Oyster workers Jackie Stewart, left, and Gary Rudolph. Photo / Northern Advocate.
Northland oyster workers who say they had to stand on one leg with eyes closed and arms outstretched for 10 seconds to get a job have laid a complaint with the Human Rights Commission.
Workers at the Sanford oyster plant in Kaeo lodged the complaint through the National Distribution Union
over what they say are draconian pre-employment medical tests.
The company said the complaint was outrageous, and Sanford managing director Eric Barratt refused to comment.
NDU general secretary Robert Reid was not sure if the test was legal and said the matter has been handed to the union's lawyer.
"It seems like it was their own version of a drug and alcohol test, so if they fell over they would be cut," he said.
The work, which involves chipping, separating and bagging oysters, is seasonal, so employees have to re-apply each year.
Gary Rudolph and Jackie Stewart have worked at the plant every year since it opened in 2000.
Would-be employees used to be checked by their own GPs but the pair say the firm "went overboard" this year and brought in nurses.
As well as having to balance on one leg for 10 seconds, Mr Rudolph said he had to squat so the nurse could check his knees, and have his hearing, eyesight, lung function, blood pressure and neck movement tested.
Mr Stewart knew of two 10-year veterans at the plant who had been rejected. One had been ruled out for a minor hearing problem - even though workers have to wear earmuffs - and the other failed because of blood pressure, despite having a certificate from his doctor saying he was fit to work.
The NDU's Northland organiser, Trevor Noel, said the union had gone to the Human Rights Commission because if a worker had only a minor disability, the employer was obliged to help them continue working.
He said the company was capitalising on a change to the law which from April next year will allow employers to lay off staff without formal process during their first three months on the job.
Sanford Kaeo manager Peter Harris said the firm had no comment to make but the complaint was outrageous.
It would "come out in the wash" when the union's complaint was officially dealt with, which is expected to be next year.
