The wording and intent of the Employment Relations Bill left little room for shades of grey. Automatically aligned in support was a workforce cock-a-hoop that past injustices, often more imagined than real, were about to be remedied. On the other side stood employers dismayed that soon to be imposed upon them were the likes of multi-employer agreements and a requirement to open their books to unions. The unsurprising upshot of this polarisation was a record 17,000 submissions to a parliamentary select committee.
Not quite all, however, has been black and white. Into the midst of the debate stumbled the private union set up by The Warehouse. Given the tense atmosphere, it was inevitable that the company's managing director, Stephen Tindall, would attract the ire of the trade union movement.
People First was, union leaders said, a transparent attempt to circumvent the new workplace law. There is, of course, considerable irony here. The Warehouse has long been considered a model employer, providing its staff with unlimited sick pay, a paid day off on their birthdays, an annual conference trip and performance incentives. How could Mr Tindall stoop to such tactics?
In all likelihood, blunting the thrust of the new workplace legislation was not Mr Tindall's motivation, even if others might use staff associations as a union avoidance tactic. What was probably in his mind, given The Warehouse's staff relations record, was a diluted brand of corporate socialism.
The idea was prominent in postwar Japan, when workers, in return for long and tedious hours on factory production lines, relied on the company to take care of almost their every need, be it housing, recreational facilities, holidays or job security. Such compacts provided the basis for Japan's rise to industrial supremacy.
At The Warehouse, workers enjoy wages, conditions and incentives superior to most in the retail sector. In return for such largesse, the company expects its rapid expansion to be underpinned by a loyal, enthusiastic and trouble-free workforce. Such accommodations, and the fate of People First, rest, of course, on both parties achieving their anticipated reward.
In Japan, the spell was broken when financially stricken companies had to lay off workers, thereby reneging on the understanding of a job for life. Mr Tindall will have to continue treating his workers better than other retailers. Otherwise, those workers will join the competitor for their allegiance, the National Distribution Union.
At The Warehouse, the interests of the national union are out of step with those of the worker. There is, in fact, little need to insert a union of any sort between the management and the workforce. It would be unfortunate if the Employment Relations Act invalidated People First because it was not at arm's length from the employer. Legislation must be flexible enough to embrace arrangements that satisfy workers, even if they are not ideologically pure.
It is important, therefore, that the Government does not see this legislation as so set in concrete that it must be treated with urgency when it is reported back to Parliament on August 1. A fundamental reshaping of workplace procedures demands the most stringent scrutiny of MPs. Especially as it might deny the likes of Mr Tindall the right to demonstrate that worker contentment does not always depend on union clout.
Love it or loathe it, the great workplace revolution is a fact
<i>Editorial:</i> Take care with new workplace law
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.