‘Foolish’: Fair pay stance under fire
Lobby group stands by view on global report analyst calls ‘scaremongering’
An Auckland business leader has questioned Businessnz’s criticism of our labour laws and a social policy analyst described that same criticism as “scaremongering”.
Michael Barnett, chief executive of the Auckland Business Chamber, challenged Businessnz’s handling of a global report on fair pay and labour laws.
Alan Johnson, Child Poverty Action Group conveyor and formerly a social policy analyst for the Salvation Army, expressed alarm at the comments by Businessnz and its chief executive Kirk Hope, calling it “scaremongering”.
Barnett said yesterday: “Businessnz has not constructively engaged in the topic of fair pay and I’m taking a very different approach.
“From a Businessnz perspective, it’s a fair question to ask about our labour laws and if they override people’s rights and freedom,” Barnett said.
“Taking a report, further analysing it and then coming up with a new headline like Businessnz did — it’s difficult to see that as being a constructive critique of proposed government policy on pay.
“I’ve taken a very different approach. If you look at the Government’s objective, they’re focused on achieving that. I’ve asked if we can achieve that in a different way and make constructive suggestions.”
But Businessnz has said it is standing by the substance of its description of an international report that it said
implied New Zealand could be in breach of international labour law — but has been criticised for distributing “misinformation”.
The business lobby group said on Monday that New Zealand risked being placed on a list of alleged breaches of international labour law if it continues with its proposal for Fair Pay Agreements.
It described the title of the report by the UN International Labour Organisation (ILO) as the 40 “worst case breaches” of international labour treaties.
“It’s scaremongering which is not credible,” Johnson said of the Businessnz stance.
“It’s foolish really. Sometimes you over-reach and that’s probably happened.”
Workplace and Safety Minister Michael Wood has brushed aside Businessnz’s criticism of the Government’s planned Fair Pay Agreements.
Wood, who is also Transport Minister, said fair pay agreements would benefit New Zealand’s most vulnerable
workers, including bus drivers and cleaners, and not force entire sectors to the bargaining table.
Wood’s comments follow a Herald article quoting lobby group Businessnz saying New Zealand risked being placed on a list of alleged breaches of international labour law, alongside Venezuela, Colombia, Egypt, Hungary, Malaysia and Mauritius, if it continued with its proposal to introduce Fair Pay Agreements.
Chris Darby, an Auckland Council councillor, also raised concerns about the comments. Darby said he had received confirmation that Mayor Phil Goff and chief executive Jim Stabback were sending a joint letter to Businessnz seeking an explanation.
Darby told Stuff it was “pretty outrageous” for Businessnz to do what it did and alter the title of the ILO report.
CTU president Richard Wagstaff described Businessnz’s treatment of the report as “misinformation”.
Johnson said New Zealand was a country where labour and people’s worth was valued so it made no sense to criticise us when you compared this country to others.
“When people say it’s really dreadful in New Zealand, you have to say 98 per cent of the rest of the world think we’re a brilliant place. It’s inconceivable that our labour standards are bad. They could be better, particularly around health and safety.
“Like a lot of people, Kirk Hope is a lobbyist and he has to state his case in the most forthright way. I don’t have a problem with that. He stretches his credibility if he says this, though. He’s trying to compare the situation in NZ with countries which are far worse in terms of labour standards.
“People just don’t believe it. Clearly, he’s having a go at what businesses will see as interference with the rights of employers including aspects like collective bargaining or the idea government will set standards on wages.”
To argue those aspects were somehow an infringement of liberty is somehow a stretch, he said.
The UN International Labour Organisation tended to be proorganised labour, Johnson said.
“It seems unlikely the ILO would have huge problems with ideas of a social contract around employment law.”
New Zealand’s employment law was based around the broader needs of people and their families, he said, citing paternity and maternity leave as one example.
These were positive aspects of our society, not negative.