Mapp 90 Day Bill

[Winston001]

Nor is the effect of the bill actually limited to 90 days. There is nothing whatsoever to stop an employer taking on a worker, sacking them after 89 days (no reason needed remember) rehiring them the same day, for ANOTHER 90 day "probationary" period, and repeating this cycle indefinately. Indeed it is possible that this could happen and the worker not even be aware it was going on - just a couple of entries in the wages book.

Yeah right! You know as well as I do what the Employment Court would say about that. It would be deemed continuous employment - and rightly so.

All of this hand-wringing and fear-mongering (lovely word eh) over 90 days is ludicrous. At 91 days all the normal procedures fall into place.

[Ixion]

And upon what grounds would you invoke the Employment Court? It can hardly be because of the dismissal since that is exactly what the bill prohibits. And it would scarely be logical to argue that an employer cannot reemploy a dismissed worker.

In fact, it would probably be simpler and better just to dismiss each worker at the end of each week. that avoids having to mess around with holiday pay too. And avoids the need to pay for stat days (don't rehire them util after the holiday). Pay out the worker each friday, new employment term starts Monday. So, in fact, the bill potentially casualises all employment.

Nothing in the bill to prevent it. As to fear mongering, given the behaviour of some employers in NZ, fear is well justifed.

[James Deuce]

Nor is the effect of the bill actually limited to 90 days. There is nothing whatsoever to stop an employer taking on a worker, sacking them after 89 days (no reason needed remember) rehiring them the same day, for ANOTHER 90 day "probationary" period, and repeating this cycle indefinately. Indeed it is possible that this could happen and the worker not even be aware it was going on - just a couple of entries in the wages book.

I'd say that all seasonal workers will find this happening. Rather than a short term contract and all the potential issues that go with it, you just hire them for the picking, pruning, or planting, and then boom, gone. Oyster fishermen - deckhands will get the same treatment.

Winston, you seem to suffer from the belief that employers will do the "right thing". Throughout the Western world, employers, particularly Medium sized (50 employees or more) companies on up to Multi-Nationals, have a track record of doing everything they can to avoid doing the "right thing".

[Lias]

The bill is a good thing, as is anything else that helps stop employers being rooted up the arse by unions. Anyone who opposes it is a dirty communist socialist marxist waste of oxygen.

I've sat and rewritten this paragraph about 20 times so far, and I cant find a goddamn thing to say about the communist unions and their relationship with Comrade Clark and her minions that isnt a foul mouthed rant, which would probably offend some of the nambie pambies, which in turn is probably an invasion of their human rights and will see me in jail for 10 years for a thought crime.

Just remember, Big Brother is watching, and big brother is a politically correct communist labour supporter....

[98tls]

[QUOTE=Lias]The bill is a good thing, as is anything else that helps stop employers being rooted up the arse by unions. Anyone who opposes it is a dirty communist socialist marxist waste of oxygen.

What a load of shit....get your head outta your arse ya silly prick....better still stop breathing your a waste of oxygen...and no i dont vote labour and am not a communist...Fucken idiot..post your shit somewhere else.

[chanceyy]

The bill is a good thing, as is anything else that helps stop employers being rooted up the arse by unions. Anyone who opposes it is a dirty communist socialist marxist waste of oxygen.

laffing at your communist union comment,

big brother is what ever govt is in power,

have you had a bad experience luv, or on second thoughts guess your management..

[Ixion]

The bill is a good thing, as is anything else that helps stop employers being rooted up the arse by unions. Anyone who opposes it is a dirty communist socialist marxist waste of oxygen.

I've sat and rewritten this paragraph about 20 times so far, and I cant find a goddamn thing to say about the communist unions and their relationship with Comrade Clark and her minions that isnt a foul mouthed rant, which would probably offend some of the nambie pambies, which in turn is probably an invasion of their human rights and will see me in jail for 10 years for a thought crime.

Just remember, Big Brother is watching, and big brother is a politically correct communist labour supporter....

Goodness. You are wrong on so many levels.

You can't have a communist union in NZ. Membership of the Communist party (indeed any association with Communism) is forbidden by the rules of almost all (probably all) unions. Wimps.

If there WERE communist unions their relationship with the right wing Ms Clark would be exceeding tense and unhappy. They would want very much to shoot her, and she would want very much to throw them into prison. As the "Labour" party did to many Communist union organisers back when Communism and unionism were not incompatible

Big brother can't be "a politically correct communist labour supporter". Firstly, communists are never politically correct.Wouldn't make sense for someone who intends to shoot you being worried about saying something that might offend you, would it? Secondly communists are never Labour supporters if you mean supporters of the present Labour party. Haven't been since 1925 when Labour forced the communists out. Rat finks, a sad state of affairs for the party Billy Banjo started. And the Labour party isn't even socialist, John A Lee was the last Socialist member, until they kicked him out.

If you don't like the Labour party you'd implode at what a Socialist party would do, and what the Communists would do is I fear beyond the reach of your mind.

[98tls]

Goodness. You are wrong on so many levels.

You can't have a communist union in NZ. Membership of the Communist party (indeed any association with Communism) is forbidden by the rules of almost all (probably all) unions. Wimps.

If there WERE communist unions their relationship with the right wing Ms Clark would be exceeding tense and unhappy. They would want very much to shoot her, and she would want very much to throw them into prison. As the "Labour" party did to many Communist union organisers back when Communism and unionism were not incompatible

Big brother can't be "a politically correct communist labour supporter". Firstly, communists are never politically correct.Wouldn't make sense for someone who intends to shoot you being worried about saying something that might offend you, would it? Secondly communists are never Labour supporters if you mean supporters of the present Labour party. Haven't been since 1925 when Labour forced the communists out. Rat finks, a sad state of affairs for the party Billy Banjo started. And the Labour party isn't even socialist, John A Lee was the last Socialist member, until they kicked him out.

If you don't like the Labour party you'd implode at what a Socialist party would do, and what the Communists would do is I fear beyond the reach of your mind.

knew you wouldnt be far away.....

[Winston001]

Winston, you seem to suffer from the belief that employers will do the "right thing". Throughout the Western world, employers, particularly Medium sized (50 employees or more) companies on up to Multi-Nationals, have a track record of doing everything they can to avoid doing the "right thing".

Fair enough. The vast majority of businesses are small employers - 1 to 8 employees. The employers are busy enough just trying to run the show. All this sophistication about dumping someone on day 89 and reemploying on day 91 is far too much trouble for them.

Basically an employer wants a reliable worker. If they find one, they keep him or her. No shagging about.

I acknowledge there are situations where sharp practise could occur but unscrupulous employers exist under the present law as it is. We can't legislate for everything.

Anyway, I'm right, youse jokers are wrong, so there.

[ajturbo]

[quote=98tls]

The bill is a good thing, as is anything else that helps stop employers being rooted up the arse by unions. Anyone who opposes it is a dirty communist socialist marxist waste of oxygen.

What a load of shit....get your head outta your arse ya silly prick....better still stop breathing your a waste of oxygen...and no i dont vote labour and am not a communist...Fucken idiot..post your shit somewhere else.

sorry but i agree with "lias" on this...

[Lou Girardin]

I love the 'reds under the bed' crowd. Trapped in the '50s and 60's still.
NZ's biggest problem is this 'gays IN the bed' Govt.
I'm seriously worried that they'll make homosexuality compulsory.

[Beemer]

I first started work in 1980 and every job I ever worked at in those days (apart from for my parents) had a three month trial period as part of the contract. I've only ever been fired twice in my working life and once was for a technical breach of contract after I'd been working there three years and the other was because they didn't want to pay redundancy (I'd worked there for three years too and took them to the Employment Tribunal and won a redundancy payout). I never looked at the trial period as anything threatening because I always believed if I did a good job, I wouldn't be asked to leave - and I never was. I did leave one job within the three month period as I wasn't enjoying it - and I felt quite relieved I had an 'out' without having to lie about why I was leaving. Most employers actually made a big deal of the day the trial period ended, welcoming me to the permanent staff.

Yes, there are some employers who may well abuse this law if it is (re)introduced but they are the types who would fondle female employees, treat junior staff like shit, sack people because they wanted to, etc, anyway, so I think it's more a case of choosing your employer (and employees) more wisely to avoid any potential conflict. So many times a person is employed to do a specific job and then they either don't have the skills or are bone lazy and won't do a decent day's work for a decent day's pay and the employer is stuck with them unless they do something really bad. There have been so many cases in the courts where an employee has done everything except steal and when the employer sacks them, they take them to the Employment Tribunal and either get their job back or win huge payouts. There should be laws to protect both employers AND employees and the basic fact is, if you do a good job, your employer shouldn't want to fire you.

[Lias]

If there WERE communist unions their relationship with the right wing Ms Clark would be exceeding tense and unhappy.

There's the foundation of our disagreement right there sir.. You think Labour is too right wing, and I think the National Front are too left wing

I love the 'reds under the bed' crowd. Trapped in the '50s and 60's still.
NZ's biggest problem is this 'gays IN the bed' Govt.
I'm seriously worried that they'll make homosexuality compulsory.

I could be wrong but I'm fairly certain that mandatory 1 in 10 homosexuality was a campaign promise of the Mcgillicuddy Serious party back in the day. Perhaps they outgrew there student activist days and joined the communist errm I mean Labour party And I cant be trapped in the '50s or '60's because I wasnt even a twinkle in the old mans eye then :-)

sorry but i agree with "lias" on this...

I'd like to thank the academy, and god, and my record company..

[The Stranger:Me]

did you go to Rally at Govt grounds yesterday Jim ?? Love the bullshit chant

Why bother? Nothing else to do?
It wont pass.

[Finn]

On the other side of the fence, there is little protection for employers in a market where half the workforce are fucken useless. In addition, the government (1/3 unwanted shareholder) does it's best to interfere with businesses.

I have useless people I can't fire and the problem is it effects overall productivity which in turn means I can't / won't give the hard workers the pay rise they deserve.

There is clearly an inbalance in employment law in NZ.