Beware new job laws: Experts

Employment law experts are warning employers and employees to school up on law changes coming into effect on April 1.
The Employment Relations Act and Holidays Act are affected, with the biggest impact expected to be the extension of the 90-day trial period to all employers.
Currently, only employers with fewer than 20 workers are allowed to use the 90-day trial.
The other key change will allow employees to request to "cash up" a week of their annual leave. But the payout deal can only happen if the employer agrees to it.
Experts are warning employees to think carefully about their work-life balance before taking the cash instead of a week's R and R.
Workers will have plenty of time to consider the possible option - while the legislation comes in on April 1, you can't cash in your holiday until an entitlement year has passed.
Tauranga Chamber of Commerce chief executive Max Mason urged employers to get informed about the changes.
Chamber members have been keen to seek information on how the changes will affect them. More than 60 people attended February seminars on the changes to the Employment Relations Act and the Holidays Act.
"Employers and managers need to be aware of the changes and be prepared by amending company policies and individual agreements to comply," Mr Mason said.
Warning on pitfalls for employers and workers
Employment lawyer Prue Dawson, of Tompkins Wake, said employers should seek advice before including a trial period in their intended employment agreements.
The trial, which can be any length of time up to the 90-day maximum, is required to be included in the written intended individual employment agreement, on which the employee is able to seek independent advice.
If the employer does not provide the written intended individual employment agreement when offering employment, they will be unable to rely on the trial period in justifying the dismissal of the employee. If the employee challenged the dismissal, the employer would not be protected against a personal grievance claim of unjustifiable dismissal.
Ms Dawson said she discussed the options with her clients, taking into account knowledge of their business, to help them choose for themselves whether to include a trial period.
She said she "would not be surprised" if the trial period was used more in the trades than in professional roles.
Ms Dawson encouraged employees to seek independent advice on their intended individual employment agreements, particularly if a trial period is included.
Half of employers surveyed by the Employers & Manufacturers Association in December had decided to use the up to 90 day trial periods, and 8 per cent had decided not to.
Mr Mason believes most Bay employers will take advantage of the trial period, "particularly if they understand how this is applied".
And if they're not planning on using it, "they should", he said.
Mr Mason anticipates the trial will offer a boost to business confidence in recruiting staff in Tauranga and impact on job growth.
Mr Mason believed most Bay employers would agree to the "cash-up" of a week's annual leave, if an employee requested it.
"Most employers will see the sense in being able to reduce leave liability by allowing cash-ups to happen. However, an employer is not obliged to cash up and can implement a policy that says they don't want to if they so desire. They can also consider individual requests."
The most significant change for the average employer was the implementation of a robust system ensuring a signed employment agreement before someone started a job, Mr Mason said.
"In practice, while most employers do now provide agreements, this is very often not done prior to start, and more often they don't follow up for an agreement that is signed prior to starting.
"From April 1, in any agreement with a trial period clause, the employer will not be able to rely on the agreement if this is not signed before the employee starts work."
For small employers, the most difficult change might be the obligation to retain a copy of a signed agreement, Mr Mason said.
"They may not admit it but for most small employers this is going to be the hardest thing, particularly in the retail/hospitality sector, where traditionally people are employed on the hoof.
"However, those caught out could find themselves seriously penalised. The penalties for non-compliance have doubled."
A week's holiday for a week's pay?  
Mount Maunganui-based life coach Bernadette Griffiths said the cash-out option put the onus on money over quality of life.
"It comes down to the fact that people need a work-life balance," she said. "The mind needs to leave work to be able to go back to work and perform well.
"The holidays we have got are not long. It's an opportunity to recharge and change routines, they are all good things for health and mind. People need holidays for good health, they need holidays for good relationships."
And she feared the already vulnerable would be most likely to take up the cash-out.
"It's taking advantage of the disadvantaged in a way. That will be what happens. The people who are struggling will probably be the ones that pick it up, because they will see it as a means to an end.
"But there is a price to pay at a very personal level to relationships with [spouses], relationships with children.
"They say it's people's choice, but I don't know it's that simple. They might feel pressure - what impact is this going to have on the retention of my job, or advancement in the company?"
But Tauranga Budget Advisory Service manager Marjorie Iliffe supported the change, saying the ability to cash in a week's holiday could be a "godsend" for struggling families.
"It's a week's wages, which ordinarily would be several hundred dollars," she said. "I can see that amount of money would make a world of difference to some families.
"It could be what they need to pay the next rent, or the latest bit of high-interest debt. It could make the difference in some cases in repossession and bankruptcy."
But Mrs Iliffe cautioned people to use the money wisely.
"I don't think they would be wise to cash it in and waste it, because that holiday is precious."
And she cautioned against workers allowing for the extra money in their budgets, as the employer might refuse the cash-out.
Les Simmonds, clinical leader of Relationship Services Whakawhanaungatanga Bay of Plenty/Gisborne, said the cash-out could be a good or bad thing, depending on circumstances.
"On one hand you could say it will be bad for families and relationships because there will be less time spent on holiday, but I don't think it's as simple as that.
"If you are a family under stress and you get an opportunity to get $600, or however much you earn, it could take a lot of stress off the family."