MP's office picketed over equity bill
Waitaki locals stood their ground outside Waitaki MP Miles Anderson's office last week in protest of the Pay Equity Amendment Bill that passed through all stages in Parliament, after being rushed through under urgency. PHOTO: JULES CHIN
Protesters in Oamaru have made their feelings known over changes to workplace regulations.
The Pay Equity Amendment Bill passed through all stages in Parliament, after being rushed through under urgency last week.
Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden announced moves to raise the threshold for proving work has been historically undervalued to support a claim.
She said changes made in 2020 had created problems.
Ms van Velden said any current claims would be stopped and would need to restart under the new threshold, to show "genuine" gender discrimination and make sure the comparators were right.
Opponents of the controversial legislation have said it would make it harder for women in female-dominated industries to make a claim.
Judith Stanley, of Oamaru, said the group protesting outside the office of Waitaki MP Miles Anderson last Friday, were there to support the repeal of the Pay Equity Amendment Act
"There was no consultation ... It was a stitched-up deal before it hit the benches in Parliament," she said.
Annah Evington, of Oamaru, said the legislation was a "war on women" and would make it almost impossible for women to claim pay equity.
"They've thrown hundreds of thousands of women and men, lower paid men, under the bus.
"People have been working towards this for years and are now being told they're back to square one."
She said essential workers were the most at risk.
Mr Anderson said it was "essentially not true" that the legislation changes would affect essential workers, and it was about the comparability of various occupations.
He alleged the opposition and unions were using this as a great opportunity to stir up a profile on the government, for themselves.
"The sky isn't falling and people will still be able to take pay equity claims to court.
"It's nothing to do with those on minimum wage, it is to do with comparison between occupations, and those discussions around gender-based discriminations in our workforce, they are still able to take claims to court," he said.
Mr Anderson said different systems, for nurses or for office administrators, revealed "real complexity" and past claims had dragged on in court for too long.
"It's a direct comparison between occupations and the need to make sure equal pay is not being scrapped," he said.
The protest was organised by Roy Hill who said the group hoped to address their concerns with Mr Anderson.
Mr Anderson was in a conference in Rotorua at the time of the Waitaki protest, but said he was "always available" for consultation.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
Council of Trade Unions take NZ's pay equity fight to international conference
Pay equity protestors voice their opinions outside Parliament on Budget day 2025. Photo: RNZ/Marika Khabazi A representative from the Council of Trade Unions has taken New Zealand's pay equity fight to an international conference. The International Labour Organisation (ILO) is a United Nations agency, which brings together workers, employers and governments to discuss work-related issues, and whose mandate is to advance social and economic justice by setting international labour standards. Council of Trade Unions secretary Melissa Ansell-Bridges is at its annual conference in Geneva, Switzerland. The coalition government announced in early May it would use urgency in Parliament to raise the threshold for proving work has been historically undervalued when making a pay equity claim. Workplace Minister Brooke van Velden said at the time , claims had been able to progress without strong evidence of undervaluation, and some had been "very broad", where it was difficult to tell whether differences in pay were due to sex-based discrimination or something else. The move cancelled 33 in-progress pay equity claims, and saved the government billions of dollars . Ansell-Bridges told RNZ she spoke about the changes during her speech to the ILO plenary on Tuesday. "It was important to inform the 187 member states that despite not being signalled in the last election, reforms to severely undermine the legislation were passed under urgency without any consultation with workers or their unions." The issue had come too late to make it onto the agenda for the ILO's committee on the application of standards, which sat during the two-week conference. "But that's definitely something that we'll be considering in advance of the conference next year," she said. If a case ended up being heard by the committee - which operated on a triage system - it would then be able to make recommendations to governments on how to stay in alignment with agreed conventions. Ansell-Bridges said the response from those international representatives who heard her speech had been one of warmth, support and surprise. "Obviously we have this reputation of being quite a progressive and forward-thinking country that values equality, and so to hear that these kinds of changes are happening in New Zealand, people are very surprised." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Scoop
21 hours ago
- Scoop
PPTA Members Support Additional Salary Claim
Members of PPTA Te Wehengarua, the secondary school teachers' union, have overwhelmingly supported lodging an additional pay claim in their upcoming collective agreement negotiations now that new pay equity law has locked them out of any future process. 'This additional claim recognises that a pay equity claim process is no longer available to us, because of the changes that were steamrolled through Parliament to fill gaping holes in the Budget,' says Chris Abercrombie, PPTA Te Wehengarua president. The claim, along with others, will be presented by PPTA when negotiations for the Secondary Teachers' Collective Agreement begin next Wednesday 18 June. The new equal pay law prevents secondary teachers from making a future pay equity claim as they do not meet the new threshold of being in a profession that is made up of at least 70% women. New comparator rules also lock teachers out from pay equity claims as the education sector is female-dominated. Chris Abercrombie said teachers were further dismayed to learn this week that Education Minister Erica Stanford did not receive any advice about what the changes to the equal pay legislation would mean for 90 000 teachers, who were part of the largest claim that was extinguished. 'It would seem an absolutely fundamental thing to do, as a Cabinet Minister considering changes to legislation, to find out what the impact of those changes will be for the people you are responsible for in your portfolio. Clearly, however, filling massive holes in the Budget was all that mattered.' The revelation about the lack of any advice follows an admission from Employment Relations Minister Brooke Van Velden earlier this week that no-one was consulted about the changes, apart from Cabinet Ministers. 'This demonstrates an unbelievable lack of regard for working people, and for democracy in Aotearoa New Zealand.'
The Spinoff
a day ago
- The Spinoff
With so many parties ‘ruling out' working with other parties, is MMP losing its way?
Part of the appeal of MMP was that it might constrain some of the worst excesses of the political executive. Right now, that is starting to look a little naive. There has been a lot of 'ruling out' going on in New Zealand politics lately. In the most recent outbreak, both the incoming and outgoing deputy prime ministers, Act's David Seymour and NZ First's Winston Peters, ruled out ever working with the Labour Party. Seymour has also advised Labour to rule out working with Te Pāti Māori. Labour leader Chris Hipkins has engaged in some ruling out of his own, indicating he won't work with Winston Peters again. Before the last election, National's Christopher Luxon ruled out working with Te Pāti Māori. And while the Greens haven't yet formally ruled anyone out, co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick has said they could only work with National if it was prepared to 'completely U-turn on their callous, cruel cuts to climate, to science, to people's wellbeing'. Much more of this and at next year's general election New Zealanders will effectively face the same scenario they confronted routinely under electoral rules the country rejected over 30 years ago. Under the old 'first past the post' system, there was only ever one choice: voters could turn either left or right. Many hoped Mixed Member Proportional representation (MMP), used for the first time in 1996, would end this ideological forced choice. Assuming enough voters supported parties other than National and Labour, the two traditional behemoths would have to negotiate rather than impose a governing agenda. Compromise between and within parties would be necessary. Government by decree By the 1990s, many had tired of doctrinaire governments happy to swing the policy pendulum from right to left and back again. In theory, MMP prised open a space for a centrist party that might be able to govern with either major player. In a constitutional context where the political executive has been described as an ' elected dictatorship ', part of the appeal of MMP was that it might constrain some of its worst excesses. Right now, that is starting to look a little naive. For one thing, the current National-led coalition is behaving with the government-by-decree style associated with the radical, reforming Labour and National administrations of the 1980s and 1990s. Most notably, the coalition has made greater use of parliamentary urgency than any other government in recent history, wielding its majority to avoid parliamentary and public scrutiny of contentious policies such as the Pay Equity Amendment Bill. Second, in an ironic vindication of the anti-MMP campaign 's fears before the electoral system was changed – that small parties would exert outsized influence on government policy – the two smaller coalition partners appear to be doing just that. It is neither possible nor desirable to quantify the degree of sway a smaller partner in a coalition should have. That is a political question, not a technical one. But some of the administration's most unpopular or contentious policies have emerged from Act (the Treaty principles bill and the Regulatory Standards legislation) and NZ First (tax breaks for heated tobacco products). Rightly or wrongly, this has created a perception of weakness on the part of the National Party and the prime minister. Of greater concern, perhaps, is the risk the controversial changes Act and NZ First have managed to secure will erode – at least in some quarters – faith in the legitimacy of our electoral arrangements. The centre cannot hold Lastly, the party system seems to be settling into a two-bloc configuration: National/Act/NZ First on the right, and Labour/Greens/Te Pāti Māori on the left. In both blocs, the two major parties sit closer to the centre than the smaller parties. True, NZ First has tried to brand itself as a moderate 'commonsense' party, and has worked with both National and Labour, but that is not its position now. In both blocs, too, the combined strength of the smaller parties is roughly half that of the major player. The Greens, Te Pāti Māori, NZ First and Act may be small, but they are not minor. In effect, the absence of a genuinely moderate centre party has meant a return to the zero-sum politics of the pre-MMP era. It has also handed considerable leverage to smaller parties on both the left and right of the political spectrum. Furthermore, if the combined two-party share of the vote captured by National and Labour continues to fall (as the latest polls show), and those parties have nowhere else to turn, small party influence will increase. For some, of course, this may be a good thing. But to those with memories of the executive-centric, winner-takes-all politics of the 1980s and 1990s, it is starting to look all too familiar. The re-emergence of a binary ideological choice might even suggest New Zealand – lacking the constitutional guardrails common in other democracies – needs to look beyond MMP for other ways to limit the power of its governments.
