|
Former employees of Event Cinemas are protesting at being laid off with only two weeks redundancy pay. They say that one of their goals is to “to make other people aware of the lack of any legal requirement to pay reasonable redundancy pay.”
It is true that most employees in New Zealand have zero entitlement to redundancy pay. We think this is wrong as a redundancy is usually a huge loss. Employees need and deserve monetary compensation to help them get back on their feet, however, the reality is that widespread redundancy compensation is not likely. What can an employee do? Firstly, if you are considering a job offer, try to negotiate an employment agreement that includes a redundancy package. Secondly, if you are being made redundant and have no redundancy payment coming to you – don’t necessarily accept no for an answer. Many redundancies are handled badly and this opens the door for a personal grievance and compensation. If you would like to discuss your situation, please call or email for a confidential, no obligation, discussion.
0 Comments
This week Sanford and fish processing company Pelco were ordered to pay $65,000 for an accident in which an employee had the skin ripped off her hand after catching it in a winch. New Zealand workplaces have an appalling safety record. In a recent 12 month period, 102 employees died at work, 378 more suffered serious injuries, and the cost of work related injuries and disease was $3.5 billion.
Safety is like happiness, many employers think they can save money by disregarding the well being of employees. The human cost doesn’t figure. Google and other companies have shown that an increase in employee happiness is actually good for the bottom line. It is the same with safety. Not only does a lack of safety have tangible economic costs, the example of Alcoa (Aluminum Company of America) shows that a safe workplace is a more profitable workplace. In 1987 a new chief executive at Alcoa made safety his sole focus. Investors were horrified and denounced O’Neill as a “crazy hippie.” Within a year Alcoa’s profits hit a record high. By the time O’Neill retired, the market value of Alco had increased by $27 billion. We have a message for New Zealand employers: Safety pays! Why does Google have the happiest employees? Google studies its employees to find out how to make them happy. Its studies have ranged from the optimal size of lunch room tables (employees like long tables so they can talk to a variety of people), to how to encourage employees to save more for their retirement. One issue Google solved was the high rate of turn over amongst female staff. By extending paid maternity leave to 5 months the company saved more on staff recruitment costs than it spent on the increased benefits. Much of Google’s research is available to human resources departments in other companies.
Most companies aren’t as profitable as Google, and sadly many don’t seem to care what makes their employees happy, however, what the Google example shows is that increased staff happiness can lead to increased profits. All employers could take something from the Google example. Take employee happiness seriously and not only will you have fewer personal grievance claims, but profitability will also benefit. A win/win solution for everyone. In a recent Employment Relations Authority case the Bay of Plenty District Health Board was ordered to pay staff over $100,000 for wages short paid over a period of 4 years. Staff working at night were paid time and a half instead of the agreed double time rate. The error could have remained undetected for several more years had it not been found by a new staff member called in to work late. If a large employer like a District Health Board, with much greater HR and other resources than the average employer, can get it wrong, any employer can get it wrong. The moral of this story is to always check your pay slip. Check that you are being paid the expected wages and allowances and that tax is being deducted at the right rate.
Debra Wilson was not only expected to drive an unsafe car during her employment at the Life Education Trust (Rodney) she was also subsequently unjustifiably dismissed.
Charities are supposed to make a difference to the community, and because of their philanthropic nature most people hope that they behave well to all those they come into contact with, including their employees. Unfortunately, in our experience, charities are over represented in personal grievance claims. In other words, and on average, charities are worse employers than commercial businesses. This is a generalisation and we know that there are many fine charities that treat their people well, however, looking at averages we are disappointed by how often we have had to represent employees who have been mistreated by their charity employer. What's your experience? Problems in the employment relationship often lead to the employer and employee attending mediation at the Department of Labour. If the issues are resolved the parties will sign a “record of settlement.” Agreements reached privately can also be signed off by a mediator which then gives them the same legal status as a settlement reached at mediation.
These settlements are legally binding. Almost always they contain provisions regarding confidentiality and for the payment of money by the employer to the employee. In the recent case of Joumaa v Pita Doctors Ltd the employer failed to make payment on the due date because it was experiencing serious financial difficulties. The Employment Relations Authority punished the employer’s failure by ordering that it pay a further $300 to Mr. Joumaa. Had it not been for the fact that the employer was experiencing financial hardship; the penalty would probably have been much greater. In our experience, most employers take their obligations under these agreements seriously, and it is rare that there are difficulties once an agreement has been reached, however, if there are difficulties something can be done about it. Terry Watson was dismissed by his employer because of misconduct towards other employees. Mr. Watson took a personal grievance claim against his former employer, Oceana Gold, and they made him a settlement offer that included:
This case illustrates two points. Firstly, that it usually better for you as an employee to settle your case as early in the process as possible - at the exit negotiation or mediation stage. Early settlement usually leads to the best financial outcome for the employee (and the employer!), it allows for confidentiality and references, it is quick, and it keeps legal costs as low as possible. Naturally, not every case is able to be settled and some do have to be taken to the ERA, however, employees need to be careful that if they do choose to take their case to the ERA that this is in their best interests. The second point is this: we don’t know what legal advice Watson was given and we make no comment or criticism of his representative, but a quick internet search shows that there are many employment lawyers who seem to view the Employment Relations Authority, or worse, the Employment Court, as the first and only port of call. The only thing that can be guaranteed from that kind of tactic is large legal fees. When choosing someone to act for you, choose carefully. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10859785 Coke’s departing managing director says that New Zealanders have an anti corporate mentality and that this is stifling business growth.
We say that corporates are responsible for most of this negativity. Most New Zealanders have a sense of fairness and when things happen that go against that they don’t like it. Multi million dollar senior management salaries, corporates able to change New Zealand’s laws to please themselves (Warner Brothers), and multinationals who pay unfairly small amounts of tax (Facebook paid less than $14,500 tax in NZ last year and is part of a tax shifting exercise by corporates that denies $1.5 billion of taxes to New Zealand) are factors that reduce goodwill. While senior executives are entitled to take the large salaries offered to them, and multinationals are entitled to exploit laws that allow them to pay little tax, it grates when they fail to see how this type of behaviour offends most New Zealanders. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10859869 The Herald recently reported that increasing numbers of employees are being overwhelmed by work pressures. This is an issue we frequently come across. The problem seems to occur most often to professionals and managers. The causes include pressure to work longer and harder because of a difficult trading environment, employees who leave not being replaced (forcing other employees to take up additional work for which they may have no spare capacity), bad management at a more senior level, and management using work pressure as a tool to force an employee out. While the underlying reasons may differ, the effect on the employee is usually the same: increasing levels of stress and negative effects on health. The health effects include psychological issues (depression, insomnia and feeling stressed out), as well as physical. If your employer can’t, or won’t, take steps to ensure that your workload is safe and manageable then you owe it to yourself, and your family, to seek help. We have helped many employees to resolve work situations involving extreme ongoing stress. Please talk to us if you have any concerns.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10859339 We have written before about the perils of employees seeking ridiculous amounts. Not only do silly claims signal to the employer’s representative that the employee doesn’t know what they are doing; it also puts up a barrier to any kind of negotiated resolution. A negotiated resolution is almost always the best way forward as it ensures a speedy outcome at the least cost. Negotiated resolutions are also more likely to result in confidentiality and positive references – intangible benefits worth having. If you are an employee, who has been dismissed or disadvantaged, don’t be like the employee in this recent case who sought payment for unused sick leave (almost never claimable) and lost wages of $569,348 when his actual loss was about 2% of that amount.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/8162672/Worker-wins-case-over-dismissal |
Archives
May 2018
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed