That's especially true for the four Uber drivers now fighting for employee status in the Supreme Court. How did we get here? The case dates back to a landmark Employment Court decision in 2022. The contractors, through unions E Tū and First Union, sought 'employee' status prescribed in the Employment Relations Act. At the time, Chief Judge Christina Inglis considered the nature of the relationship, who called the shots, who profited, what both sides intended, and whether the drivers were genuinely seen as part of Uber's business. Despite the unorthodox employment model, Chief Judge Inglis rejected Uber's claims that it merely facilitated rides, concluding the company '... creates, dictates, and manages the circumstances under which its business is carried out, and driver labour is deployed in order to grow that business'. Same same, but different Enter the Court of Appeal decision released last year, which also found in favour of the drivers, but disagreed with the Employment Court's emphasis on the workers' vulnerability. Instead, it took the Supreme Court's Bryson v Three Foot Six approach. It compared the contractual terms with the reality on the ground, asking: How much control did Uber exercise? How integrated were the drivers into the business? Could they meaningfully operate on their own account? First, the court found the Uber-directed contract was offered on a 'take it or leave it basis with no scope for negotiation'. Clauses designed to steer away from employee status were, in Justice Lowell Goddard's words, 'window dressing'. In practice, Uber controlled almost everything: fares, terms, conditions, complaints and customer contact. Drivers could not negotiate prices or reject too many rides without being penalised, and they had no way to build goodwill of their own, the court found. Sure, they provided their own cars and phones, picked their hours and wore mufti, but this did not outweigh Uber's control or how integral drivers were to the business. No drivers, no rides, no Uber. Let a good thing lie In my view, this was a win for the underdog, with the potential to open the door for all drivers and gig workers to ask whether they too, are entitled to minimum rights. Great for worker bees but not so great for business. It's therefore no surprise we are now at the Supreme Court, where Uber has warned that the court risks rewriting the rules for 20% of the workforce, consequently increasing compliance costs. Uber claims that the court should adhere to the contract and its underlying intentions. Yes, Uber sets quality standards and prices, but drivers also determine when and where to log in, which jobs to take, and cover costs. Conversely, the drivers contend that the contract is the baseline; the law was never meant for fine print to mask the true nature of the daily grind. They argue that the real essence of the model depends on control and subordination, not genuine independence. Where to from here? As we wait with bated breath for the Supreme Court's decision, it may already be too late for contractors suffering under the weight of big business. Enter the Government's Employment Relations Amendment Bill, introduced last month. The new 'gateway' test promises, in the words of Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden, to 'provide greater certainty for all parties and allow more innovative business models'. Under the proposal, a worker will be excluded from the definition of 'employee' if all the conditions are met: the contract must specify independent contractor status, they can freely work for others, they are not required to work set times (or can subcontract), they can't be fired for turning down extra tasks, and they must have time to review the deal. If the contract's signed, sealed and delivered, even a 'take it or leave it' deal might lock you out of your rights for good. And who said romance was dead?
STV News
11-07-2025
- Politics
- STV News
Unite suspends Angela Rayner over Birmingham bin strikes
Unite, one of the largest trade unions in the UK, has suspended Angela Rayner's membership over the Birmingham bin strikes row. It also voted to 're-examine its relationship' with Labour over the issue, in a sign of growing divide between the union and the party who have historically worked hand-in-hand. The announcement comes after a vote by Unite members at their conference in Brighton, where they condemned the Labour-run council in Birmingham, and the government, for 'attacking the bin workers'. However, a source close to Rayner told ITV News that she is no longer a member of the union, after resigning her membership some months ago. Unite sources insist their membership system shows she is still an active member and she did not formally resign. The union said fire and rehire tactics had 'effectively' been deployed against striking workers, who are taking industrial action in a dispute over pay and job conditions which has been ongoing for four months. 🚨 𝗨𝗡𝗜𝗧𝗘 𝗣𝗢𝗟𝗜𝗖𝗬 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗙𝗘𝗥𝗘𝗡𝗖𝗘 𝗩𝗢𝗧𝗘 𝗧𝗢 𝗦𝗨𝗦𝗣𝗘𝗡𝗗 𝗔𝗡𝗚𝗘𝗟𝗔 𝗥𝗔𝗬𝗡𝗘𝗥 𝗙𝗥𝗢𝗠 𝗨𝗡𝗜𝗧𝗘 𝗠𝗘𝗠𝗕𝗘𝗥𝗦𝗛𝗜𝗣@unitetheunion is crystal clear it will call out bad employers regardless of the colour of their rosette. @AngelaRayner has had every… — Sharon Graham (@UniteSharon) July 11, 2025 Unite General Secretary Sharon Graham said: 'Unite is crystal clear it will call out bad employers regardless of the colour of their rosette. 'Angela Rayner has had every opportunity to intervene and resolve this dispute but has instead backed a rogue council that has peddled lies and smeared its workers fighting huge pay cuts. 'The disgraceful actions of the government and a so-called Labour council, is essentially fire and rehire and makes a joke of the Employment Relations Act promises. 'People up and down the country are asking whose side is the Labour government on and coming up with the answer not workers.' It also voted to suspend the union membership of John Cotton, the Labour leader of Birmingham City Council, and other union members on the authority. The strikes have resulted in unsanitary conditions throughout the city, with large piles of rubbish in the streets. Unite is listed as an affiliated union of the Labour Party. Last year, it offered the most financial support out of all 11 affiliated unions to Labour MPs. In 2024, it gave more than £500,000 in the run up to the election including £10,000 to Rayner herself, according to the Parliamentary Register of Members' Financial Interests. A Downing Street spokesman said the government's priority throughout the dispute had 'always' been Birmingham's residents. The No 10 spokesman also told reporters: 'As you know, Unite's industrial action caused disruption to waste collection. 'We have worked intensively with the council to tackle the backlog and clean up the streets for the residents for public health. 'We remain in close contact with the council and continue to monitor the situation as we support its recovery and transformation. 'I think it's important to look back to the context of this dispute: Unite is in dispute against Birmingham City Council's decision to reform unfair staff structures, which were a major cause of unequal pay claims and left the council liable to hundreds of millions of pounds in claims, and that was a key factor cited in the council section 114 notice in 2023, declaring bankruptcy.' Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
North Wales Chronicle
11-07-2025
- Business
- North Wales Chronicle
Unite votes to suspend Angela Rayner's membership over Birmingham bins dispute
Despite the union's vote, a source close to Ms Rayner said she had already resigned membership of Unite some months ago. But in a sign of a growing divide between the major union and Labour, Unite also voted to 're-examine its relationship' with the party. The move comes after Unite members debated a motion at their conference in Brighton, where they condemned the Labour-run council in Birmingham, and the Government, for their approach to the bin workers. The union said fire and rehire tactics had 'effectively' been deployed against striking workers, who are taking industrial action in a dispute over pay and job conditions. 🚨 BREAKING. THIS IS BIG! 🚨Unite conference votes overwhelmingly to re-examine relationship with @UKLabour and suspend @AngelaRayner from Unite membership over Birmingham bins to follow… — Unite the union: join a union (@unitetheunion) July 11, 2025 Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: 'Unite is crystal clear it will call out bad employers regardless of the colour of their rosette. 'Angela Rayner has had every opportunity to intervene and resolve this dispute but has instead backed a rogue council that has peddled lies and smeared its workers fighting huge pay cuts.' She added: 'The disgraceful actions of the Government and a so-called Labour council is essentially fire and rehire and makes a joke of the Employment Relations Act promises. 'People up and down the country are asking whose side is the Labour Government on and coming up with the answer not workers.' Earlier this week, Ms Graham suggested 'workers are deserting Labour in droves', in a signal of the union's anger with the party. Unite's vote that it is to re-examine its relationship with Labour suggests it could cut the hundreds of thousands of pounds of funding it provides to the party each year. It also voted to suspend the union membership of John Cotton, the Labour leader of Birmingham City Council, and other union members on the authority. A Downing Street spokesman said the Government's priority throughout the dispute had 'always' been Birmingham's residents. The strikes have resulted in unsanitary conditions throughout the city, with large piles of rubbish in the streets. The No 10 spokesman also told reporters: 'As you know, Unite's industrial action caused disruption to waste collection. 'We have worked intensively with the council to tackle the backlog and clean up the streets for the residents for public health. 'We remain in close contact with the council and continue to monitor the situation as we support its recovery and transformation 'I think it's important to look back to the context of this dispute: Unite is in dispute against Birmingham City Council's decision to reform unfair staff structures, which were a major cause of unequal pay claims and left the council liable to hundreds of millions of pounds in claims, and that was a key factor cited in the council section 114 notice in 2023, declaring bankruptcy.' Labour is elsewhere facing pressure from unions representing public sector workers over suggestions they could get pay rises, but only in exchange for lower pension packages. Health Secretary Wes Streeting suggested he was amenable to the move while speaking to LBC on Thursday, as resident doctors prepare for further strikes over pay. 'If the BMA (British Medical Association) want to come to me and say, do you know what, given that challenge, we think we would rather have a slightly less generous pension in order to have higher pay today. Those are the sorts of issues you can get into in a discussion, but I've offered to talk, they haven't taken me up, and that's one of many reasons I think this is unreasonable,' he said. Downing Street urged the BMA to 'step back from the brink' as it accused the union of having not yet taken up the Health Secretary's offer to engage in talks to improve working conditions for doctors. Responding to the suggestion, Steve Wright, Fire Brigades Union general secretary, said it would be 'outrageous to raid our pensions again', adding: 'The FBU will fiercely resist any attempt to attack the pensions of firefighters and other public sector workers. Workers will not accept a false trade-off driven by austerity.'
