While the Opposition may complain about the Government's process for the Employment Relations Bill - and indeed I wasn't always 100% happy about it myself - I reckon that the consideration taken by the Select Committee on the issue of Clause 6 demonstrated the willingness of all concerned to listen to the serious and real (and I emphasise real - not phantom) concerns of the many people who made submissions on this clause. I was honoured to stand on Parliament's steps a few weeks ago to receive a petition of over 60,000 signatures from Rural Delivery Contractors from my home district of Rodney, and from people who support the RD men and women all over the country. These contractors, and many other self employed and small business people like them, had purchased their businesses and in some cases had spent many years building them up. To have allowed these people to be deemed employees against their will would have have precipitated personal and economic tragedies.
There was no way I or the Green Party could countenance passing into law any act which would lead to thousands of innocent hardworking people losing both their life savings and their jobs. Our Party made our position on this clause clear to the public from early on, and we were relieved that the Government saw fit to amend the Bill as we see it here tonight.
At the same time, I am glad we've retained what I perceive as the Government's original intent in regards to this clause: that is, that those people, like some of the other submitters we heard, who are unhappy at being classed as independent contractors, will now be able to apply for and achieve employee status with the rights and protections which that offers.
I would like to speak briefly to Peter Brown's amendment aimed at deleting the exclusion of volunteers. As Mr Brown and other Select Committee members will realise from some lines of questioning I took during the Committee process, from my background in the community sector I am very concerned about the situation of unpaid workers. Along with Green Party colleagues we did look at length at whether we could use this Bill in any way to provide better processes and protection for voluntary workers. In the end we decided to let the issue lie - it is complex and needs a lot more consultation and thought than time on this Bill permitted. I examined the situation in the United Kingdom where legislation aimed at providing some protection for volunteers has had some serious negative consequences.
For example, an effect of this legislation has been to create confusion in the voluntary sector and to blur the lines between paid employees and volunteers. In the UK, those organisations that have treated their volunteers in the most democratic and valued way were most at risk of that relationship being deemed a contractual rather than a volunteer one. This has resulted in a situation where volunteers who have received some gratuities such as petrol expenses have ended up being able to make a claim against their organisation for minimum wages.
Such demands are usually unsustainable for not for profit groups. Groups become less willing to take voluntary staff on because of the unreasonable expectations they may have and the risk of litigation that could arise. Volunteers make a critical contribution to our society and our economy, and we do not want to do anything which puts the concept of voluntarism at risk.
So while we are not supporting Mr Brown's amendment, the Green Party will be continuing to discuss ways of improving the situation of volunteers and the groups which use them both with Government and with the not for profit sector.
Subscribe to email newsletters
