Matt McCarten: Jobs bill designed to intimidate our most vulnerable low-wage workers

Wayne Mapp's jobs bill, if passed, will allow unscrupulous employers to sack workers in the first 90 days of their employment for no reason.

Mapp seems genuine enough when he says it's intended to encourage employers to take on staff. When I talked to other MPs in Wellington this week, they tended to respond to Mapp's bill on partisan lines. The issue of whether workers got screwed, or not, seemed less important than the political game.

The vote on this bill is anyone's guess and New Zealand First and the Maori Party are the lynch-pins. The trade union movement is mobilising a campaign against the bill and is furiously lobbying these two parties.

Of all the MPs I saw, Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples was the only one genuinely open to discussing alternatives to help young people get into work.

What was also obvious to me was that the MPs I spoke to had little idea of what life was like for the working poor in the casualised workforce. Many didn't have a clue of the likely consequences of this bill if it was passed. When I raised examples of what already happens out here in the real world they were somewhat surprised.

Some of the MPs genuinely think that employers and their employees are all big happy families.

In my experience, most employers aren't too bad and do take their obligations as bosses seriously. In my union work, however, I come across hundreds of employers who have acted badly against their workers.

Most conflicts can be fixed amicably. But there are many employers who see their workers as little more than slaves.

If Mapp's bill passes, I have no doubts that those employers will use it to bully their workers and rip new employees off.

If workers stand up for themselves, I have no doubt these employers will sack them.

Do you think I'm exaggerating? Then let me give you a few recent real-life examples.

One of my union organisers received a call from a 17-year-old employed as a farmhand in the Waikato. He worked a 12-hour day, six days a week. For his 72 hours, he got $180 in his hand after his board was taken out. Our organiser told him he should be on at least $600 gross a week.

The young worker went to talk to his boss about it. Within two hours his belongings were packed up and he was off the farm.

We'll get this young farmhand his back pay and some compensation for his clearly unjustified dismissal. But under Mapp's bill, this farmer's behaviour would be legal.

Unfortunately this doesn't happen only on the farm.

A widespread practice in central Auckland restaurants and cafes sees the owners offer backpackers and language school students' casual work as kitchen and waiters on a trial period. This trial period is at a minimum eight-hour day and can be for up to a week. No wages are paid. Frequently these workers are told after this period they are not working out and are "let go".

Some owners of ethnic restaurants employing migrants from their own countries seem to have adopted practices they may have got away with in those countries.

Many of their workers are language school students or visitors on short-term visas and, in at least two cases I know of, are treated like servants. Anyone who isn't suitably obedient is sacked on the spot. The lesson isn't lost on the other workers.

Almost all these workers have short-term work permits so are in no position to demand a fair deal from the boss. If Mapp's bill becomes law, this intimidation will be cemented in.

It's not only small players who get up to this practice.

A major hotel in Auckland contracts out its housekeeping. The contractor employs staff on minimum wage on a 90-day probation period. The new workers are told at the start of their employment that if they can't meet his standards by that time, they will not be kept on. Some of them aren't paid for their first month's work, as this is called a training period.

I've seen these women in tears over their workload and some are sacked if they complain. Certainly anyone who sticks up for themselves has their employment terminated at the end of the 90-day probation. This will be legal if Mapp's bill is passed.

Another major hotel specialises in giving international students work experience as interns for up to six months on no wages.

The hotel's human resources director had the cheek to tell me the hotel employed these students as a favour so they could improve their English. She didn't even blink when I asked her how much English practice these students got as hotel cleaners and dishwashers.

It's done sneakily at the moment but I have no doubt this practice will boom if Mapp gets his way.

I'm only scratching the surface with these examples.

MPs who support this bill should be honest about its real intent. Its purpose is to intimidate new workers and make them understand that their boss can do whatever he or she likes.

If the boss doesn't like someone they will thrown out on the street - no questions asked of the boss and no rights for the worker.

It's a nasty piece of proposed legislation intended to enslave and intimidate vulnerable New Zealanders.