Unions slam 90-day trial expansion

Western Bay union representatives are fearful of Government plans to widen the 90-day trial scheme under which workers can be fired without comeback, saying it will lead to a "casualisation" of employment.
While employers are relishing the proposal, saying it gives them the power to employ staff without fear of making a blunder, unions say the policy could lead to unsafe workplaces as new employees will be afraid to raise concerns.
One union spokesperson the Bay of Plenty Times spoke to called the proposal "ludicrous".
Prime Minister John Key was expected to give further details of the Government's plans for the scheme when he spoke at the National Party's mid-term conference in Auckland today.
He earlier said the results of the changed law had been "stunning" and meant many more New Zealanders had secured jobs.
Under the current law, newly-hired workers can be let go within the first three months and cannot take out a personal grievance over their dismissal.
Maritime Union Of New Zealand Tauranga branch organiser Eddie Cook described the policy as "terrifying".
"Instead of being given permanent jobs, they'll (workers) get the 90-day bill and they'll get rid of them anytime they like without any help from the union."
Mr Cook feared new employees would be too scared to speak out.
"Any sort of safety issues, they won't report them because why would you want to report them? You'd be too frightened. Some of it is pretty scary," he said.
Tauranga's Ian Leckie, a member of the National Executive of teachers' union NZEI, said the trial notion did not fit teaching, and schools should be exempt from the rule.
He said parents wanted and expected stability for their children and the 90-day trial meant schools in small towns and rural locations would become even harder to staff.
Service and Food Workers Union assistant national secretary Neville Donaldson said the union, which had about 500 members in the Western Bay of Plenty, was "absolutely livid". He said expanding the 90-day trial was not only "ludicrous," it would increase the "casualisation" of employment.
"It also gives the ability to circumvent entitlements before they (staff) even have them," he said.
Many employers would "take advantage" of the system so they never had to pay out leave, Mr Donaldson said.
"It goes back to the 1990s Employment Contract Act where workers were effectively treated like employment slaves. We're heading back in that direction."
However, Employers and Manufacturers Association (EMA) employment services manager David Lowe described Mr Donaldson's comments as "just rubbish".
"[The trial] has been in place for 18 months and 18 months ago the unions said the sky was going to fall in, and all these horrible things would happen, and they haven't.
"What it has meant, is that people have got jobs they wouldn't have normally got. It is very standard law around the world and the only countries in the OECD not to have it were New Zealand and Denmark. Now New Zealand has it ... and we are still conservative among international standards."
Mr Lowe said people being fired "at will" would not happen.
"Employers employ people because they are needed."
Chamber of Commerce chief executive officer Max Mason supported the proposal, describing it as a good thing for both employers and employees.
"It's more likely to define what the performance parameters are and encourages both parties to communicate them more."
One of the Bay's largest employers, TrustPower, agreed that the proposal was a good thing.
TrustPower communication relations manager Graeme Purches said there were advantages to be able to take someone on trial, and it worked well for those on the employment "cusp."
"Some people don't interview strongly but they can turn out to be really good employees," he said.
Mr Purches said if the employer-employee relationship did not work out, the employer could renege on the decision, and if it did, the employee had a job they otherwise might not have secured.
Employment Law Services director Wendy Macphail described the proposal as a double-edged sword.
Ms Macphail said the proposed law change was good for small and medium-sized businesses.
"They will possibly take people on more readily," Ms Macphail said. "Employment law is [currently] so complicated and problematic. This way they are more likely to take someone on."
However, she said employees would find it rough.
"Employees should be given the opportunity to learn how and why their employment will be terminated during the 90-day trial period, rather than being told 'sorry it's not working out'.
"The rationale is that everyone else has the opportunity to put their side forward under any legal hearing, and they don't have that opportunity at the moment under the trial period. You can't take a personal grievance."
WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED
* At the moment the 90-day scheme applies to employment in businesses with fewer than 20 staff. The Government has been looking at expanding the scheme to firms with 50 employees but it appears set to be extended to all companies, regardless of size.
* A survey of 400 employers found 48 fired someone in the trial period.