KEY POINTS:
It seems like the week for silly sackings. The most prominent firing this week was Paul Buchanan - arguably the most talented and thoughtful political lecturer at Auckland University.
His email to a tardy student was deliberately leaked to the media after he was sacked. I don't know Buchanan personally, but among political circles and former students, he is regarded as one of the most intelligent, insightful and informed political commentators.
A colleague was a student of Buchanan who was widely known as an uncompromising taskmaster, intolerant of slackness. Although his email was intemperate, his refusal to extend a timeline for an assignment was understandable if, as sources claim, this student had failed all of her papers and was uninterested in studying. She was seen to be on a bit of a holiday at the expense of her wealthy family.
Many lecturers have complained that our universities spend more time sucking up to students from rich families to help balance their books rather than caring about academic standards. Apparently, Buchanan has been a vocal critic of this practice and has in the past upset his bosses. The word is they were delighted when he stepped over the line, and couldn't get rid of him fast enough.
In his email he was very firm in advising the student she was wasting his and her time continuing her studies. But telling her this after she said she couldn't meet the deadline because of the death of her father was clearly wrong. I'm sure he would concede he was grossly insensitive.
I take it as read that this student's father has actually died. But funnily enough I haven't seen any reports in the media if this is actually true. How many times a week does a teacher get told that an assignment will be late because a family member has died?
But while Buchanan's sacking has dominated our headlines, the other public sector sacking is even more outrageous. After 24 years with TVNZ, security guard Louis Rawnsley was marched off site and dumped because Christine Rankin allegedly complained against him for disagreeing with her.
Her public "no comment" speaks volumes not just about what she may or may not have said, but her role in getting - according to his workmates - a loyal and well-liked colleague fired. I couldn't recall anyone shedding a tear when Rankin was dumped sometime ago as the Winz boss. But it is instructive that more than 200 TVNZ workers, including some of the more prominent presenters have signed petitions pleading for Rawnsley's reinstatement.
It seems Rankin feels she can spout off her prejudices and bigotry on TV, but gets indignant that a mere worker may disagree with her after the show. From those who were present, Rawnsley only told her that he thought she had been a bit over the top in her views on Maori child abuse. She apparently accused him of being one of those Kiwis who were soft on Maori. He made the mistake then, to have engaged her in discussion.
The truly gutless, of course, in both of these sackings, are their spineless bosses in these public institutions, who seem more concerned in covering their butts than using their common sense.
Both workers should have been spoken to about what is appropriate behaviour when conducting themselves in their respective roles, but to have their careers terminated by people apparently wanting venal payback is nauseating.
In the private sector, brutality against workers, while at times more shocking, is at least more upfront. For example, the owners of a south Auckland hotel sacked a young woman because she was five months' pregnant. Whilst a case is pending they still have this idea that they can get away with anything. When my union, Unite, called in labour inspectors, they conceded to our claim that these workers were paid less than a minimum wage. But the inspectors' response to this illegal activity is that they would visit in three months' time so that the employer had time to remedy the situation.
As you can imagine, this employer was emboldened by the department's non-action and promptly locked out the entire workforce this week when these workers wouldn't accept conditions that were less than legal minimums.
Disappointingly, these same labour department inspectors have been too busy to return any phone calls.
One thing is for sure though - with each of these three incidents, lawyers will be getting paid handsomely, while these workers sit at home worrying about what they do now.
If you want to win a fight for your rights and protect your workmates, there is very little effect paying lawyers and signing petitions.
Ultimately, the only thing that counts is when workers come together as a group to defend their workmates and protect their employment rights.
That's why seeing young workers and students marching in Queen St yesterday against the inequity of being paid youth wages, when they are employed in the same job as adults, was so refreshing.
Fighting for justice and fairness in the workplace cannot be left to the lawyers and their ilk.
It's only if enough concerned people come together to support Buchanan, Rawnsley and the hotel workers, will they be re-instated.
