Mike Hosking's Opinion piece: This Government's about to muck up workplace laws

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Mike Hosking's Opinion piece: This Government's about to muck up workplace laws

Eitsop

584 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 153

ID Verified

#245334 29-Jan-2019 20:24

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=12197694

While I agree that unions wielded too much power pre-"employment contracts act", I think Mike Hosking fails to consider if now businesses wield too much power.

While I am too young (48) to fully comprehend the union situation in 70/80's, my take is that we imported a lot of Unionist behaviours in that period. And the Unions did wield too much power.

But My take is now that Businesses, can cart blanch do what they want.. there is not a balance

My take is many businesses have taken advantage of the low minimum wage, to stagnate wage growth rates, to race to the bottom

I personally would like to see T1.5 back after 40hours mandatory. Not to raise wages, but to encourage better work life balance for everyone, not just the well off..

GV27

5979 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2170024 30-Jan-2019 08:01

That's the thing though - 1.5 after 40 hours doesn't work for people on salaries, who also lose a significant amount of unpaid labour to missed lunch breaks and starting early/finishing late. I've heard rumours about a recent EC hearing about unpaid salary work but haven't been able to find any details.

Unfortunately the Govt basically rewards low wages with top ups like WFFTC and the Accommodation supplements, which everyone tries their best to avoid talking about. Why should employers pick up the tab when the Government is going to dish out extra cash a week, right?

Kind of telling that we have record low unemployment and people still can't get a take-home wage to cover the costs of living.

Agreed we need to find a new balance but we also need to acknowledge that things that are killing us like a lack of physical activity, not enough time to see doctors, money woes etc are just as prevalent in the formerly-comfortable middle class professions now. A fix aimed just at the lower end isn't going to cut it and may even be inflationary.

Eitsop

584 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 153

ID Verified

#2170080 30-Jan-2019 10:35

GV27: Unfortunately the Govt basically rewards low wages with top ups like WFFTC and the Accommodation supplements, which everyone tries their best to avoid talking about. Why should employers pick up the tab when the Government is going to dish out extra cash a week, right?

Agree WFFTC has allowed businesses to leverage this, hopefully the new tax package will go a ways to fixing this

A fix aimed just at the lower end isn't going to cut it and may even be inflationary.

We do actually need some inflationary pressure, inflation is not all bad, that's why they target 2-3%. I think the raising of minimum wage is a good thing.

GV27

5979 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2170117 30-Jan-2019 12:24

attewell:

GV27: Unfortunately the Govt basically rewards low wages with top ups like WFFTC and the Accommodation supplements, which everyone tries their best to avoid talking about. Why should employers pick up the tab when the Government is going to dish out extra cash a week, right?

Agree WFFTC has allowed businesses to leverage this, hopefully the new tax package will go a ways to fixing this

A fix aimed just at the lower end isn't going to cut it and may even be inflationary.

We do actually need some inflationary pressure, inflation is not all bad, that's why they target 2-3%. I think the raising of minimum wage is a good thing.

Inflation is great if you're on an hourly wage or you can get an increase in line with inflation. As we've seen with living costs over the last few years, this doesn't usually happen.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2170473 30-Jan-2019 21:44

WTF is Hosking's qualification to w*nk on about minimum wage, unions etc?

People need to stop listening to "one percenters" - they're clearly pushing a barrow for their own advantage - not for the well being of the majority.

GV27

5979 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2170992 31-Jan-2019 19:01

Fred99:

WTF is Hosking's qualification to w*nk on about minimum wage, unions etc?

People need to stop listening to "one percenters" - they're clearly pushing a barrow for their own advantage - not for the well being of the majority.

Probably as much qualification as a union has to speak for someone who has chosen to not be part of one, yet we're about to give them the power to argue terms for entire industries.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2171114 1-Feb-2019 08:57

GV27:

Fred99:

WTF is Hosking's qualification to w*nk on about minimum wage, unions etc?

People need to stop listening to "one percenters" - they're clearly pushing a barrow for their own advantage - not for the well being of the majority.

Probably as much qualification as a union has to speak for someone who has chosen to not be part of one, yet we're about to give them the power to argue terms for entire industries.

That comment really doesn't make any sense at all if you think about it.

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

GV27

5979 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2171311 1-Feb-2019 15:09

Fred99:

GV27:

Fred99:

WTF is Hosking's qualification to w*nk on about minimum wage, unions etc?

People need to stop listening to "one percenters" - they're clearly pushing a barrow for their own advantage - not for the well being of the majority.

Probably as much qualification as a union has to speak for someone who has chosen to not be part of one, yet we're about to give them the power to argue terms for entire industries.

That comment really doesn't make any sense at all if you think about it.

Can you point out the bit you don't think makes any sense? Freedom to associate or not is considered a human right.

shk292

2916 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2040

Lifetime subscriber

#2171451 1-Feb-2019 19:49

Fred99:

WTF is Hosking's qualification to w*nk on about minimum wage, unions etc?

People need to stop listening to "one percenters" - they're clearly pushing a barrow for their own advantage - not for the well being of the majority.

Similar qualifications and financial position as the PM perhaps? Perhaps we should say that nobody earning over 100k should have a say in labour laws? It could equally be said that the govt are only pushing a barrow for the trade unions, given that they are a significant source of party funding

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2171577 1-Feb-2019 22:45

GV27:

Fred99:

GV27:

Fred99:

WTF is Hosking's qualification to w*nk on about minimum wage, unions etc?

People need to stop listening to "one percenters" - they're clearly pushing a barrow for their own advantage - not for the well being of the majority.

Probably as much qualification as a union has to speak for someone who has chosen to not be part of one, yet we're about to give them the power to argue terms for entire industries.

That comment really doesn't make any sense at all if you think about it.

Can you point out the bit you don't think makes any sense? Freedom to associate or not is considered a human right.

The "freedom to associate" part.

What are you on about?

wsnz

654 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 204

#2172376 3-Feb-2019 18:36

Fred99:

WTF is Hosking's qualification to w*nk on about minimum wage, unions etc?

People need to stop listening to "one percenters" - they're clearly pushing a barrow for their own advantage - not for the well being of the majority.

Should we also stop listening to the bottom "one percenters" as they're also pushing a barrow for their own advantage? Everyone's viewpoint is valid and worth listening to.

wsnz

654 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 204

#2172379 3-Feb-2019 18:44

attewell:

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=12197694

While I agree that unions wielded too much power pre-"employment contracts act", I think Mike Hosking fails to consider if now businesses wield too much power.

While I am too young (48) to fully comprehend the union situation in 70/80's, my take is that we imported a lot of Unionist behaviours in that period. And the Unions did wield too much power.

But My take is now that Businesses, can cart blanch do what they want.. there is not a balance

My take is many businesses have taken advantage of the low minimum wage, to stagnate wage growth rates, to race to the bottom

I personally would like to see T1.5 back after 40hours mandatory. Not to raise wages, but to encourage better work life balance for everyone, not just the well off..

As an employer, I wouldn't say we can cart blanch do what we want. It's extremely difficult to hire or remove an employee (unless within the 90 day trail period, but that works both ways). What specific aspects do you think are unfair towards employees? That's not bait, I'm genuinely interested in what you think.

Regarding the T1.5 after 40 hours, would that apply to salaries as well? Many employers pay themselves a wage/salary but work far more than 40 hours, so would T1.5 apply to the employer as well?

Based on what I've been told over the years by family members and colleagues, I'm not sure that the work-life balance in the 80's was necessarily better as a result of the awards scheme, or penalty rates. Perhaps there is a better alternative to encourage work-life balance.... I don't know.

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

Eitsop

584 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 153

ID Verified

#2172415 3-Feb-2019 19:59

wsnz: As an employer, I wouldn't say we can cart blanch do what we want. It's extremely difficult to hire or remove an employee (unless within the 90 day trail period, but that works both ways). What specific aspects do you think are unfair towards employees? That's not bait, I'm genuinely interested in what you think.

Regarding the T1.5 after 40 hours, would that apply to salaries as well? Many employers pay themselves a wage/salary but work far more than 40 hours, so would T1.5 apply to the employer as well?

Based on what I've been told over the years by family members and colleagues, I'm not sure that the work-life balance in the 80's was necessarily better as a result of the awards scheme, or penalty rates. Perhaps there is a better alternative to encourage work-life balance.... I don't know.

Suppose I shouldn't say employers are all bad, but the framework they are given to work between, can allow unintended consequences or behaviors..

So like be employment contracts act, things were too one-sided to unions, and on reflection of post-employment contracts act.. there are problems.. which likes of bill birch is acknowledging

Just we have scare mongering from celebrities that we are going back into teh dark ages.. I would like to give more credit to this Govt than what has bee painted in herald article.

Up until few months ago, I was earning well above average wage.. I see some of those people well remunerated, so overtime wouldnt make huge difference to them. they probably still earn enough to pay mortgage & childcare

More of concern is those on minimum wage to living wage.. the raising of minimum wage will help, I just thought T1.5 after 40 hours would an extra assistance.

Edit: one bad think employers in general can do is defer & mute wage growth, due to lack of unions bargaining