Danyl's satire – a recommended read – seems more bang on than trad media coverage is likely to be.?

where it will affect an estimated 400,000 employees annually (that's the number changing or moving into jobs)

You're missing the words "up to". This isn't compulsory. And you implicitly point out, if employers want the best skilled staff, those who insist on probation periods are less likely to find them.?

Sure, this law might make employers more likely to take risks when hiring ? but employers already have the option of hiring new employees on three month?

This isn't compulsory.

That's just hilarious.

I can't say I'm fussed on the first sentence, but the second sentence is patently ridiculous. It's the hard work of thousands?

The enterprise and willingness to embrace risk of employers literally pays the rent of millions of people.

I think you'll find that it's the work that employees do for those employers that *literally* pays their rent.

This is, of course, all just a run-in to this week's round of explaining?

If the employers couldn't extract surplus value from workers' time and effort they wouldn't bother employing them.

Evidently. If you don't have a margin after labour and other costs you don't have a business and nobody has a job.

That's just hilarious.
...
That's just hilarious.

I fail to see why. I know a number of people who shifted into new jobs, now working for employers who employ fewer than 20 staff over the last year or so. Not one has had a 90-day trial imposed.

Will most new?

Our MP Grant Robertson is quite angry about the unethical use of the public service in compiling and leaking this report for National Party use.

He has a right to be angry. Hours after unions have been denied access to the report, it's freely circulating at the National Party conference??

This is, of course, all just a run-in to this week's round of explaining stuff to Kerre Woodham

I'm a Deborah Hill-Cone fan myself.

Sometime in the last year the declining quality of the Herald's columnists made the transition from offensive to hilarious.

Will most new employees? Perhaps. Will many more semi- or un-skilled workers? Probably. But it will not apply to everyone? Clearly and obviously not.

Some employees will be in a strong enough position to bargain away the 90-day period as a condition of employment — those who would be least?

I'm a Deborah Hill-Cone fan myself.

Wibble.

Evidently.

Not one has had a 90-day trial imposed.

Note your own choice of words there, Graeme – imposed – by the employer on the employee. Voluntary for whom?

I think you'll find that it's the work that employees do for those employers that *literally* pays their rent.

It's the money they're paid from the turnover of the business that *literally* does that, if we're going to be fiddly about it. I was simply saying that I don't find?

Wibble

The mental gymnastics required to make libertarian lite beliefs fit the real world are quite awesome to behold.

Nine to Noon has a good interview with EEO Commissioner Dr Judy McGregor on the matter. McGregor says, and I agree, the big problem is the summary nature of dismissal.

Yes, that was a good interview. The loss of rights and redress is shocking.

It needs someone with more time?

I think, if I had the opportunity, I'd shop around employers to see who did and did not have?

It's fine to state your view, but to try and back it up by completely obfuscating the hard work of the employees who create the turnover that?

It's the money they're paid from the turnover of the business that *literally* does that, if we're going to be fiddly about it.

Which in turn is created by the work of the employees, who otherwise wouldn't be employed. We could play this game of chicken and egg forever!

I?

It's fine to state your view, but to try and back it up by completely obfuscating the hard work of the employees who create the turnover that pays for their wages I believe is wrong.

That wasn't my intention.

I think that making the eligibility for the period universal will tend to make its application nearly so.

Just like the minimum wage?

As a strong and confident young woman, she gives him the blow-off.

I hope to hell no one misreads or misunderstands that sentence...

the ECA went down like a cup of cold sick, yet they insist on bringing aspects of it back again, in effect.

That's a nice theory, but National won two elections after passing the ECA so it may not have been a big deal for as many people as you?

As a group of people they get together in organisations like the Employers and Manufacturers Association and lobbied National for the sort of changes we are seeing now.

The sole purpose of these changes are to increase their?

Meanwhile, on Kiwiblog, DPF leads his defence of the changes with the expert commentary of ... Kerre Woodham.

That's just because Torqeumada had to cancel due to a clashing engagement.

This isn't compulsory.

That's just hilarious.

About as funny as the guy on NatRad yesterday who tried to argue that this is actually a good thing for employees, since if you're in a situation where your employer wants to get rid of you, then summary sacking might be just the?

I'm sure this is just part of a clever viral marketing campaign for the new Alice in Wonderland movie.

National will get many many more votes from employees than it does from employers

Not this employee they won't.

it's the government looking after its core constituency, at the expense of others

No surprise there either. I didn't vote for them for that very reason.
That said, I do think?

If you don ' t have a margin after
labour and other costs you don ' t have a
business and nobody has a job .

Not at the UK retailer John Lewis Partnership (operator of Waitrose) where the employers only the business and split the profits. Or at many?

That's a nice theory, but National won two elections after passing the ECA so it may not have been a big deal for as many people as you?

Not at the UK retailer John Lewis Partnership (operator of Waitrose) where the employers own the business and split the profits. Or at many other cooperatives.

It's a diligently maintained myth that capitalism is the only effective way to organise an economy.

I think it would be fair to say?

Craig Y

And you implicitly point out, if employers want the best skilled staff, those who insist on probation periods are less likely to find them.

Will many more semi- or un-skilled workers? Probably

And Graeme, labour laws need to be crafted to protect those who have the least power to bargain.?

It's not the good burghers of Public Address who need protection from unscrupulous employers, given that the average PASer appears to be intelligent, skilled, eloquent, and generally able to approach an employment relationship from a position of power.

I suspect there are also quite a few, including me, out there?

2.

this is actually a good thing for employees, since if you're in a situation where your employer wants to get rid of you, then summary sacking?

It's not the good burghers of Public Address who need protection from unscrupulous employers, given that the average PASer appears to be intelligent, skilled, eloquent, and generally able to approach an employment relationship from a position of power.

I'm reminded of a question I asked Wayne Mapp in 2005, when?

Of course a small business can have a disaster, lose a lot of work, and may want to use the three month period employment law to get rid of staff but they should definitely have to justify the dismissal.

You know, there's an employment law situation that's designed for precisely?

Yes, you could equally say that Labour was re-elected twice after having abolished it.

I could.

That too would support my argument that it wasn't a particularly big deal.

And Graeme, labour laws need to be crafted to protect those who have the least power to bargain. That would be?

Dear lord, deliver us from gung-ho management types.

I'm putting this on my wall. If only I could embroider :)
National's thinking around productivity gains and higher wages appears to be that the wages will follow gains in productivity. I suspect it's round the other way. Higher wages force employers?

Rather, it's the low-intelligence, monosyllabic, strictly-unskilled workers who will likely never be in a position to bargain from strength, that need to be at the forefront of any designer of labour laws.

It is part and parcel of right-wing philosophy that people are not destined to be forever excluded from?

You may be wondering where employees ? the other group affected by the law change ? featured in these surveys...

...although employees manifestly outnumber employers in the economy, employers outnumbered staff in the consultation exercise by 100 to one.
The report says the imbalance was "due to resource constraints".

Personally?

A wonderful argument. But given that my argument was the Russell was wrong to state that this would affect every one of the 400,000 NZers who start a new job each year, I'm not sure where it gets you.

I didn't think it would affect 400,000 people in the same?

Could I suggest some footwork on this- such as tactical voting in Ohariu-Belmont and especially Epsom to dispose of Messrs Dunne, Hide and their satellite parties...?

We don't need to. Any time up to 90 days after we elect them we can just sack them for no reason, right?

A wonderful argument. But given that my argument was the Russell was wrong to state that this would affect every one of the 400,000 NZers who start a new job each year, I'm not sure where it gets you.

Russell was referring to the estimated 400,000 employees changing jobs each?

this is actually a good thing for employees, since if you're in a situation where your employer wants to get rid of you, then summary sacking might be just the incentive you need to get on and find something more suitable

We're letting George Clooney's character in __Up in the?

But then I am ANAL.

:-)

All jobs are subject to the Minimum Wage Act; I do not accept that a rise in the minimum wage affects all workers, or even all employers.

IIRC, a few years back when the usual suspects whined about a minimum wage going up, the BNZ's Tony Alexander told them to?

I've also heard it described as the employer and the employee having a chance to check each other out. Which is crazy because employees can always resign, even within 90 days.

Employees also cannot just leave with no notice within the 90 days. So it's not "a chance to check?

All jobs are subject to the Minimum Wage Act; I do not accept that a rise in the minimum wage affects all workers, or even all employers.

IIRC, a few years back when the usual suspects whined about a minimum wage going up, the BNZ's Tony Alexander told them to?

But it will not apply to everyone? Clearly and obviously not.

An email that I got today indicated that the law only applies when changing employers, not jobs. So if you move around different jobs in an organisation, no probation period can apply, it's only when you move to a?

An email that I got today indicated that the law only applies when changing employers, not jobs

That's correct. And it doesn't apply if you're returning to an employer, either. One clause of the trial-period section restricts its application to employees who have not previously worked for the employer.

Graeme?

What ' s up with this site today ? . Keeps logging
me out and telling me pages ain ' t available an
shit . anat an stuff

After Key gets his way Russell will be able to fire his code bitches with even less explanation than above.

And the?

I include the meat & wool sectors amongst the retards

Then you'll guess where the demand for sick day crackdowns comes from.

Mr Key said this issue had been raised with him, and it affected the meat industry.

She [Minister of Labour] disagreed with Ms Turei that there was no problem that needed fixing, saying: "The issue has been raised with us"

So it turns out that all you need to do to get some government?

Gio, I'm saving my 'e's for later.

See you at Spy bar.

However, the practical reality is that if an employer wants to hire an employee and include a trial period in the employment agreement, and the employee refuses to consent to the inclusion of the trial period, the employer is?

The?

PASers be ribbin'

Surely a contender for a top 10 placing in Word of the Year 2010.

And, noting that the Word of the Year has averaged three-words-long in recent years, we can observe it is like Paul Hlmes, perfectly formed.

Phil
who one day will learn not to take?

So an applicant can specify they don't want a trial period in their employment agreement – but they may not get the role.

Oh for a New Zealand where there are more jobs than people available. Then businesses would have to, you know, compete, in a free market, to attract?

There's a healthy black market in China for those doctor's certificates.

Well there's an opportunity for Farrer Slater Ltd (and others) to start up an enterprise selling medical certificates through the interweb.

No need for a doctor to have seen the person. Nor indeed to be a registered medical practictioner?

The quantitative research using the Department of Labour?s employer database involved an initial short phone call, with a request to complete a follow-up on-line or postal survey.

But only 23% of the 3352 employers the DoL attempted to contact actually?

So it really does discourage people taking risks with their employment and moving into new fields, physical locations.

I think this will be a consequence that hasn't really been explored. In my profession I can see teachers staying put in their schools for a long time rather than risk applying?

General Practice New Zealand chairwoman Bev O'Keefe said the change could put pressure on medical centres.

"The issue for general practice is how we accommodate all those people who need to claim medical certificates?

25 / 40 said not today
12 / 40 said today
3 / 40 said we may be able to squeeze you in

1 day wait to see doctor at 12 places
2 day wait to see?

Mr Key said this issue had been raised with him, and it affected the meat industry.

Talley's?

Oh and the Greens at least ran a quick survey of 40 GPs.

This is so much sharper and more useful than whatever it was I heard Phil Goff say on the radio today.

...then summary sacking might be just the incentive you need to get on and find something more suitable.

He'd probably just been won over by Up in the Air.

who one day will learn not to take Danielle and others seriously all the time

I am vaguely horrified at the prospect of being taken seriously even a bare majority of the time.

?Ultimately, the employer must make arrangements to pay for the doctor?s visit. "

I took that to mean the employer paid for a doctor to visit you at home and examine you and issue a certificate (if appropriate). I.e. I took "the doctor's visit" to mean?

This is so much sharper and more useful than whatever it was I heard Phil Goff say on the radio today.

Quelle surprise. A semi-competent Opposition would quickly highlight 4-5 key reasons why these changes are a bad idea, and relentless highlight them in ways people can easily relate to?

Any MPs on here care to?

I took that to mean the employer paid for a doctor to visit you at home and examine you and issue a certificate (if appropriate). I.e. I took "the doctor's visit" to mean "visit of the doctor".

Did she not mean that?

If she did, she is so grossly out?

PASers be ribbin'

Surely a contender for a top 10 placing in Word of the Year 2010.

Credit to Danielle, really. I just took her comment and made it closer to the meme she was paraphrasing. Not exactly original thought.

Because some meatworkers took three Mondays in a row off?!

It's so ridiculously minor and specific that it really just sounds, to me, like one of the large donors calling in a favour.

@Tamsin: it seems to be happening in Dubai on a more extreme scale, where?

one of the large donors calling in a favour.

Indeed – $1m donation offer

if an employee is really completely rubbish, demonstrably so, and has been formally warned about their crapness (no, I know that isn't a real word), can they not be fired legitimately? Really, I'm curious.

Yes they can. We used to give 3 warnings(all could be issued at 48 hour intervals?

Credit to Danielle, really. I just took her comment and made it closer to the meme she was paraphrasing. Not exactly original thought.

Oh, goodness, what have I started?

I saw Russell use it the other day and did a double take. Fun fact: the original version (not mine) was?

Oh, goodness, what have I started?

Ah! Got it!

I tried to attribute it, but I was looking on PAS for the quote when it was actually you over on the Dim-Post.

DPF on KB has just posted a list of 35 countries including France, Germany, Spain and Sweden that have some form of trial period employment laws.
Assuming DPF is correct, it is a bit hard to describe NZ's new law as extreme isn't it?

Three things: some of those places?

Derek Cheng attempts a balanced report.

Interesting to read how similar laws in other countries have had no noticeable effect on unemployment. I must have missed that bit in Key's speech.

Evidence is for sissies

And socialists.

How does this improve productivity, exactly? Appears pretty counter-productive to me.

That's because?

Hopefully the Natz have made a tactical blunder by moving the 90 day?

Yes they can. We used to give 3 warnings(all could be issued at 48 hour intervals if behaviour continued to warrant warning. then we could dismiss with the weeks wages (they were paid weekly) + 6% annual leave.

Labour's law was one that gave sufficient power to business that it?

PM Key not known for his love of detail in public is now dissing meatworkers, surely one of the most unpleasant occupations, and their alleged sick leave habits. Fer chrissakes a Prime Minister on about Monday/Friday syndrome.

I think National's support among working class voters will take a hit in?

I think National's support among working class voters will take a hit in the next week. I wouldn't have a clue whether it's a small one or slightly larger.

Especially if WorkChoices was anything to go by for John Howard. Big time.

Especially if WorkChoices was anything to go by for John Howard. Big time.

Yeah, but that came with a convergence of factors that combined to portray the government as "out of touch", and magnified the impact. Had it been early in the term, with a still lukewarm media, things might?

PASers be ribbin'.

My immediate reference for that line is from hip-hop; "haters be hatin", "players be playin", "ballers be ballin", etc. Can't stop what comes natural.

I don't think that in and of itself it will cause a large impact on the polls, but I could be wrong! Like their mining decision, it certainly increases the risks for the Government however.

And the National Standards, ECan, and possibly Treasury getting its GST predictions wrong.

and possibly Treasury getting its GST predictions wrong

Que? Haven't heard about that one.

Que? Haven't heard about that one.

To be precise, if the GST hike isn't as revenue-neutral as first thought, and turns out in practice to be a Clayton's Community Charge.

PASers be ribbin'.

would that be like SPAre ribbins?
– fresh from th' grill – finger lickin' good!
– or the biblical girl from the rib cage...

Teachers keep on teachin'...

My immediate reference for that line is from hip-hop;?

To be precise, if the GST hike isn't as revenue-neutral as first thought, and turns out in practice to be a Clayton's Community Charge.

The pain will eventuate, but come from an unidentified source, then. I'd guess that manifests as low level general discontent, rather than sharp turns of opinion.?

In unrelated business news – Talleys bids to takeover Affco

If that's unrelated, I'm a banana.

I for one have no desire do eat meat that's been butchered by ill, infectious, workers, The Jungle style.

I wonder if the UK supermarkets will be as keen to buy it when they?

Mr English said his Government had sought to address this challenge "by way of a substantial tax reform programme, a multi-billion dollar infrastructure programme, sorting out the Government's finances which were left in a mess, improving skills and education, and cutting red tape".

Uh?

On current trends the prospect of New Zealand losing more people from migration, rather than gaining them as is usually the case, "is very real", ANZ said. "This does not augur well for the housing market and domestic spending."

I hate how "well" in the housing?

They all benefit from an inflationary housing market.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YpAdK0CrTY

Can the public expect a loud and co-ordinated union campaign of opposition, as happened with the Employment?

John Banks and Scott Campbell, 176 words:

Auckland City emails reveal the pattern of communication between former TV3 journalist Scott Campbell and?

Compare two identical Herald stories by the same journalist about how key campaign staff for Mayoral candidates are interacting with the communications staff of the Councils they currently head.

I noticed that too. Fisher had essentially the same story for both Banks and Brown — if anything, Banks' is a?

yet wrote them in quite different ways

Quite

The Automobile Association said yesterday it would be happy to extend its defensive driving programme into every school in the country.

The nine-hour course includes one hour driving with a professional instructor. With 47,247 Year 13 students nationally, and a $165 cost?

We seem to be imitating the negative aspects of Japan without the positives – whaling issues, pressure-cooker education, highways to nowhere, and now labour?

"if we had $8 million to spare, we would spend it in different ways".

I guess he's saying we can't even afford ambulances for the bottom of the cliff, too...

Maybe they could pay for it with all the fines collected from the small-business-crushing idea of permanent bus lanes on?

Can the public expect a loud and co-ordinated union campaign of opposition, as happened with the Employment Contracts Act in 1991? Or even a general strike?

Has the law changed? My understanding is that general strikes are illegal. You can only take industrial action in pursuit of a pay claim?

I'm talking out of school here, but I found it fascinating to have a drink with Kelly at the Waldorf?

The DMCA alone is reason to be cautious of an NZ-US FTA, if the Aussie experience is anything to go by.

Totally, and ACTA is another attempt at DMCA through the backdoor, as is s92. Both see the same dodgy Hollywood lobbyists pushing their industry's interests on our regulators, with?

Trotter is, frankly, a menace to the moderate left of ANZ politics.
And he knows & plays on that-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb_qHP7VaZE

A caller to my show this week said if motorists didn't know when the 50m mark kicks in on the bus lanes, why not make the bus lanes 50m shorter?

Only cars turning left and buses could use?

Yup, so much easier to invent special 50-metre stretches of "I Can't Believe It's Not Still a Bus Lane" for buses and turning cars than to just put up a sign at the 50-metre mark...

This caller would certainly make an entertaining mayor. I have a feeling that if?

A caller to my show this week said if motorists didn't know when the 50m mark kicks in on the bus lanes, why not make the bus lanes 50m shorter?

Only cars turning left and buses could use it.

First they came for the bus lanes, and I didn't speak?

E.g. NZEI Te Riu Roa (who I work for when I'm not on leave) is well-known as "the primary teachers' union" but it has several thousand members who are working outside?

as the public has been educated about not driving in bus lanes

Unfortunately, ticketing infringers is no substitute for actually informing people why bus lanes need to be free of cars to work.

Pointing to successful overseas implementations might reassure doubters that this is not them being picked on. Diagrams?

Kyle, even if they did buy their own bus I think they'd have to have a certain number of passengers (2 or 3 depending) to qualify ;-)

Unfortunately, ticketing infringers is no substitute for actually informing people why bus lanes?

Kyle, even if they did buy their own bus I think they'd have to have a certain number of passengers (2 or 3 depending) to qualify ;-)

They could rent some poor people surely? It's so hard being rich, on top of taxes this bus lane persecution really is too?

But didn't the travel times actually suffer for other cars in that T2 trial on Tamaki Drive?

IIRC, yes. Impact on buses was minimal, almost margin-of-error stuff, but the impact on non-T2 using cars was significant. Stereotypical selfishness by the Range Rover-owning St Heliers set.

That needs to start at the very top, with judicious clue-by-four application to the various local body pollie tubbies who want to make the Dominion Road bus lanes into T2 lanes.

I particularly love how the proposal means that instead of buses having full priority at peak times, they would?

They could rent some poor people surely? It's so hard being rich, on top of taxes this bus lane persecution really is too much.

This isn't Jakarta, yet. The practice was recently outlawed there, IIRC.

what are we paying extra for I wonder?

Joyce's anti-public transport attitude, that's what. It's all about farebox recovery ratios, and the Minister for Trucking's insistence that all forms of non-road and public transport pay their way in as-close-as-possible-to full so that he can provide more invisible subsidies to his?

http://publicaddress.net/default,6705.sm

Maybe because she's the sort of feminist who thinks abortion causes breast cancer. Maybe because her talk will be based on this kind of non-evidence.

and I was amused by this Family First press release:

Come to School Ball ? Have Sex
Family First Media Release 29 July 10
Family First NZ is shocked?

Either beneficial or neutral impact on the child as long as:
1.?