Opinion

In a speech to the Wellingtonian of the Year awards this week, Finance Minister Grant Robertson briefly apologised to a packed audience about the new Air New Zealand safety video. Apparently, the Crown’s 53 per cent shareholding did not give the Beehive creative control over a video which the bulk of travellers seem to find grating.

Joking aside, this weekend Robertson and his colleagues must long for more control over what must feel like two fighting children.

Air New Zealand, the national carrier majority-owned by taxpayers, and E tu¯ , one of the unions officially affiliated with the Labour Party, head to mediation tomorrow, but do so from a tense starting point.

Along with another smaller union, the two sides are locked in a dispute which could see engineers downing tools just as Kiwis are heading off to Christmas.

The airline arguably inflamed the situation when it announced it had received a strike notice, warning of how holidays could be disrupted and talking up how much the engineers were paid.

The threat of disruption at New Zealand’s largest airline, comes just days after threats to disrupt New Zealand’s largest petrol company.

On Monday, First Union said 180 drivers who work for Pacific Fuel Haul, suppliers of virtually all fuel to Z Energy and Caltex stations, were planning to go on strike for five days from December 16 to December 20.

The trucking company has given little detail of the dispute, although it too tried to portray the drivers as well paid, in statements disputed by the First Union, which says the strike threat centres on an attempt to water down redundancy provisions.

Whatever the merits of the arguments, the unions have to accept that timing strikes close to Christmas will be perceived as an attempt to use the holiday as leverage.

For Labour, this could turn out to be a massive headache.

Its opponents warned that the expectations created while the party was in opposition would lead to increased industrial action.

During election debates in 2017, Labour leader Jacinda Ardern dismissed the risk of ‘‘mass strikes’’.

Although the term is impossible to define, the level of industrial action does seem to have climbed, at least in the public sector.

This is hardly a surprise. Labour has not only backed legislation to strengthen the position of unions, strikes are more likely to have an impact now because Labour appears more likely to listen.

So far, the issue does not appear to have hurt the Government politically.

While the groups which have engaged in major strikes have generally had public sympathy, the pay demands have often been high.

Refusing to simply bend may indeed enhance Robertson’s reputation of restraint with the public’s finances, especially given the healthy state of the Government’s books.

But the strikes being threatened this week, in the event they go ahead, could be in a different category.

Parents might begrudgingly put up with the inconvenience of a teacher strike, because they can see why the profession is pushing back after years of low wage increases.

Those same parents may be less willing to accept spending hours with their children, crammed into airports hoping to get home for the holidays.

Z Energy has said it expects there to be little or no disruption from striking tanker drivers.

But any images of motorists queuing will make for unwelcome summer headlines.

Whatever the merits of the arguments, the unions behind the strikes need to be aware that they may quickly lose public support.

They may also affect how the public views strikes generally and hurt the Government that claims to represent them.

Whatever the merits of the arguments, the unions behind the strikes need to be aware that they may quickly lose public support.