NZ Politics

572 readers

6 users here now

Kia ora and welcome to the NZ Politics community!

This is a place for respectful discussions about everything that's political and kiwi

This is an inclusive space where diverse opinions are valued, but please don't be a dick

Other kiwi communities here

Banner image by Tom Ackroyd, CC-BY-SA

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Dave

RaoulDuke

Plans to reintroduce pay deductions for partial strikes (www.rnz.co.nz)

submitted 1 month ago by Dave to c/politics

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Workplace Relations Minister Brooke van Velden has announced plans to reintroduce pay deductions for partial strikes.

A partial strike is where the employee is still doing some form of their work. Employers have been banned from reducing the worker's pay since the previous Labour-led government removed that power in 2018.

ACT's van Velden said she recognised the entitlement of employees to strike, but the disruption caused "should not continue without consequence".

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Dave 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

So, the employer's options:

Her proposed changes would mean an employee's pay could be reduced by a proportionate amount "calculated in accordance with a specified method that is based on identifying the work that the employee will not be performing due to the strike".

Alternatively, the employer could deduct 10 percent of the employee's wages.

Either option would need to be communicated to striking workers ahead of the deduction being made, but they would not be required to communicate the amount.

One of the example situations:

train drivers in Wellington working to rule in September.

Isn't working to rule meaning that they are doing their whole job and nothing that they aren't paid to do? And if this happens in future their employer can deduct 10% of their wages?

Have I misunderstood something here?

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago

I'm a bit confused myself actually. I can understand pushing back against practices like deliberately working slowly, or bus drivers not collecting fares, if you're at work and being paid.

But following the rules to the letter?

[–] Viper_NZ 3 points 1 month ago

Defence force staff are currently working to rule which is causing all sorts of problems. Eg taking their allotted breaks which leave critical parts of the org offline for 30 minutes or so (so they're having to pull in officers to cover the gaps). It's hugely disruptive and I assume very effective as a negotiation tool.

BUT. If the organisation can't function with the staff taking their legally mandated breaks, the understaffing is just being exposed by the workers who have been plugging the gap, unpaid, until now.

That work to rule can see your pay docked is utterly insane.