[Sitting date: 25 November 2014. Volume:702;Page:11. Text is subject to correction.]

12. IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North) to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety : Is he confident that employers’ obligations under the Wages Protection Act 1983 are being complied with in light of recent reports of workers’ pay being docked to recover the cost of theft by customers at service stations and supermarkets?

Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): I am confident that the overwhelming majority of employers are acting appropriately and within the Wages Protection Act, but I am concerned about the incidences and reports of deductions for drive-offs at service stations and thefts at supermarkets. I am advised that it is almost certain to be unlawful. To my mind, it is absolutely unacceptable.

Iain Lees-Galloway : What actions has the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment taken to ensure that workers whose pay has been docked illegally recover their lost wages?

Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE : I am advised that in respect of the cases that have been brought to attention by the media, there is an active investigation under way. But in general, the labour inspectorate will investigate and require remedies to be made. What those remedies are may depend on the individual circumstances, but I am satisfied that the labour inspectorate is taking those matters seriously.

Iain Lees-Galloway : Given that answer and given that there are just 35 labour inspectors nationwide, which is one for every 63,000 workers, how can the Government adequately monitor and enforce workers’ rights against this kind of illegal activity by rogue employers?

Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE : In Budget 2014 there was a significant increase in the resource available to the labour inspectorate, and the number of labour inspectors is now 41. That is a 24 percent increase on the number of labour inspectors who are employed by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment from the time we came to office. I am satisfied that there are sufficient resources—

Andrew Little : You don’t care about low-paid workers.

Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE : Well, as to the member who is interjecting, I say that we certainly care about workers. We certainly would not fire officials for one lapse of judgment. We certainly believe that a 90-day trial is appropriate, but I would certainly not support a 365-day trial.

Iain Lees-Galloway : Is the Minister aware of any collective employment agreements that do not adhere to the Wages Protection Act; if not, what impact will removing the duty to conclude collective bargaining, removing the right for new workers to be offered the same terms and conditions as any collective agreement in place, and blocking workplace access for union representatives have on the number of employment agreements that do not adhere to the Act?

Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE : Well, no employment agreement should be in breach of any Act. It is as simple as that. But the member raises questions about changes to the Employment Relations Act that this Government has made. They are fair, they are appropriate, and they create a flexible working environment that is good for both workers and employers.

Iain Lees-Galloway : Does the Minister believe that a worker on a 90-day trial would be likely to speak up if their employer was acting illegally?

Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE : Well, yes, I would, and I certainly would expect that person to speak up a lot more readily than somebody who is on a 365-day trial would.

ENDS

© Scoop Media