The Major Parties: National's and Labour's Employment Relations Policies

Abstract

The 2020 election campaign has been divisive and extended, with the election date delayed in August by a month (from 19th September) to 17th October. The Covid-19 pandemic has influenced public policies to an unprecedented degree as well as playing havoc with the political parties’ voter support. While there, initially, did not seem to be many major policy differences between the two main parties, a clear choice has been established during the election campaign. Aside from National’s crucial choice of promising tax cuts and stronger debt reduction targets, a clear distinction in employment relations policies has also been established. Labour continues its policy priorities, which include new employment relations initiatives and large employment support policies, while National pledges more employer-determined flexibility and employee choice in respect of statutory minima and educational opportunities. However, although there have already been many election promises, there appears to be no comprehensive plan from either party of how to establish a sustainable, high skill and highly productive economy along with associated workplace relationships.

The major parties: National’s and Labour’s employment relations policies

“…This was magnified in the contention surrounding the Employment Contract Act (ECA) 1991, the intense debate regarding the introduction of the Employment Relations Act (ERA) 2000 and subsequent amendments, along with fundamental disagreement over increased statutory employment rights, employment protection and union involvement. Despite this, there have also been notable areas of agreement, as previous General Elections commentaries have highlighted by Anderson et al, 2020: "It has previously been argued that, under the Employment Relations Act (ERA), there appears to be less of an ideological gap between the two major parties' employment relations positions. This was partly caused by the National Party's decision, in 2007, not to repeal the ERA but instead focussing on specific amendments (see Rasmussen & Anderson, 2010), and partly due to pressure on the National-led governments to expand legislation in health and safety, to have a stronger focus on employment standards, constraining 'zero-hours' practices, as well as implementing tripartite agreed changes to pay equity in aged care (Foster & Rasmussen, 2017)" (p.4).…”

“…During the 2017 General Election campaign, differences between the parties were once again heightened, with the Labour Party's employment relations policies containing a range of proposed changes. While these aspirations sought the reversal of many of the neo-liberal, free market approaches to employment, once in power, Labour was seemingly constrained by the 2017 Coalition agreement between Labour and New Zealand First, which contained a much smaller number of mutually agreed ER changes (Foster & Rasmussen, 2017).…”

“…Reversing changes made by earlier National-led governments, 90-day trial periods became restricted to organisations with fewer than 20 people, meal and rest breaks were reinstated, while the ''30-day rule' 1 was re-introduced for new employees (Anderson et al, 2020). A wage floor equivalent to the Living Wage was introduced for all those directly employed in the core public service, including fulltime, part-time and casual employees.…”

“…During the 2020 election campaign, significant public policy differences were evident between the two main parties, with National promising to reverse many of the changes that had been introduced by the Labour-led government, around a theme of increasing employer-driven flexibility and 'opening up' for short-and long-term net migration (Anderson et al, 2020). The notable Labour victory in the election, however, made the Labour Party the first single-party majority government under Aotearoa New Zealand's MMP system.…”

Family businesses and employment relations: Review and suggestions for future research

“…In New Zealand, there has been a strong rise in the statutory minimum wage since 2017 as well as in other employee entitlements (for example, the doubling of sick leave entitlements in 2021). Additionally, with a personal grievance (PG) right covering most employees (Anderson et al, 2020), this entitlement could have a significant impact on the managing of employees within family businesses. The general question is whether family firms have experienced particular issues or trends in respect of these employee rights.…”