KEY POINTS:
National signalled a desire to introduce dismissal at will for new workers in small workplaces before the election - but it did not indicate its determination to take urgency in Parliament and cut the public out of having a say.
John Key said a previous submission process in relation to a different bill presented by National in opposition was all the say critics needed - if something has been declared in National's policy then alternative voices should not expect to be heard, let alone listened to.
This should worry anyone whose perspective is not aligned to the new Government's. Is the message that: in voting for a change of Prime Minister and the issues that National campaigned on, voters endorsed all the fine print too? And will voters not in the Government's camp have to sit out the next three years?
When John Key won the right to form a Government he began a relationship with all New Zealanders. That includes non-National voters and non-partisan interest groups who rely on political leaders of all hues to protect their stake in democracy. I for one have promoted as active an engagement by unions with this Government as with the Labour-led governments of the last nine years. That is if they are willing to let us in the door.
What worries me most is there is more to come and that the biggest losers will be workers in some of our lowest-paid industries. Those workers have been at the heart of the resurgence of unionism and collective bargaining and two more National policies will put a spoke in the wheels of that.
What are those two policies?
First, making unions get employers' consent to exercise right of access to workplaces and second, enabling employers to prevent union collective bargaining by signing up non-union collective agreements directly with staff.
Neither policy will have a direct impact on workers who are already in unions and covered by union collective agreements. Nor will they help workers who already prefer to deal directly with their employer (employers must already negotiate in good faith with such workers).
The only winners from these policies will be anti-union employers anxious to reduce the likelihood of union appeals to staff to organise together for better wages and conditions.
Currently, unions have a right of access to workplaces which employ people within our membership rules. We must exercise that right in a reasonable way. Although employers can negotiate (collectively or individually) with their staff for individual agreements, workers always have the right to join a union and bargain for a collective agreement.
Union campaigns in Auckland's Pak'n Save supermarkets, the nation's fast food chains and many other workplaces have used these rights to deliver substantial pay rises and a greater voice for those workers.
This has flowed on to other low-paid workers - underpinning campaigns to raise the minimum wage and end youth rates and putting pressure on non-union employers to match the higher benchmarks being set by collective bargaining.
Our union is working around the clock to keep up with the demand from retail workers in non-union shops for genuine collective bargaining.
It is those workers who will lose out under National's policies. Their employers will be able to pre-empt things by "negotiating" a collective agreement on their own terms, keep it in force for three years and thereby prevent those employees from opting into collective bargaining with the support of a union. The Employment Contracts Act in all but name.
Like its protestations that dismissal at will is about increasing workers' opportunities rather than reducing their rights, National's statements that these policies will increase workers' choices is cynical spin. They will reduce employees' options by foreclosing on their right to bring in an independent union to protect their interests during bargaining.
I've spoken to several National MPs who appeared genuinely impressed with the success of unions like Unite and the NDU in helping low-paid, immigrant, casual, part-time and young workers to improve their lot.
Those efforts have relied on the rights that National wants to remove - the right of workers, and not employers, to choose whether to meet the union in their workplace and the right of workers to opt for union collective bargaining at any time.
The workers we are reaching might not be empowered - personally, industrially or politically. But it's in everyone's interests that their rights to organise in unions are protected. An army of low-paid workers keeps all workers' wages low, increases the demand on taxpayers to top-up wages through income support and undermines efforts to raise productivity through investment in technology, skill development and infrastructure.
You may have the numbers, National, but democracy means more than that.
* Laila Harré is national secretary of the National Distribution Union and a former Associate Minister of Labour.
