Kyanar:

 

MikeAqua:

 

Wouldn't matariki qualify as a faith-based observance?

 

 

It's a culturally significant day to the indigenous peoples of Aotearoa and not rooted in theology. It should be celebrated (and be a public holiday) for the same reason Chinese New Year is celebrated (and is a public holiday) in China.

 

I think most of us know what matariki is by now.  I was seeking to understand whether it is part of traditional Māori spiritual belief systems, or purely a calendar-based celebration. 

Te Ara says (emphasis added): -

"Matariki is an abbreviation of ‘Ngā Mata o te Ariki Tāwhirimātea (‘The eyes of the god Tāwhirimātea’) and refers to a large cluster of stars, known in some European traditions as the Pleiades. According to Māori tradition, the god of the wind, Tāwhirimātea, was so angry when his siblings separated their parents, Ranginui the sky father and Papatūānuku the earth mother, that he tore out his eyes and threw them into the heavens."

And

"Traditionally, Matariki was a time to acknowledge the dead and to release their spirits to become stars. It was also a time to reflect, to be thankful to the gods for the harvest, to feast and to share the bounty of the harvest with family and friends."

If that info is correct, it's a celebration with religious origins.

I couldn't personally think of a worse time of year for a public holiday in NZ, than the depths of winter. Good timing for the skiers, perhaps.  Maori must have been tough, to be up at dawn in winter in the traditional clothing.  It would have been colder back then, too.  I feel cold just thinking about it.

I like the suggestion that in lieu of a calendar of public holidays, everyone gets another ~11 days to use as they see fit.  We all have different interests that are best undertaken at different times of year. 

Geektastic: “I like the suggestion that in lieu of a calendar of public holidays, everyone gets another ~11 days to use as they see fit. We all have different interests that are best undertaken at different times of year.”

Yes. This is a much more sensible idea.

I’d also scrap the inconvenient “Anniversary Day” thing which just causes annoyance when you try and deal with someone who is off when your region isn’t. I’d just add one day to the 11.

You'd probably find that anniversary days once had a more practical purpose. In Queensland for example every city/region has a "show day" (the equivalent of an anniversary day) which falls in the middle of the region's "agricultural show" (which is pretty much like the Easter show in NZ, but with the addition of farm animals and the plague colloquially known as "Ekka flu") - the holiday was so that people with 9-5 jobs could get a day to take their kids in.

But by your logic though, we should also scrap those inconvenient "annual leave" things which just cause annoyance when you try and deal someone who is off when you aren't. Sarcasm, in case it isn't obvious - there may be reasons to reform public holiday legislation, but your convenience is not one of them.

As a secular nation, I'd be fully in support of retaining a calendar of secular holidays - things like Waitangi Day, celebrating the signing of a treaty between the crown and the Māori peoples, ANZAC day - which contrary to popular belief isn't a celebration of veterans or military but a constant reminder of the horrors of war lest we forget and repeat the mistakes of the past (you know, the reason it's on the day of the most wasteful loss of life in the entire war, the tragedy at Gallipoli), and probably a couple of others. You know, like how the US has Martin Luther King Day (celebrating someone who made a big impact on their nation, that arguably they seem to be quietly regressing) and Thanksgiving (which while I have no idea what the whole deal is with turkeys, having a day for families to just have a family dinner and reflect on good things is kind of cool).

I'd even go so far as to tentatively support the aggressive trading restrictions for ANZAC day because of the sheer national significance.

Kyanar:

 

Thanksgiving (which while I have no idea what the whole deal is with turkeys, having a day for families to just have a family dinner and reflect on good things is kind of cool).

 

I'd even go so far as to tentatively support the aggressive trading restrictions for ANZAC day because of the sheer national significance.

 

I believe that Turkeys are native to N America (hunting wild turkeys is a sport there), and the settlers were thought to have killed and eaten them at the original thanksgiving.

ANZAC day is the one day that I see as deserving of special significance/protection.  It honours real sacrifice and is time to be grateful for what we have and the sacrifice some made to protect that. ANZAC day generally seems to be a day of unity, which I personally find relevant and participate in. 

Waitangi Day, by comparison seems to be focus for division and hostilities.  As a non-Maori citizen, I feel the ToW has very little to do with me. NZ didn't become a fully independent nation (from a statutory perspective) until 1947 or 1987 depending on who you ask.  

Easter in the modern incarnation seems to be a patch-over of an older pagan ceremony

Geektastic: 

I’d also scrap the inconvenient “Anniversary Day” thing which just causes annoyance when you try and deal with someone who is off when your region isn’t. I’d just add one day to the 11.

We already deal with people who are off when using their normal 22 days Annual Leave or Sick leave. I don't see why Anniversary Days are any different. At least in that region, friends and families have a day they can spend together if they wish

Kyanar:

Geektastic: “I like the suggestion that in lieu of a calendar of public holidays, everyone gets another ~11 days to use as they see fit. We all have different interests that are best undertaken at different times of year.”

Yes. This is a much more sensible idea.

I’d also scrap the inconvenient “Anniversary Day” thing which just causes annoyance when you try and deal with someone who is off when your region isn’t. I’d just add one day to the 11.

You'd probably find that anniversary days once had a more practical purpose. In Queensland for example every city/region has a "show day" (the equivalent of an anniversary day) which falls in the middle of the region's "agricultural show" (which is pretty much like the Easter show in NZ, but with the addition of farm animals and the plague colloquially known as "Ekka flu") - the holiday was so that people with 9-5 jobs could get a day to take their kids in.

But by your logic though, we should also scrap those inconvenient "annual leave" things which just cause annoyance when you try and deal someone who is off when you aren't. Sarcasm, in case it isn't obvious - there may be reasons to reform public holiday legislation, but your convenience is not one of them.

As a secular nation, I'd be fully in support of retaining a calendar of secular holidays - things like Waitangi Day, celebrating the signing of a treaty between the crown and the Māori peoples, ANZAC day - which contrary to popular belief isn't a celebration of veterans or military but a constant reminder of the horrors of war lest we forget and repeat the mistakes of the past (you know, the reason it's on the day of the most wasteful loss of life in the entire war, the tragedy at Gallipoli), and probably a couple of others. You know, like how the US has Martin Luther King Day (celebrating someone who made a big impact on their nation, that arguably they seem to be quietly regressing) and Thanksgiving (which while I have no idea what the whole deal is with turkeys, having a day for families to just have a family dinner and reflect on good things is kind of cool).

I'd even go so far as to tentatively support the aggressive trading restrictions for ANZAC day because of the sheer national significance.

tdgeek:

 

I don't see why Anniversary Days are any different. At least in that region, friends and families have a day they can spend together if they wish

 

Assuming

1) They all live and work in the same regions (my partner and I work in different regions, her AD is in January, mine is in October/November)

2) All those people get anniversary day off (our vessels work 24/7, about 360 days per year)

If all public holidays were converted to an extra 11 days leave, people would have 31 days per year they could organise to be together, without paying peak rates for accommodation and travel.

MikeAqua:

 

If all public holidays were converted to an extra 11 days leave, people would have 31 days per year they could organise to be together, without paying peak rates for accommodation and travel.

 

With the massive caveat that reforms would need to happen to employment law, since annual leave can only be taken with the employer's consent. You would need to introduce amendments to flip the onus onto the employer to justify why an employee cannot take annual leave, and impose sufficient penalties on employers who flout that onus to deter the behaviour, as well as sufficiently resource the Labour inspectorate or whatever it's called to ensure that employers do not retaliate against employees who report them for refusing leave etc etc.

Basically without a wholesale reform of employment laws, I don't see any way that could even work. Even the US doesn't bother trying and just has public holidays - and they wouldn't know what an employee protection was if it flew up and crapped on them!

tweake:

 

sen8or:

 

2 1/2 days without the shops being open really isn't significant in the scheme of things. Will retailers miss out on the revenue completely if they don't open, or will it just delay when they receive it? Thats the gamble that retailers don't want to take I guess.

 

 

thats just it.

 

the revenue is taking a dive so they are looking at ways to boost that back up. typical nz practice is to cut staff or wages, very old fashion. treat staff as just a cost not an investment. no thought to innovation, productivity or efficiencies. this idea is to simply to make workers work more and erode workers rights. 

 

It might be "old fashioned", but in terms of below the line costs, staff costs are usually the highest (or very near it) cost of operating a business with rent and finance costs usually right up there. 

In boom times, you bring on extra staff in anticipation of growth / demand and efficiency measures usually go out the window. You continue to make money will things are growing and all looks rosey. Its only during the quiet times when your big wage bill starts to hurt each pay cycle that roles come under the microscope. If more businesses asked if things can be done more efficiently all the time, then businesses would already be lean and staff costs controlled. Profit hides a million sins, but lack of profit highlights them.

Revenue is tanking in pretty much all industries and there isn't really much light at the end of a very long tunnel. Interest rates likely too hold until the end of the year, unemployment expected to rise, cost of living continues to hurt and 1 very scary war in the middle east (and a long ongoing one in Ukraine) and there isn't anything on the horizon that points to any sort of recovery anytime soon.

Ultimately though, to open or not open is a business decision. Open, pay the extra rates to staff as incentive to work then make the business decision to charge extra or not for the extra costs incurred. Charge and you run the risk of alienating a segment of the market who object to paying more, don't charge and you may lose money (or not make as much profit), really depends on each businesses unique position.

MikeAqua: I think most of us know what matariki is by now. I was seeking to understand whether it is part of traditional Māori spiritual belief systems, or purely a calendar-based celebration.

Kyanar:

 

MikeAqua:

 

If all public holidays were converted to an extra 11 days leave, people would have 31 days per year they could organise to be together, without paying peak rates for accommodation and travel.

 

 

With the massive caveat that reforms would need to happen to employment law, since annual leave can only be taken with the employer's consent. You would need to introduce amendments to flip the onus onto the employer to justify why an employee cannot take annual leave, and impose sufficient penalties on employers who flout that onus to deter the behaviour, as well as sufficiently resource the Labour inspectorate or whatever it's called to ensure that employers do not retaliate against employees who report them for refusing leave etc etc.

 

Basically without a wholesale reform of employment laws, I don't see any way that could even work. Even the US doesn't bother trying and just has public holidays - and they wouldn't know what an employee protection was if it flew up and crapped on them!

 

yes. but add to that when you convert public holidays to annual leave, you loose the 1.5x and day in luie. win for the employer there.

plus people simply don't organize leave so everyone gets together. thats why public holidays are such good family events, you know everyone is off work. so its a bad social effect.

and lastly its worker rights erosion. soon enough even annual leave will be cut back down etc. its a sneaky little tactic.

tweake:

 

yes. but add to that when you convert public holidays to annual leave, you loose the 1.5x and day in luie. win for the employer there.

 

plus people simply don't organize leave so everyone gets together. thats why public holidays are such good family events, you know everyone is off work. so its a bad social effect.

 

and lastly its worker rights erosion. soon enough even annual leave will be cut back down etc. its a sneaky little tactic.

 

Huh, you know what? That didn't occur to me - I think everyone pitching that idea is making the same mistake: looking at things from the context of a 9-5 office worker, and completely ignoring all the people that actually currently work on public holidays. Logistics workers. Fast food outlets. Customer service people. Yes, even cafes. They would all get no benefit at all from a "get 11 extra leave days" - mostly because many of them are shift workers who currently get zero leave days.

Put in context, nope, I can't support the "just scrap all holidays and have extra leave". That just screws over the least well off.

sen8or:

 

It might be "old fashioned", but in terms of below the line costs, staff costs are usually the highest (or very near it) cost of operating a business with rent and finance costs usually right up there. 

 

In boom times, you bring on extra staff in anticipation of growth / demand and efficiency measures usually go out the window. You continue to make money will things are growing and all looks rosey. Its only during the quiet times when your big wage bill starts to hurt each pay cycle that roles come under the microscope. If more businesses asked if things can be done more efficiently all the time, then businesses would already be lean and staff costs controlled. Profit hides a million sins, but lack of profit highlights them.

 

nz businesses are not lean and staff costs not controlled. thats why so many are not productive. but just cutting staff doesn't fix that. yet thats what tends to happen. you rarely see them fixing the problems so they can survive the hard times. its usually slash costs but keep all the problems. which in turn often ends up costing them more.

every time they loose staff they also loose the knowledge the staff had. i get that in my industry where at every downturn many old guys retire and take their knowledge with them. then in the boom times the new guys have to learn everything from scratch. which makes for really poor businesses.

Kyanar:

 

Put in context, nope, I can't support the "just scrap all holidays and have extra leave". That just screws over the least well off.

 

it can also screw over middle management because someone needs to manage the workers, store etc. so really it comes down to what i mentioned earlier, the only winners is the top people and owners. its lords and peasants all over again. thats why i think its such an insidious nasty idea.