9.05.2018

Replacement Workers – Are the times (and the law) changing?

Replacement Workers – Are the times (and the law) changing?

On 13 June the Employment Relations (Continuity of Labour) Amendment Bill was drawn from the ballot of private members’ bills, meaning that it will soon be introduced to Parliament and debated in the House.  This Bill targets section 97 of the Employment Relations Act 2000.

As it currently stands, section 97 permits employers to employ or engage another person to perform the work of a striking or locked out employee in limited circumstances.  That is, when employees are lawfully on strike or locked out, an employer cannot require non-striking or non-locked out employees to perform their work.  Nor can an employer employ new workers to perform those tasks except on health or safety grounds.

The Bill aims to repeal section 97 completely.  The explanatory note attached to the Bill justifies this proposed repeal on the grounds that section 97 creates an imbalance between unions and employers, and that “restricting the ability of employers to engage temporary replacement labour can have a considerable impact on the productivity and financial viability of an organisation”. 

The National Party has promised to support the Bill through its first reading and to Select Committee.  It has not committed to anything further than that.  It is likely that the Bill will need the support of ACT and either United Future or New Zealand First to even get to Select Committee, as the Opposition are lining up against any repeal of section 97.  We note that Peter Dunne of United Future, a potential supporter, has signalled he will vote against the Bill.  That leaves Winston Peters as the likely kingmaker.

We will keep an eye out on developments with this Bill, as it could potentially have a significant impact on strikes and lock outs.

Do you need expert legal advice?
Contact the expert team at Hesketh Henry.
Kerry_100x100 1
Media contact - Kerry Browne
Please contact Kerry with any media enquiries and with any questions related to marketing or sponsorships on +64 9 375 8747 or via email.

Related Articles / Insights & Opinion

LIQUIDATED DAMAGES
When Actual Delay Losses Exceed Liquidated Damages
14.11.2018 Posted in Construction Law
So long, farewell, auf wiedersehen, goodbye…
When the employment relationship comes to an end, for whatever reason, there are still a few boxes to be ticked. So what needs to be done before you can bid each other a (hopefully) fond farewell?
5.11.2018 Posted in Employment Law
WorkSafe v Athenberry Holdings Ltd: The Competent Contractor?
Defining health and safety duties in a contracting situation is rarely straightforward.
1.11.2018 Posted in Health & Safety Law
Managing Partner Honoured with German Award
Erich Bachmann, the Managing Partner of Auckland based commercial law firm Hesketh Henry, has been awarded the Cross of the Order of Merit with Ribbon of the Federal Republic of Germany (Verdienstkreu...
30.10.2018
Building and Construction Law Journal
Construction partner, Nick Gillies, has been published in the latest Building and Construction Law Journal ((2018) 34 BCL 179).
18.10.2018 Posted in Construction Law
EBERT CONSTRUCTION: RECEIVERSHIP AND LIQUIDATION
Introduction Following our Initial Note, the receivers of Ebert Construction Ltd (Ebert) released their first report on 1 October 2018.  Then, on 3 October 2018, Ebert put itself into liquidation, wi...
Pruning Back Liability: Do Contractual Arrangements Hold the Key?
The first defended hearing under the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (HSWA), WorkSafe v Athenberry Holdings Ltd, required the District Court to consider the ability of a business (a PCBU) to influe...
9.10.2018 Posted in Health & Safety Law
Send us an enquiry
For expert legal advice, please complete the form below or call us on (09) 375 8700.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.