An unfair burden on workers

Anna Wallis PHOTO/FILE

For those workers worried about the undermining of their rights under the new Employment Relations Amendment Bill, there could be worse around the corner.

The casualisation of the British workforce, for instance, has set a cracking pace with something called zero hours contracts, which mean workers might earn nothing in a week. There are no set hours and they must be ready to work each day, sometimes with just hours' notice.

While this may seem familiar to casual Kiwi staff for agricultural or horticulture jobs, overseas the practice has moved into retail, the public sector and charities.

While the flexibility of such agreements is touted, many of the contracts do not pay sick pay or holiday pay. Planning to pay a mortgage or major purchases would be impossible, and it is a stressful, demeaning way for people to live.

Further liberalisation of the workforce marketplace is under way in New Zealand with the passage of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill. Among changes proposed are that employers will be able to walk away from the bargaining table if they cannot reach an agreement, they can deduct pay if employees work to rule, and will be allowed to opt out of multi-employer bargaining at the beginning of the process.

For the 15 per cent of the workforce that is unionised, the bill is a huge threat. It also proposes that an employer may impose restrictions on an employee's rest and meal breaks where it is "reasonable and necessary", with regard to the nature of the work.

The backers of this "flexibility" have probably not worked significant parts of their lives in such jobs where breaks are mandated.

It's an unfair burden when most people in these jobs go above and beyond the call of duty anyway.

Whole industries - such as aged care - are based on the goodwill of the people who work in them.

Not only do we want to pay such workers as little as possible, we now want to make statutory breaks something they have to negotiate.

Come on!