I wish I was joking
You could never make The Apprentice in New Zealand, with any rich guy at the helm. Donald says, ‘You’re ﬁred,’ and Martha said, ‘Goodbye,’ but in New Zealand, that would put you at odds with the Employment Relations’ Act 2000.
I went to law school and I never saw a crock of junk like this: a piece of legislation totally geared toward employees, so bosses cannot ﬁre people.
Not even if they are incompetent.
Not even if they steal from you.
You ﬁre someone, the Employment Court is likely going to award the dismissed employee three months’ wages.
I have never seen a law like this that so offends natural justice.
So, in the New Zealand version of The Apprentice, the star will have to say, ‘I would like to propose that you leave this organization and would like to enter into a consultation process with you, with full legal representation for you. I hope you will accept this proposal.’
And that, ladies and gentlemen, would be crap television.
Because it sure as heck makes for crap business. Posted by Jack Yan, 10:47
What?? Businesses in New Zealand can't fire employees? So what do they do when people are clearly incompetent, stealing, etc.? These businesses just have to sit there and accept that kind of behavior? Wow, now that's what I call job security!
# posted by RisingSunofNihon: 9/27/2006 11:40:00 AM
It also makes for higher unemployment because employers are going to be very leery of hiring new people. It also means higher costs as employers are going to have to use expensive screening processes to try to avoid hiring a dud employee as well as what it will cost them to fire a dud employee.
RSON: I am never hiring a New Zealander as an employee ever again in this country. Never. You have to go through some cockamamie process of warnings for a long time before you can dismiss someone. And the warnings cannot be cumulative unless agreed to, e.g. if you warn someone one day for being an ass to a customer, and the next day you warn the same person for theft, that’s not two warnings. That’s one warning for each offence.
I have traditionally voted left-of-centre political parties here, but with this law, I have to warn everyone off left-leaning parties! You cannot run businesses with this sort of legislation.
Ron, you are totally correct. I will contract New Zealanders as independents but I ain’t going to be helping unemployment ﬁgures like I tried to do before.
But you know, employees will always outnumber employers, and the assholes in the Labour government know this.
Very interesting. I honestly never heard this stuff before...
# posted by RisingSunofNihon: 9/27/2006 03:57:00 PM
Call me an idealistic liberal, but I’ve often found there’s a root cause for these types of things. What scenarios inspired such strong pro-worker mandates? Was there a history of employer abuses? How many employees have suffered job losses because of shady activities from their bosses?
You're right Jack that employees will always outnumber employers BUT unemployed employees won't keep re-electing a government that doesn't take various steps to help get them employed i.e. look at the frustration with the Schroeder government in Germany. One of the reasons unemployment rates remain so high in Europe is because of the difficulty employers have with firing employees.
Highjive, it never got that bad here that we employers were landed with a law like that. True, the previous employment legislation was more in favour of employers, because it came into force under a conservative government, but I never heard of serious abuses. Today, all I hear from employers is what a POS the Employment Relations’ Act is.
Ron, excellent point. New Zealanders tend to be optimists though, so I wonder how long it will take employees to see the writing on the wall.
I believe the Europeans might have it easier than we do. I can’t imagine it being this bad anywhere! I think even Red Chinese have less job security.
Bill, thank you for stopping by—I have just visited your blog and found it incredibly interesting.
Jack - this is amazing to me as well.
It seems it makes the workplace all that more adversarial between employees and employers.
Thanks for venting while you enlarge the conversation!
We'll be watching to see how this "experiment" in New Zealand's marketplace goes.
# posted by Michael Wagner: 9/29/2006 02:59:00 AM
Welcome to France and Germany where the same thing applies. But check this - the UK has passed anti-ageism legislation which looks like it might cause a few problems - including problems for goernment.
# posted by Dennis Howlett: 9/30/2006 01:44:00 AM
Michael, thank you. And Dennis, after what you and Ron posted, I need to add: no wonder their employment record leaves something to be desired. I’m going to have to remember that should we wind up living in France.
"What scenarios inspired such strong pro-worker mandates? Was there a history of employer abuses"
- um, historically? one good example would be the industrial revolution, which kinda encouraged labour laws. People couldn't like, afford to buy bread even though they worked 40 hours a week for someone who had inherited a business.
# posted by Anonymous: 10/03/2006 07:12:00 PM
I don’t think Highjive was going back that far in his question, Anonymous.Post a Comment
Links to this post:
NoteEntries from 2006 to the end of 2009 were done on the Blogger service. As of January 1, 2010, this blog has shifted to a Wordpress installation, with the latest posts here.
With Blogger ceasing to support FTP publishing on May 1, I have decided to turn these older pages in to an archive, so you will no longer be able to enter comments. However, you can comment on entries posted after January 1, 2010.
Individual JY&A and Medinge Group blogs
DonateIf you wish to help with my hosting costs, please feel free to donate.
Copyright ©200210 by Jack Yan & Associates. All rights reserved. Photograph of Jack Yan by Chelfyn Baxter.