Workplace Relations Minister Brooke van Velden responds to questions from reporters at Parliament. Photo \/ Mark Mitchell<\/p>\n
Van Velden told reporters at Parliament the premise of the law changes was to \u201cbuild some business confidence to make it easier to hire people across the wider economy\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe know there are many companies out there that are actually quite fearful of [having] a go on a new worker because they are afraid of what will happen if it doesn\u2019t work out.\u201d <\/p>\n
Personal grievances <\/p>\n
Greater weight will be given to the behaviour of employees when setting remedies for personal grievances<\/a>. In these cases, no remedies would be available if an employee is dismissed for serious misconduct. <\/p>\n Meanwhile, lesser misconduct could reduce remedies by up to 100% with no option for reinstatement or compensation for hurt and humiliation if an employee was found to have contributed to their personal grievance. <\/p>\n According to law firm Dentons, \u201cwhile employees will still be able to sue, many employers will feel able to dismiss employees without any process where remedies cannot be awarded\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cThis amendment may also encourage employers to dismiss an employee who they deem to have contributed to any potential personal grievance without due process (for example, where there are significant performance concerns), knowing that the consequences for them will be limited due to the reduced remedies available for the employee.\u201d<\/p>\n $200k threshold <\/p>\n Under the sweeping changes to personal grievances, people who earn more than $200,000 per year will not be able to pursue an unjustified dismissal claim against their employer. This is unless they had opted out of this clause by contract. <\/p>\n The legislation says these earners were \u201clikely to have high bargaining power\u201d and the changes would provide greater \u201cflexibility and certainty in the dismissal process for employees who have a significant impact on organisation performance\u201d.<\/p>\n Who is a contractor? <\/p>\n The legislation defines who is an \u201cemployee\u201d and who is a \u201ccontractor\u201d. It comes swiftly after the landmark Supreme Court ruling<\/a> where Uber drivers won their battle to be treated as employees (and therefore be subject to employee entitlements like minimum wage and leave) rather than contractors. <\/p>\n According to law firm Buddle Findlay, \u201cthe wider impacts of this decision will likely be countered by the Employment Relations Amendment Bill\u201d which introduces a new \u201cgateway test\u201d that limits a workers\u2019 ability to challenge their employment status. <\/p>\n And as Douglas Lawyers explains, under previous 2000 employment law, individuals who were working as independent contractors could apply to the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) or the court to claim that the \u201creal nature\u201d of the relationship is that of employment. <\/p>\n Under the law, a person would be a \u201cspecified contractor\u201d if the following \u201cgateway test\u201d is met: <\/p>\n There is a written agreement that specifies the worker is an independent contractor.The business does not stop the worker from working for others including competitors. The worker isn\u2019t required to work at certain times, days, or for a minimum period and is able to sub-contract the work.\u00a0An employer can request the subcontractor is vetted. The business cannot terminate the contract if the worker does not accept additional work.<\/p>\n If all the above factors are met, that contractor will not be able to raise legal claims with the court regarding their employment status.<\/p>\n \u201830-day rule\u2019 gone <\/p>\n If the legislation is enacted, the \u201c30-day rule\u201d will be scrapped. Currently, new employees are automatically covered by a unionised collective agreement<\/a> for the first 30 days of their employment before choosing whether they want to join the union. <\/p>\n Under the amendments, employers would only be required to inform new employees of the existence of a collective agreement and provide a copy. In essence, repealing the \u201c30 day rule\u201d means employers and employees can negotiate an individual agreement from the start. <\/p>\nThe legislation includes a definition of a contractor. Photo \/ NZME<\/p>\n