Pay equity protesters rally outside Minister Brooke van Velden’s electorate office in Auckland in May. Photo / Jason Dorday
Pay equity protesters rally outside Minister Brooke van Velden’s electorate office in Auckland in May. Photo / Jason Dorday
New documents reveal the Government’s use of urgency to rush through controversial changes to the country’s pay equity scheme wasn’t decided until after a high-powered meeting between the Prime Minister and senior ministers.
A document dump yesterday from several government agencies provides an insight into the Government’s shock decision inMay to amend the Equal Pay Act, which ministers claimed created a fiscally unsustainable pay equity scheme as changes saved almost $13 billion over the next four years.
The changes, which stopped 33 live pay equity claims, raised the threshold for claims to be made and limited the job types workforces could use as comparators when arguing inequity.
The amendments announced by Workplace Relations Minister Brooke van Velden had not been publicly forecast, and the Government used urgency to pass the bill through the House, meaning no public consultation was done.
Now, documents released yesterday showed urgency hadn’t been raised by officials in the months of preparation through 2024 before potential reform.
Urgency first appeared after Prime Minister Christopher Luxon met with van Velden, Finance Minister Nicola Willis and Public Service Minister Judith Collins between 9pm and 10pm on March 4 this year.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon led a meeting with senior ministers in early March to discuss the pay equity changes. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Documents showed the meeting had been set by Luxon’s office, overriding plans van Velden’s office had to speak with Collins and Willis about the changes around the same time.
Publicly, ministers argued that urgency was warranted to ensure claims were judged under the same conditions.
Briefings to van Velden from Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) officials in February said there had been “limited testing and analysis” of the changes due to the “short timeframe to develop proposals”.
“There remains the risk of the changes not achieving the policy intent and unintended consequences arising once the bill has been passed,” officials warned.
Officials acknowledged that altering the pay equity scheme in such a way would likely be “contentious” because it would retrospectively remove people’s rights and override some aspects of existing settlements.
They also advised secrecy until after the bill was introduced because it risked a large increase in the number of claims lodged.
“While these would be overridden by the proposed transitional provisions, it may create additional noise and unnecessary compliance and cost for employers.”
Workplace Relations Minister Brooke van Velden led the pay equity reforms. Photo / Mark Mitchell
There were even plans made in case the changes leaked: “In the event of unauthorised disclosure of material prior to the information being made public, a communications approach will be developed and shared with ministers.”
The documents also revealed ministers considered retaining current claims but using a “legislative pause” while a new pay-equity process was built.
The pause would have taken between seven and 11 months to introduce, according to officials’ estimates. Wider reform of the pay equity system had been expected to take 12-19 months.
Adam Pearse is the deputy political editor and part of the NZ Herald’s press gallery team based at Parliament in Wellington. He has worked for NZME since 2018, reporting for the Northern Advocate in Whangārei and the Herald in Auckland.
