Stakeholders’ views of the change:
The views of a number of key stakeholders became clear during the process of consultation and consideration of the policy. It is useful to consider these views, and to consider the possible reasons for them.
What follows is a brief consideration of the views of:
- Council of Trade Unions (CTU)
- Business New Zealand (BNZ)
- Engineering Printing and Manufacturing Union of New Zealand (EPMU)
- Department of Labour (DOL)
- The Minister of Labour, Kate Wilkinson.
CTU:
The CTU is strongly opposed to the changes. In their view, the changes will have a strong, negative impact on the operation of unions, and on the rights of members to join unions, and be informed about them, as well as to interact with union officials. The CTU is strongly in favour of the current rights being retained.
The CTU also noted that in practice the previous system seemed to work well, with only nine cases relating to union access having been taken between 2000 and 2009. This seems to suggest that employers and unions were relatively satisfied that the law regarding union access was being complied with.
The CTU also cited as a concern increased compliance costs for employers unsure as to when they can decline access.
BNZ:
BNZ supported the retention of the previous rights, as BNZ members had not raised union access as a major concern. BNZ is of the view that some concerns regarding union access related to uncertainty about the practical meaning of reasonable access, and that these concerns could have been addressed by improved or increased education of unions and employers.
However, BNZ also supported the Government’s changes, despite being concerned that they could be too complicated, especially in terms of requiring written requests for entry.
DOL:
The Department of Labour, in its policy advice to the Minister of Labour, recommended the retention of the previous rights, as they were not causing apparent widespread problems, and the widespread practice of unions providing notification to employers prior to visiting a site was apparently working.
The Department’s perception in this regard seems to be borne out by the opinion of the peak organisations for unions and employers supporting the retention of the previous system.
The Department noted some issues around the definition of reasonable access, but noted that in general this did not lead to major problems.
The Minister of Labour:
The Minister of Labour described the impact of the changes as “marginal” and “symbolic”. This seems to accord with the views expressed earlier, that the changes were not addressed a perceived strong need.
This raises the question as to the motivation for the changes.
Neither of the peak organisations concerned had major concerns about the previous system, and the CTU strongly opposed the changes. As such, it seems likely that this policy change was motivated by a combination of ideological and political factors, including the desire to implement the 2008 National Election Manifesto, rather than in anticipation of making major improvements, or avoiding major harm by implementing the policy.