Move angers bridge workers

Press, 17 December 1983, Page 8

Move angers bridge workers

PA Auckland Angry Auckland Harbour Bridge workers are seeking a meeting with the Government after its decision to cancel part of the redundancy agreement negotiated with the bridge authority. The authority itself, which is also unhappy with the Government’s move, will meet the States Services Commission in Wellington next week to clarify the effects of the step. It is believed that Federation of Labour unions, who represent about 60 of the 160 workers, want a meeting with the Minister of State Services, Mr Thomson. The secretary of the Northern Local Government

Officers’ Union, Mr K. M. Tuxford, who acts for the other workers, said he did not think the Government would change its mind. “Obviously we would like to see it amended, but I cannot see the Government changing its position and admitting it was wrong,” he said. “We would hope that public opinion would register its protest at the destruction of this agreement. “In our opinion no agreement anywhere is sacrosanct if the Government can use such a blatant abuse of political power to frustrate an agreement legally enterd into between two parties,” said Mr Tuxford. _____

Through legislation passed in Parliament early yesterday, the Government has removed from the agreement payment for long-service leave, and workers can now be refused redundancy if they decline to transfer to a Ministry of Works or Ministry of Transport job anywhere in New Zealand. It has, however, left intact the basic redundancy pay-out. Those pay-outs will be four weeks pay for every year of service up to 40 years of age and six weeks for each beyond that. Mr Tuxford said that workers would suffer significant losses by removal of the long-service leave provi-

sions. These were included after negotiations. Workers who served on the bridge since it opened fell just seven days short of entitlement. These workers were also to receive the smallest superannuation pay-out under an old agreement. A feature of most redundancy agreements was the right of the worker to decline a transfer if it proved unsuitable to him or his employer, Mr Tuxford said. The Government had withdrawn this right and a bridge worker who had lived in Northcote for 25 years could be faced with moving his family. “The Government is al-

ways appealing to the public on law and order, but no agreement, no mortgage is worth the paper it is written on the way this Government acts. Democracy in New Zealand is in serious trouble,” said Mr Tuxford.

Redundancies usually occurred when a business was losing money or going out of business. In this case, Mr Tuxford said, it was because the business had succeeded by paying off the bridge well ahead of schedule.

The agreement was negotiated in 1975. Last month the parties again sat down to negotiate the application of the document.

The bridge authority will be dissolved from March 31. Its functions will be taken over by the National Roads Board. About 80 workers will lose their jobs as a result.

Mr Tuxford said that the mood of the workers was bitter and hostile.

However, a condition of the agreement was that no union member would take industrial action on the issue of redundancy.

“Our argument is with the Government, not the authority, and we will honour that condition. We are not prepared to recommend action and see the public being used as pawns for what the Government has done.

“I have a letter signed by the chairman of the authority, Mr W. Marley, which says that if the provisions could be legally implemented the authority would do so,” he said.

Mr Tuxford said that the agreement had provided’ that if a worker got another job he would not get redundancy. It also said that a worker had an option.

“That option has been removed, and that is what has incensed the members the most.

“This agreement was so watertight that it needed an act of Parliament to overturn. The legislation is rushed and it is provocative,” said Mr Tuxford.