Opposition proposes redundancy bill

Press, 27 July 1981, Page 12

Opposition proposes redundancy bill

PA Wellington An Employment Protection Bill intended to provide security for workers laid off because of company closings, retrenchment, or bankruptcy has been proposed in Parliament by Mr D. J. Butcher (Lab., Hastings).

"One of the most urgent improvements required •in New Zealand involves the way we handle dismissals when an enterprise is shifted, reorganised, closed, or suddenly becomes insolvent." Mr Butcher said.

■ Three recent cases in which big industrial problems had had their roots in the lack of provision for redundancy were the Southdown. the tanker drivers, and the Mangere bridge disputes. The bill provides that at least 90 days before some or all of his employees become redundant an employer must give notice to the Labour Department of the matter. The department would give notice of the matter to unions and other employers who might be affected. Employees taking reasonable time off from work to seek other employment when the plant closed Would not suffer any loss. Employees with one year or less of service with a company would receive three weeks pay as redundancy pay on the closing of their employer’s business. Workers with more than one year of service would receive three weeks ordinary pay plus a further one week's pay for each year of service over one year.

Employees who have a better redundancy-protection scheme with employers

could opt for that scheme instead of the plan advanced in the bill.

A Redundancy and Reemployment Board consisting of five members would be established. It would administer an employment protection fund established under the bill to which employers would contribute a levy based on the number of employees they have on their payroll. The board would guarantee the minimum payments required to be made to employees made redundant as a result of the bankruptcy of companies and would make payments according to its discretion for retraining, relocation, and “assisting" the satisfactory re-establishment of the individual in the workforce.

The bill provides for' the establishment of departmental task forces to assist the board in its work. The Leader of the House (Mr Thomson) said that the bill was the "typical product of a socialist mind" and that it would not be appropriate for the House to spend further time on it.

The bill provided for a bureaucratic monstrosity, “one gigantic socialised quango," in the Redundancy and Re-employment Board. It also provided for 21 regional quangos when there were already well organised trade union and employers' bodies of recognised experience and strength. The House should be encouraging more openness and co-operation between employers and workers instead of considering the bill. The bill provided an extra

cost burden on consumers. Who would- pav for the quango? The cost' of government would go up and taxes would rise. Employers would not bear the costs involved themselves b’ut would pass them on to consumers.

Mr T. K. Burke (Lab., West Coast). Labour’s Shadow Minister of Employment, said that the present system imposed a greater cost burden. He asked, “Who pays for the Affco mess at Southdown? Who paid for the Mosgiel collapse and the folding of Fibremakers at Shannon 0 "

Of greater co-operation between employers and unions, Mr Burke said that the unions would not have been told by the Affco. Fibre makers, or Mosgiel managements that those industries would close.

Mr R. L. Bell (Nat., Gisborne) said that the bill’s required 90 days notice of redundancy would only hasten the collapse of a business.

The bill's requirements would discourage small businesses and new businesses from employing more people because it would make labour more costly.

Mr F. Gerbich (Lab., Onehunga) said that employers would welcome the bill. Redundancy pay had been a flashpoint in industrial situations.

The Mangere bridge was an example: 2‘a years of stagnation and a cost to New Zealand of millions of dollars.

The debate on the bill was interrupted by the adjournment at 1 p.m.