Mayor cops heat over living wage
Living Wage Nelson supporters say they’ve been ‘‘betrayed’’ by a ‘‘backflip’’ from Nelson Mayor Rachel Reese on an earlier pledge of support for the initiative.
But Reese rejected the claim, saying discussions on a living wage were progressing in a proper way through discussions with the Tasman District Council.
The fallout followed Cr Brian McGurk’s motion during the council’s annual plan deliberations this week that sought to commit the Nelson City Council to becoming an accredited living wage employer.
It also requested advice from the chief executive on how it could be implemented, and sought a workshop with Tasman District Council.
However, an amendment by Councillor Bill Dahlberg removed the commitment and limited it to just the joint council workshop with Tasman District Council.
This was passed 6-5, with Reese voting in favour of the amendment.
‘‘It’s very important that we initiate a scoping exercise around what this means for our residents and ratepayers,’’ she said.
Reese said she didn’t like seeing the council chamber being used to ‘‘promote central government election campaigns’’, nor did she think the chief executive should be distracted with what was ‘‘very much a central government political endeavour, as right as it may be.’’
Living Wage Nelson’s Andrew Irvine said the mayor failed to show leadership and went back on the pledge she made last year in support of the living wage.
‘‘From my view, she is now just another politician who promises one thing to get elected and then does the complete opposite,’’ Irvine said.
‘‘When it came out that there was support for it and that [the council] was going to be considering it, people were in tears, people who had fought for getting beyond poverty wages were in tears. They thought we might actually get some movement here.’’
He said the council had missed an opportunity to be a leader.
He said it was shameful the council paid its chief executive $309,000 a year while some contractors were on little more than the minimum wage of $15.75.
Living Wage Nelson was backed by local community organisations and churches, and they were not going to give up.
However, Reese said her vote was not a ‘‘backflip’’ and the living wage discussions were progressing in the necessary way.
She said as mayor she was obliged to think of all ratepayers – waged, unwaged, employers, or people on fixed incomes.
‘‘The Living Wage is now able to progress in a way that is sensible for local democratic decision making. It is essential that discussions are held first with the one organisation that we share significant contractual and ownership relationships with, Tasman District Council,’’ Reese said.
Council chief executive Clare Hadley advised councillors to ‘‘put your toe in the water incredibly gently’’ when it came to the issue.
She said there was a question over whether councils that adopted the living wage were contravening local government legislation which required services to be delivered to communities in the most cost-effective way.
However, Cr McGurk said his motion did not require the council to make sudden changes, but simply put the council on the track of working towards being a living wage employer.
He said while it was clear they needed specific legal advice, particularly regarding contracts, there could be real benefits for paying the living wage including increased productivity and reduced staff turnover.
Cr Mike Rutledge said because 94 per cent of directly-employed council staff were already paid the living wage or higher, there was no need to sign up to a new commitment and be ‘‘beholden’’ to a group that could ‘‘make up numbers’’ as they went along.
However, Cr Kate Fulton said it was about security for employees in the future.
Reese, along with councillors McGurk, Kate Fulton, Matt Lawrey, Luke Acland, Mel Courtney, and Tim Skinner, had all previously pledged their support for the principle of the living wage for council staff.