Replacement worker ban legalises union bullies
HIDESIGHT
Unions derive their bully-boy power from Parliament.
It used to be they got their power from good old-fashioned thuggery.
But now Parliament saves them the effort.
Parliament has given unions power that no other organisations enjoy.
They have these powers simply so they can abuse them.
Take s97 of the Employment Relations Act 2000. It serves to turn ordinary strike action into a lethal weapon. The section prevents employers using replacement workers in the event of a strike.
It has never existed in statute before, even going back to the dim, dark days of industrial action.
Employers have always historically been entitled to bring in replacement labour. It makes sense.
It puts a limit on the ability of unions to abuse the strike process. And enables businesses to stay afloat.
Few exceptions
Besides, whose business is it? I have no trouble with anyone choosing to strike. But I also think that employers should be free to bring in replacement workers.
But that’s not how it works in New Zealand now. S97 adds some big muscle to union bullying power.
It’s a power that unions have historically never had in New Zealand and unions in other countries don’t enjoy. The only exceptions are Japan, Korea and Mexico.
The Employment Contracts Act 1991 never had such a provision. Nor did its predecessors, the Labour Relations Act 1987, the Industrial Relations Act 1973, the Industrial Relations Act 1949, the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act of 1925 and 1908.
S97 is an entirely new development in industrial law. It can cripple any business and enables unions to blackmail bosses.
Devastating effects
Taranaki-King Country MP Shane Ardern called it right when the legislation was passing. He pointed out to Parliament the devastating effect the section would have if there was a strike in the dairy or meat industry.
Milk would have to be poured down the gurgler and animals would suffer terribly.
The section even denies the option of volunteers or family members saving the milk or relieving the suffering of animals.
Mr Ardern was prescient. The Dairy Union went on strike in 2009 while bargaining with Open Country Cheese. The union was seeking initially a 45% wage-cost increase and later between 15% and 25%.
At the time they were already earning twice the average wage and had a wage-cost per tonne of product twice that of other plants.
Open Country Cheese brought in outside workers.
If they hadn’t, a million litres a day of milk would have been dumped on land, cows would have been dried off, causing harm to the herds and a seasonal loss of income to farmers and the region of up to $70 million.
Shot in the arm
The case went to the Court of Appeal. It held that Open Country Cheese was wrong to use other workers from within the same wholly owned group of companies and farmer volunteers. That’s how s97 operates.
It’s a shocking section that gives shocking power to unions.
The National-led government should just get rid of it.
Labour is beholden to union muscle and would have no choice but to fight the change.
That would suit National. Middle voters tempted to swing back to Labour would see exactly what Labour stands for and would stick with National.
Middle voters, especially in the present economic climate, don’t believe for a second that unions should be able to shoot down a business at will.
National should go for it. It would make Labour squirm. And it would be a good shot in the arm for business.
Good policy is seldom good politics. But getting rid of section 97 is both.
Back to home
Back to top
Print
Latest
NBR SERVICES
SUBSCRIPTIONS
Sign up for NBR subscriber content or email alerts
Comments and questions17
Today I learnt something. For a bit of a news junky this issue passed me by and Mr Hides unfailing logic & commonsense prevails. How in gods earth did the court of appeal even, fail so spectacularly?
All NZ courts have been taken over by activist Judges.From the Supreme Court down.Why do you think the Labour Govt ,fuelled by Clark and Wilson got rid of the Privy Council.Most of the Judges owe their position to Labour Party placements.When have we ever had a logic result or common sense sentencing in the last few years.
Totally agree Rodders – but it’s not just S97 that needs to go – it’s the entire union / bully boy / renta-thug industry that can legally hold entire industries / ports / Regions to ransom. Just look at what happened and is still happening at PoAL with a Rate Payer owned entity attempting to get increased productivity. The unions block it – why is this legal? How can they legally be allowed to inflict multi-million dollars worth of deliberate business sabotage… and get away with it…. And are still getting away with it – costing Auckland rate payers millions in lost business.
The unions also need to be held to account for collecting their own union fees. For years, employers have had to deduct union memberships from the employees wages and then pass it along to the unions – at the employers expense. Why? Why can’t the unions collect their own fees?
Is it because they can’t manage their own financial affairs and have severe trouble just filing annual accounts like they legally have to remain “Incorporated societies” with numerous “Related party trusts” that pay no taxes… MCarten / Unite Union that owes the tax payer over $152K in unpaid GST and PAYE taxes.
The unions also act with deliberate belligerence and extreme obnoxiousness when not getting their own way. They vandalise workplaces – urinating on company BBQ’s and even set-up one of their members as some kind of mistreated, downtrodden, unfortunate being treated harshly by PoAL as the unions spoon-feed propaganda to a willing and compliant churnalist – who then churns out the untrue propaganda over national TV – which then requires a more credible, factual media source – Whale Oil - to provide the full, entire story – which completely contradicted the lies and deceit MUNZ attempted to spin.
To make this sorry example even worse – MUNZ then cries crocodile tears about this guys “privacy” all whilst stirring up trouble and inciting staunchly held negative thoughts and opinions on their current employer – vandalising PoAL property, spoon-feeding the churnalists propaganda and manufactured lies over the union manufactured fiasco…. And then the unions go into negotiations acting in “good faith” – Yeah Right!
If National really want to cut Labour off at the knees, all they need to do is make the unions collect their own membership fees from their own members – and change the law so that “incorporated societies” acting as political activists MUST register as political activists (NOT neutral incorporated societies)– AND insist all the unions file their full public accounts on time, in full AND make sure the authorities who administer and oversee this minimum legal requirement actually do their job.
The Meat Workers Union still haven’t filed their 2006 accounts properly and are having trouble working out staff holiday pay entitlements – so where are the authorities on this issue?
If the MWU was a private employer having trouble working out staff holiday pay entitlements… all hell would break loose – and rightly so too – so c’mon authorities – extract digits, pull up ya pants and.. (excuse the pun) but get on and ACT on the unions wilful incompetence / negligence / inability to meet minimum legal requierements.
You are too kind.
Here's a brief news report on the case on appeal from March last year.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10711167
Solidarity: all excellent points. I agree. I will keep researching and writing on unions! I am surprised that the government has done more reform.
One of Kommisaar Klark's many ruinous moves was to get rid of our access to the Privy Council which allows our justice system to be corrupted by political influence as it has been.
Unfortunately the Key administration has taken no steps to rectify the situation.
liberte
Yes. We can hardly blame the courts. The law is very clear. And the Labour government was specific in what it wanted to achieve.
Now that this has been pointed out we wait to see whether our government the necessary backbone to do anything about it; but don't hold your breath.
WG
Whale oil a credible factual media source? Hilarious!
He was credible and factual enough that the courts tried to shut him down with suppression orders.
Whale Oil breached suppression orders that applied to everyone. He was charged because he broke the law. He has so little respect for this country that he thinks the law doesn't apply to him - why do people continue to give him the oxygen of publicity?
Go look for yourself - search MUNZ v's PoAL and Mr. Cecil Walker. Read the full story,not the propaganda spoon-fed to MSM churnalists, then come back and we can then talk about credibility. That's just one example...
He also has his own opinionated opinions making for great entertainment too...
I note you use 'Open Country Cheese' as an example! Put some balance into your argument Rodney, OCC is majority owned by Talley's, are they not the bully boy employers ( AFFCO) who locked out their unionised workers for 75 days?
Seems you have your propagana confused with your facts.
AFFCO had numerous people working - it was the unions that wanted to stop people returning to work and it was the unions that attempted to block people from returning to work.
Plenty did return to work - probably more people that have since left the unions...
And all this from a Bloke who wears a yellow jacket and drops Women on their Heads....
I bet as an arm chair All Black also, you've never missed a try or a conversion from the couch either eh?
Surely, it's better to at least attempt and possibly fail - than never to attempt at all?
Generally if you want to be taken seriously, don't paint yourself with a cheap orange tan and use it as your photo on the NBR.