Deep Freeze workers denied rights

Press, 3 August 1983, Page 21

Deep Freeze workers denied rights

By

GLENN HASZARD,

I, Industrial Reporter

Voluntary unionism will soon be debated in the House of Representatives, but at Christchurch Airport there is already a small group of workers who are not in a union and are not covered by an award. In itself that is not unusual. Many workers are not members of unions because the unions have never been able to keep up with their shifting from job to job. There are also a few small groups of workers, such as early childhood workers and poultry farm workers, who are not covered by an industrial award, but in their case they are held back by the Government’s ban on conciliation councils during the wage freeze. What is unusual is that the workers at the airport are New Zealand civilians but are denied the right to be protected by an industrial award and are not al- ‘ lowed to join a trade union. They are employed by the United States Naval Support base — Operation Deep Freeze. Because they are not covered by an award, they have to work for

whatever the United States Navy chooses to pay them, as long as it is above the minimum wage of $B4 a week.

It means that they might do the same work as someone in the same sort of job in Christchurch, yet could be paid less. The Naval Support base did not have to comply with any award provisions because it was not employing the civilians for “pecuniary gain,” said the acting Minister of Labour, Mr Thomson, in a reply to “The Press.”

The exemption on the grounds of lack of “pecuniary gain” is the same ground that the Salvation Army tried to use to exempt itself in two rest homes in Christchurch last year, but the Arbitration Court ruled that the Army was not exempt because it was in the rest home business for pecuniary gain. Trade unions in Christchurch are unhappy about the situation at the Naval Support Base, but before taking proceedings to the Arbitration Court are doing their homework.

It is believed that more than a dozen workers perform various jobs such as clerical, stores, and catering at the support base. The secretary of the Canterbury Stores, Packing and Warehouse Workers Union, Mr P. E. Piesse, says that it was “rubbish” to claim immunity from an award on the grounds of an absence of pecuniary gain. The Salvation Army case had shown that whether or not an enterprise was profitable was immaterial. “The fact is that it is engaged in commercial operations and should not be exempt from the award,” he says.

Mr Piesse thinks the claim for exemption on the grounds of lack of pecuniary gain was a “smokescreen.” His union had been told that the reason for the exemption from award-coverage was the sovereign status of the naval base.

“It is a question of sovereignty — ours. It’s ridiculous that there

should be a foreign military base in our country which can avoid one or any of our laws. It shouldn’t be allowed, otherwise we’re giving away our sovereignty,” says Mr Piesse.

The civilians are paid according to what is known as the “Embassy pay plan,” which the United States Embassy in Wellington says attempts to follow prevailing wage rates by means of surveys of local employers providing work similar to that done by the workers at the base.

However, the secretary of the Canterbury Hotel Workers Union, Mr G. D. Harding, says that as far as he is aware the rates of pay do not reflect New Zealand thinking or minimum standards.

“I know of no Embassy pay plan that has been sanctioned by any Minister of the Crown in New Zealand. I don’t believe such authority exists anyway. The relationship of master and servant is an

industrial matter, and as such should be dealt with only within the Industrial Relations Act,” says Mr Harding. Also, Mr Harding adds, he has evidence that wage rates at the Naval Support base are not in line with those applicable to similar industries within New Zealand. “My union has certainly not been consulted. I doubt if any other union has been either.” The union is also concerned about affidavits which it says the civilians have to sign before they get a job at the base. Part of the agreement in the affidavit is that the civilian promises not to take part in any strike against the United States Government, nor join any union which holds the right to strike against the United States Government.

“Such acts of blind allegiance may be fine for military personnel who expect someone else to do their thinking for them, but not for a New Zealand citizen or a United States citizen employed in New Zealand and subject to New Zea-

land laws,” says Mr Harding. The affidavits may even be ultra vires and of no effect within New Zealand, Mr Harding believes. Many of the conditions provided for in New Zealand industrial awards are provided for under the Embassy pay plan. The workers are entitled, for instance, to annual holidays, tea breaks, service leave bonuses, and sick leave. However, if a worker is dismissed, his rights are curtailed by the prohibition against joining a union. Under the Industrial Relations Act a worker can take a case of unjustified dismissal to the Arbitration Court only if he has first tried to go through a union but the union has refused to act for him. A worker at the United States Naval Support base has no right to take a case to the Court. The unions want the workers to have the same rights as other New Zealand workers enjoy, but unless there is an award they have no right to enter the Naval Support premises to talk to potential members.