5 March, 2010

The Government this week released a discussion document proposing further erosion of New Zealanders' protections against unfair dismissal.

The changes proposed in the discussion document include:

• Extending the 90-day fire at will period for workers at small companies, including extending the period but also making it apply to companies with up to 50 workers instead of 20 workers.
• Reducing the 90 day time limit in which a worker can raise a personal grievance.
• Setting a period of time a worker had to be at a company before they could make a complaints, and
• Removing all rights to fair dismissal for workers earning over a certain income.
• Measures including regulation to ensure better standards of employment advocates such as ‘no win, no-fee' advocates.

The EPMU said the Government must ensure its review of fair dismissal laws is based on evidence and is not simply an excuse to strip away rights to natural justice.

EPMU national secretary Andrew Little says the underlying principle of this review must be that no worker should be deprived of their economic livelihood without good reason and due process.

"The ability to take away someone's economic livelihood is a huge amount of power, and it's a basic democratic right that all workers have access to natural justice.

"It is not encouraging that these natural justice rights have already been denied to thousands of workers in small businesses through the 90 day fire at will law and we will oppose any attempt to extend this period or apply it to the majority of Kiwis who work for large employers.

"While the evidence shows the system is fundamentally sound, there are areas where we believe the law could be improved, in particular the regulation of opportunistic ‘no win, no fee' agents, as well as better information and assistance for SMEs about their legal rights and obligations.

"However, it's crucial that this review is based on evidence and that when the minister hears employer complaints about our dismissal laws she is able to distinguish between the usual whinging and moaning on the one hand, and the genuine problems on the other.

"If the Government simply uses this as an opportunity to pander to bad employers and strip away basic work rights then it's hard to see how they can expect workers to willingly embrace a productivity agenda."

The union said it is committed to engaging constructively with the review but is concerned it is being driven by an employer lobby agenda to undermine basic protections against unfair dismissal.