
New Zealanders don't tend to talk about pay. What would happen if we did?
'One night, at a work farewell, a few of us started talking about how no one knew what the others earned,' says Sandra. It was 2015. The group all worked in marketing and communications at a large bank which used a banding system to determine salary ranges – but some of the bands were $40,000 deep. Inhibitions shrugged off with the help of a few drinks, the colleagues divulged their salaries. Despite having a larger team and same-sized budget to manage, Sandra was earning $30,000 less than her colleagues. It took years, chance and wine for her to find out.
These kinds of stories filter through as tales of the importance of talking about pay, but they're relatively rare. There's a culture in New Zealand of not discussing pay with colleagues or friends. In my experience, it's seen as a little uncouth and confrontational. A new member's bill, the Employee Remuneration Disclosure Amendment Bill, aims to remove some barriers people face in talking about pay – namely the fear of retaliation from employers. When Labour MP Camilla Belich introduced her bill at its first reading in parliament in November 2024, she noted 'persistent and unexplained' pay gaps for Māori and Pacific workers and women. Her hope is that by bringing increased pay transparency, discrimination can be eliminated, she said. During the select committee process the bill received 225 public submissions – almost 90% were in support of the bill and 4% were opposed. Last Wednesday, the bill passed its second reading with support from all parties apart from Act and NZ First.
While fear of retaliation from employers may be a reason for colleagues not talking about what they're paid, only three cases related to dismissal following remuneration disclosure have been brought to the Employment Relations Authority or the Employment Court since 2000. People are free to discuss pay unless there is a pay secrecy clause in their contract. It's not known how common these clauses are in New Zealand – this week experts have told me 'not that common' and 'potentially more common than people thought'. What they have agreed on is that regardless, people in New Zealand don't tend to discuss pay with their colleagues or friends. Jarrod Haar, professor of management and Māori business at Massey University, says that 'we have a culture of secrecy' around pay, while Amy Ross, an independent expert in employment relations and investigations, describes pay as a 'taboo subject'. It seems, then, that the legal issues the bill deals with aren't the biggest barrier to pay transparency.
The mystery surrounding pay rates is a fairly recent phenomenon. For most of New Zealand's history, wages were set by the national awards system. The system, run by the state, set minimum pay and conditions across industries and jobs, made them public and reviewed them yearly with feedback from workers. That system was 'much more open and more public' in terms of wages, says Ben Peterson, assistant secretary at Unite Union. And so, even if money wasn't discussed at the pub or around the dinner table, workers knew roughly what was considered appropriate and fair for their industry and their neighbours'.
The awards system ended with the neoliberal reforms of the 1980s, replaced by the Employment Contracts Act 1991, which instead focuses on individual contracts and basic minimum conditions (minimum wage, 15-minute tea breaks, 10 days of sick leave, etc) set out for all. 'It's very individualised, and then that becomes an incentive for employers to discourage people talking about stuff,' says Peterson. Quite simply, if an employer is paying someone $26 an hour and others doing the same job $24 an hour, they don't want those workers knowing and then requesting $26. Individualising contracts also puts the burden of negotiating pay onto individuals, which can further reinforce bias on gendered and ethnic lines. It can be a 'don't ask, don't get' situation, and some people have been brought up not to ask.
In folding wages into individual contracts, companies have been able to treat them as confidential information, even without secrecy clauses. Simon Schofield from Auckland University's law school says that while there may have always been a cultural 'modesty' in New Zealand about pay rates, the neoliberal system has allowed businesses to 'play into that cultural norm' to keep people quiet about their pay in order to suppress wages. After the reforms, the share of GDP that goes to wages dropped away. 'At the end of the day, the companies are making substantial money out of that,' he says. Unions and collective agreements work against this, but in March last year only 14.5% of employees in New Zealand were part of a union.
Ross says another problem is a lack of understanding of employment rights and pay in New Zealand. 'It's not taught at school. It's not really taught anywhere.' Ross was once contracted to give advice to students on moving from universities into the workplace. She was working with a group of students in their fourth and final year of studies – 'highly intelligent people', she says – when one of them put their hand up to ask a question. 'What's a union?' they asked. Ross was shocked. 'This is where we are, actually,' she says. 'People don't even know how to access the fundamental rights at work here.' She says that this allows for people, particularly more vulnerable people, to be exploited in the workplace.
But it's not only the people on low wages who don't want to talk about pay. People who suspect, or know, their pay is higher than their colleagues' are often uncomfortable or embarrassed to talk about it, says Ross. 'People who are on huge, big, fat salaries – they feel like they don't want to talk about that. Maybe it's time to start asking why.'
Peterson has found that some employers aren't great at talking about pay either. 'Every employer likes to think of themselves as a good employer,' he says, but evidence to the contrary – like low wages – often emerges during negotiations between the union and employers. 'People get very personally confronted,' he says. Instead of focusing on the numbers and facts in front of them, some employers can get offended by a perceived attack on their character. Peterson says this is 'unhelpful' during negotiations.
For Sandra, knowing that her colleagues earned more gave her the onus to ask for a pay rise and know she was justified. 'I did and got it,' she says. 'It definitely helps to have a sense of what others are earning and some sense of solidarity.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
Letters: Warriors defensive woes, voting reforms, David Seymour and dropkicks, passport name-changing
It is just too easy for opponents to exploit the frailties we have here. Alan Walker, St Heliers. Voting reforms How are the changes to voting going to make it harder to cast a vote? The election date is announced months in advance, so people have no excuse to not enrol to vote. Also, by making it illegal to have entertainment or food offerings within 100m of a voting station is just common sense, votes must be cast freely and no inducement should be offered. It seems the only ones complaining are the ones who use this as an election-day strategy. Mark Young, Ōrewa. David Seymour and dropkicks David Seymour has again demonstrated his gift for insult, this time calling tardy voting registrants 'dropkicks'. Such boorish, sneering, self-righteous language, while not surprising coming from Seymour, really shows what a massive dropkick he is. Brian Dwyer, Welcome Bay. Passports It is so hard to understand what the Government is trying to do in changing the order of name on our New Zealand passports. The use of te reo is a source of pride in the unique embracing of our heritage through our original language. Other countries praise us for it. There are no obvious nay-sayers except certain voters who are dwindling in number as they 'get' the unique lustre of 'Aotearoa New Zealand'. In that order. Christine, Northcote Point. What's in a name? I am a New Zealand citizen living in South Dakota. I recently had my New Zealand passport renewed and noticed the Māori word for New Zealand was placed above the English word on the passport. I was somewhat mystified and offended by this change, as I view myself as a New Zealander, not an Aotearoan. I presume this renaming order is a manifestation of 'woke' ideology derived from the previous Government under Dame Jacinda Ardern. I find this form of 'virtue signalling' distasteful and not becoming of the Commonwealth country New Zealand is. To the three leaders of the current Government, congratulations are deserved on their sensible and appropriate name reversal on the front of the New Zealand passport. Quentin Durward, South Dakota, US. Cost of living We are currently in Perth and there are five different supermarket chains to shop at, plus a whole host of independent stores. One greengrocer in particular, Spud Shed, is 17 stores strong. Many of these are open 24 hours, offering an exciting shopping experience for the customer. It is a lot easier to shop around here to keep them honest. Some purchases included red capsicums for $1.75 each, two for $4 cabbages, $5 blueberries, and large 500gm strawberries for only $4.99. Two chips of cherry tomatoes for $3, and a block of Aussie butter for $6.79. Their in-season Sumo mandarins are magic, but it is not all beer and skittles in the produce world; we spotted our gold kiwifruit for $12.99/kg, and we miss our glorious New Zealand apples dearly. However, one thing is for certain, our New Zealand grocery retail needs some serious competition. Glenn Forsyth, Taupō.


NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
Tauranga City Council cocktail party: Ombudsman recommends invite list be publicly released
Communications staff were told to tell NZME 'Marty said he won't be releasing the list of invitees, that they can go to the Ombudsman'. NZME referred the matter to the Ombudsman last July. Chief Ombudsman John Allen's June 17 decision recommended the council 'reconsider' NZME's request 'and make a new decision'. While it may have been a privately sponsored event, it was organised and hosted by the council, he said. The invite-only event was held on May 10, 2024, at the Cargo Shed in Tauranga. Photo / Alex Cairns Allen, who began his term as Chief Ombudsman in March, noted the council's assessment of the use of staff time 'as minimal and non-disruptive'. However, 'public money and resources, through the contribution of Council staff's work hours, were still used in organising the event'. Allen said the Privacy Commissioner considered the privacy interest of invitees and attendees to be 'low' and there did not appear to be 'any inherent or immediate risk' that public knowledge of this could create that would heighten the privacy interest. Allen considered the draft list of invitees, 'a fair number' of which held 'prominent public positions'. 'Given these factors, there appears to be a stronger public interest in releasing this information than the low privacy interest in withholding.' Allen noted the council was governed by four commissioners at the time. He acknowledged the council's comments that the celebration was 'partially to farewell the outgoing commissioners'. 'However, it remains that for the past three years, the people of Tauranga were effectively denied their elected representation in favour of appointed governance. 'The Ombudsman is likely to consider that this heightens the public interest in transparency, and also in accountability by way of council time spent on a non-essential celebration.' Section 7(2)(a) of the Act provides official information may be withheld if it was necessary to 'protect the privacy of natural persons'. He said the council 'improperly applied' this section to withhold the names of invitees, attendees, and sponsors from NZME. In an email on July 9, the council's democracy services team leader, Kath Norris, said the council had 'reconsidered' its decision and sent a list of 240 invitees and 10 sponsors. Norris said there was no attendance list or registration at the event, 'and therefore no definitive record of who attended, or whether other people came in place of someone on the list'. The guest list showed 40 council staff and their partners were invited. Other invitees included MPs, business leaders, construction and property development leaders, Western Bay of Plenty District Council and Bay of Plenty Regional Council staff, and iwi leaders. The event's 10 sponsors were economic development agency Priority One, Tauranga Business Chamber and property development companies or groups Twenty Two, Willis Bond, LT McGuinness, Quayside, Watts & Hughes, Urban Task Force, Carrus, and Panorama Ltd. Carrus founder Sir Paul Adams revealed last year that the company was a sponsor and said the party was a chance to celebrate the 'long-overdue' revitalisation of the CBD and to thank the commissioners for kick-starting it. New council offices and a $306m civic precinct redevelopment were among projects the commission approved during its four-and-a-half years governing the city council. A newly elected council began its term in August. Megan Wilson is a health and general news reporter for the Bay of Plenty Times and Rotorua Daily Post. She has been a journalist since 2021.

1News
6 hours ago
- 1News
Job cuts as part of Govt's polytech reform necessary
Vocational Education Minister Penny Simmonds says a reduction of 600 roles across different polytechnics is necessary to address unsustainable financial deficits as the Government dismantles Te Pūkenga. Ten polytechnics will be re-established from next year 2026, Simmonds announced last week, with differing fates for six other institutions. Simmonds told Q+A the net job losses were necessary to address unsustainable deficits. "It depends where they're coming from. When you've got institutions that are running $11.3 million deficits, you simply cannot carry on with that," she said. "You look at what's causing those deficits. In the WelTec/Whitireia situation, the arts centre here in the middle of Wellington, they were running at a ratio of one staff member to 5.6 students. No school gets that advantage. ADVERTISEMENT "You've got to have a look at where the staff are going to come from, and in some cases, it's just they shouldn't be operating at that ratio." She confirmed "there would be a reduction this year" of roles at some institutions. "There will be further redundancies." Minister confident changes will prove worth Treasury has previously suggested the reforms could risk repeating past failures, saying plans remained focused on supporting institutions' financial viability, "with no clear evidence of how the needs of learners and employers have been considered". Simmonds responded when read the advice: "Treasury gave a range of advice, which Cabinet looked at along with lots of other advice. "We've got evidence over the last five decades of polytechnics being able to be successful to reflect the needs of industries and their community, and so I relied on the history that we'd seen of polytechnics being able to do that successfully." ADVERTISEMENT Before entering politics, the Vocational Education Minister and National MP served as the chief executive of the Southern Institute of Technology. Treasury officials also posited the reforms could create a financial situation "similar, if not worse, than the situation faced by [educational institutions] pre-Te Pūkenga". Asked about assurances that further bailouts wouldn't be needed, she said the institutions "will be set up in the best possible way that they can be". "They will have their debt addressed. They will have their financial pathway to viability. It's then up to communities to make sure that the right people are in the governance roles and the right people are in the management roles, and that they integrate with the community." Simmonds was also pressed about whether some institutions gaining independence were in worse financial positions than those entering federation. "No, not a worse financial position, no. So, some of them will get to sustainability. They'll get to a surplus. In the time they'll take to get to a surplus, they have reserves that can cover them during that time." Labour says new model will drain regions ADVERTISEMENT In response to the Q+A interview, Labour's education spokesperson Shanan Halbert said, the whole point of Te Pūkenga was to make the polytechnic sector more financially viable and ensure more training opportunities and employment in our regions. "The changes announced today will only return the polytechnic sector to a model that was never financially viable – and the result will be major job losses in local areas." Halbert said the Government "could have simply addressed some of the issues" the existing model to avoid the "uncertainty this has had on staff and students". The changes to amalgamate polytechnics and institutes of technology were introduced by the previous Labour government. In her interview, Simmonds was also asked about delays to a ban on single-use plastics, how she had managed her environment portfolio, and on Gore's recent tap water issues. For the full interview, watch the video above Q+A with Jack Tame is made with the support of New Zealand On Air