Parliament Considering Big Changes To Employment Law
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.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
3 hours ago
- Scoop
ACT Announces Aaron McLeod & Jerry Pickford As ACT Local Candidates For Manawatū
Local Avionics Engineer and Community Volunteer, Aaron McLeod, Selected as ACT Local Candidate for Manawatū District Council ACT Local has selected Aaron McLeod – an avionics engineer and community volunteer – as its candidate for the Feilding Ward of the Manawatū District Council in this year's local election. Aaron, 36, has lived in the Manawatū for over a decade. He began his career as an avionics engineer in the Air Force and now works privately at the Feilding Aerodrome. Married with two young children, Aaron is also president of the Feilding Little Theatre and volunteers his time to help keep it running. 'I'm standing to make sure the Manawatū is a great place to raise kids, live and work. We need infrastructure that supports growth without leaving a debt burden on our children. That means cutting vanity projects, consultant spending, and keeping rates increases to no more than inflation I'll bring practical, communityfocused representation to council.' – Aaron McLeod Local Construction Business Owner, Jerry Pickford, Selected as ACT Local Candidate for Manawatū District Council ACT Local has selected Jerry Pickford – a coowner of a joinery and building company and manager of one of New Zealand's oldest frame and truss plants – as its candidate for the Feilding Ward of the Manawatū District Council in this year's local election. A father of three, and a qualified craftsman joiner, Jeremy leads complex prefabrication projects and works closely with clients and contractors every day. His handson business experience gives him a clear understanding of the challenges local families and businesses face everyday. 'I'm standing for council to bring a backtobasics approach that puts people first. I want to fix what's broken, reduce waste, and make rates fairer. I'll fight for practical investment in local infrastructure and stronger, safer communities – through fresh thinking, real solutions, and the courage to act.'– Jerry Pickford Earlier this year, ACT New Zealand announced it would be standing Common Sense Candidates for local government for the first time — after hearing from New Zealanders across the country who are sick of rising rates, ballooning budgets, and councils that ignore the basics while chasing ideological vanity projects. When you vote ACT Local, you know what you're getting: Fixing the basics Lower Rates Cutting the waste Stopping race-based politics Restoring accountability End the war on cars ACT Local Government spokesperson Cameron Luxton says: ' ACT Local candidates are community-minded Kiwis who've had enough of wasteful councils treating ratepayers like ATMs. It's time to take control on behalf of ratepayers — to restore accountability and deliver real value for money. ACT Local is about getting the basics right: maintaining roads, keeping streets clean, and respecting the people who pay the bills. Our candidates won't divide people by race or get distracted by climate vanity projects. They're here to serve, not lecture." – Cameron Luxton
The Spinoff
7 hours ago
- The Spinoff
Councils under pressure as government pushes ‘back to basics' agenda
Increasingly loud demands that councils rein in spending have made for a fractious week between ministers and mayors, writes Catherine McGregor in today's extract from The Bulletin. Ministers and mayors air out their differences The relationship between central and local government was extra prickly this week, with a fresh suite of reforms tabled in Wellington and ministers getting a somewhat frosty reception in Christchurch at the Local Government New Zealand conference. The Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill, which passed its first reading last night , will remove councils' legal responsibility to consider the 'four wellbeings' – social, cultural, environmental and economic – when making decisions. Instead, councils will be legally obliged to prioritise so-called 'core services' like water, roads and rubbish. Opening the conference, the prime minister pitched the changes as a return to basics, saying ratepayers wanted councils to '[prioritise] pipes over vanity projects'. But among the mayors gathered in Christchurch, frustration was palpable at the expectation that they somehow, as Newsroom's David Wiliams put it, 'achieve the triumvirate: upgrading infrastructure, holding down rates, and keeping debt in check'. Clutha mayor Bryan Cadogan said ministers refuse to admit they're demanding the impossible. 'The Government knows it, we know it, but we just keep on getting this.' Councils fed up with policy whiplash That frustration is compounded by the sense that councils are forever adapting to the whims of central government. The four wellbeings, for instance, have now been added and removed from the Local Government Act four times since 2002 – inserted twice by Labour governments, stripped out by National. 'Every time we have an election, there's a flip-flop,' said LGNZ president Sam Broughton. As Shanti Mathias reports this morning in The Spinoff, he and others also pushed back at the government's suggestion that councils are blowing money on 'nice-to-haves' like bike lanes and 'fancy toilets'. In his own district of Selwyn, Broughton said, 80% of spending goes to key infrastructure like pipes and roads, with the rest funding services that communities still see as essential. Coalition partners not convinced on rate caps One of the other changes introduced in the new bill is benchmarking – mandatory, comparative performance reporting on council spending, rates, debt and outcomes. While this information is already publicly available, the law will now require councils to collate it into reports. Deputy PM David Seymour is a fan: he told the Christchurch conference that 'some healthy competition between councils is long overdue'. He also cheered the removal of the wellbeing requirements, which he dubbed the Puppy Dogs and Ice Cream Bill when they were proposed by Labour, for the second time, in 2017. However Seymour later expressed reservations about local government minister Simon Watts' proposed cap on rates increases. 'Don't cap your income until you've got your spending under control,' he warned. NZ First leader Winston Peters was even blunter, RNZ's Lillian Hanly reports. 'Doctor, heal thyself,' Peters opined, arguing that central government's own spending record left it in no position to preach to others about fiscal restraint. Tikanga or 'red tape'? Seymour's speech also ignited controversy with his attack on what he called 'ceremonial chanting' in the consenting process – a reference to clauses in resource consents requiring karakia or other tikanga Māori. As Māni Dunlop reports in Te Ao Māori News, the line was in his prepared remarks but not in the speech he delivered at the conference. However Seymour doubled down later that day, claiming that developers were backed into a corner over karakia, believing they had to allow their use to avoid controversy. The comments brought Seymour his second rebuke of the week from Peters: 'Why am I responding to what David Seymour doesn't know? Excuse me,' said the NZ First leader, adding that he had spent much of his career defending the 'right protocol'. Karakia, he said, are 'appropriate when used correctly'. Writing in The Spinoff, Liam Rātana notes that such clauses are typically inserted by mutual agreement to build respectful relationships with mana whenua, and argues that Seymour's complaints are based on misunderstandings of both tikanga and how consent conditions actually work. 'While highlighting these clauses as unnecessary 'red tape' and 'roadblocks', Seymour says his changes will put 'power back with communities',' Liam writes. 'I wonder which communities he's talking about?'
Otago Daily Times
10 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Undetermined and undermined
What a mess. The years of disruption and uncertainty in the polytechnic and vocational education sector have continued unabated. Despite a flawed and inadequate funding system, Otago Polytechnic was a thriving institution, even generating surpluses, thanks in part to its Auckland campus for overseas students. In February 2019, Labour Education Minister Chris Hipkins, concerned about several polytechnics running large and persistent deficits, triggered upheaval by beginning the centralisation of the 16 polytechnics. This led to the creation of Te Pūkenga and a costly Hamilton-based bureaucracy. The plan was poor, and the execution was a shambles. By July 2022, about $200 million had been spent on reorganisation, and the projected deficit of $110m far exceeded the net deficits before the upheaval. The promises of economies of scale, reduced course duplication, greater expertise, improved consistency and less waste on marketing were alluring. In practice, however, such reforms often lead to additional layers of highly paid management, the dead hand of bureaucracy, and diminished innovation. Compromised were speedy responses, local pride, genuine local community involvement, and even a touch of healthy inter-polytechnic competition. Regional polytechnics will be better attuned to local needs than branch offices operating under Te Pūkenga. The government and Vocational Education Minister Penny Simmonds have since taken a ham-fisted approach to dismantling Te Pūkenga. Crucial courses have been cut, and many valued staff lost, while restructuring drags on. This week finally brought announcements that 10 polytechnics would return to regional governance. Yet what should have been a positive step for Otago has instead been met with confusion and criticism. Although Ms Simmonds insists Otago Polytechnic will have its own council governance structure with local representatives, it has been placed under a "federation model." Executive director Megan Pōtiki says she has no idea what this will actually mean. In extraordinarily strong criticism, Dr Pōtiki said she feared the federation model would dilute Otago's high learner completion rates and damage its reputation. Its independence and viability as a regional institution were at risk. Ms Simmonds said that being part of the federation — anchored by the Open Polytechnic and including the Universal College of Learning (UCOL) — would enable collaboration in areas such as online learning resources, IT, procurement, and specialist services. This, she argued, would reduce duplication and support financial sustainability. Ideally, such co-operation could occur under regional governance across all 10 "autonomous" polytechnics, not solely through Otago's imposed federation membership. As Tertiary Education Union general secretary Daniel Benson-Guiu said, no-one asked to be part of the federation. Is this simply a "race to the bottom"? Will it lead to excessive reliance on online learning? Surely it would have been helpful if Dr Pōtiki had been consulted on both the federation and the supposed "autonomy", which resembles more a halfway house for her polytechnic. As of Wednesday, she said she still had not been contacted by Ms Simmonds about the changes. How can Otago be truly autonomous while the Open Polytechnic leads and provides services to it? It is bound to be both confusing and unwieldy. Given Ms Simmonds' background as a successful head of the Southern Institute of Technology, one might have expected her to bring more of the sector onside as the system reverts towards its earlier structure. At least, Labour leader Chris Hipkins acknowledges the turbulence endured by polytechnics and their staff. He acknowledges that a return to Te Pūkenga-style centralisation would be unwise for that reason if the coalition loses power at the next election. Inadequate funding and a crude "bums-on-seats" model underpinned earlier deficits. For any system to succeed, sufficient resourcing is vital. Otago Polytechnic has a long and proud history. It must be granted genuine autonomy, adequate funding, and space to rebuild its strength, resilience and innovation.
