Contents Page: NZJER, 2008, 33(3)Name

Prue Hyman

Title

Pay Equity and Equal Employment
Opportunity in New Zealand:
Developments 2006/2008 andEvaluation

Page
Number

1-15

Stefan Kesting & Scott
Fargher

The Effect of Early Childhood
Education and Care (ECE) Costs on
the Labour Force Participation of
Parents in New Zealand

Katherine Ravenswood

The role of the State in familyfriendly policy: An analysis ofLabour-led government policy

34-44

John Wren

A Contested Workplace: Situating
New Zealand’s OHSM Regulatory
Practice within the Literature – anIntroduction to the Policy History
and Regulatory Debates

45-69

David Williams,
Candice Harris andJohn Parker

I love you – goodbye: Exit
Interviews and Turnover in the
New Zealand Hotel Industry

70-90

Kirsty Raubenheimer

Erling Rasmussen & Colin
Ross

Research Note: A Research Note:
Employee-focused corporate social
responsibility reporting in thebanking industry
Chronicle: June–September, 2008

16-33

91-104105-113

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15

Pay Equity and Equal Employment Opportunity in New Zealand:
Developments 2006/2008 and Evaluation
PRUE HYMAN*

Abstract
This paper is the third in a series of papers updating developments relating to pay equity andEEO and evaluating their impact. As with the previous papers, it focuses primarily on gender,
but also discusses the overall situation and touches on issues related to ethnicity, age anddisability. In the last two years, the broad public sector, assisted by the Pay and Employment
Equity Unit in the Department of Labour, has made significant progress in reporting on
gender issues in most departments and in some parts of the public health and education sector,
but practical action to reduce remaining gender pay gaps is a slow process. This paper will
discuss these public sector processes and also the private sector situation in the context of aperiod where women have surpassed men in terms of education outcomes, therefore, the needfor vigilance around women’s position in the labour market is increasingly questioned. With
respect to ethnicity, despite non-discrimination legislation, there is substantial evidence ofproblems encountered by many immigrants entering the labour market. The paper will
examine recent evidence on discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, age, disability andreports/recommendations for its elimination.

Introduction
This paper is the third in a series of papers updating developments relating to pay equity andEqual Employment Opportunity (EEO) and evaluating their impact. The 2006 paper
concluded that reductions in gender and ethnic inequality in educational and other humancapital acquisition have occurred partly from government action, however, partly in spite of it,they were likely to continue, given social change, pressure from the groups previously denied
equal access, and the economic imperatives to use all our labour resources fully (see Hyman,2006). These factors (i.e. government action, social change, etc) were assessed to be of greater
significance than legal requirements and policy initiatives towards employment equity(Hyman, 2008). These predictions were close to the mark, however, current world economic,
financial, and credit turmoil makes ongoing progress more uncertain. This paper examinesand evaluates developments in pay equity and EEO in the last two years. It focuses mainly on
gender issues but also touches on other dimensions of EEO, including age, disability andethnicity.

*

Adjunct Professor of Gender and Women’s Studies, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand,
Prue.Hyman@vuw.ac.nz

1New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15

Pay and Employment Equity (PEE) in the Broad Public Sector
The establishment and early work of the Department of Labour’s Pay and Employment Equity
Unit, in accordance with recommendations from the 2004 Taskforce on Pay & Employment
Equity in the Public Service, Public Education and Public Health, was a major focus of my2006 paper. Since then, Phase One of the work has been almost completed, with 35 of the 39
core public service organisations having finished their reviews. In the public health sector, 5District Health Boards (DHBs) have completed reviews and others a validation process,leading to a Report and Response Plan which has gone to the Minister of Health. The public
education sector is similarly placed with respect to schools and kindergartens. In Phase Two,local governments have started its reviews, with Gisborne District and Waitakere City
Councils being the pioneers, together with three CRIs, while 14 polytechnics/institutes oftechnology and Te Wananga o Aotearoa are starting the tertiary education sector process anddiscussions are under way with universities. The Unit has provided tools and assistance toorganisations undertaking reviews, with the processes streamlined and made more consistent,with a view to higher standards in later reviews. This was made possible through thedevelopment of the Pay and Employment Equity Analysis Tool (PEEAT), to help generate therelevant gender profiles from human resources data. The Unit’s website,www.dol.govt.nz/services/PayAndEmploymentEquity/index.asp, is extremely informative,
with case studies of reviews from a number of departments, detail of the tools used, and a
regular newsletter.
The emerging themes from completed reviews are: lower starting salaries for women, barriers
to career development, lower performance pay, and pay gaps ranging from 3% to 25%,
varying by department and occupation. Women’s incomes also tended to be lower in female
dominated occupations. Some reviews found that such occupations received lower
remuneration than male dominated occupations of similar job size – a major equal pay forwork of equal value issue/pay equity. Several reports did not know if the job sizing had been
done in a gender neutral manner, while others attributed the result to market factors, the issue
which has long been the nub of the debate between equal value advocates and opponents.
Comparisons are often made within roles, where the gaps are fairly small, though still
important, bringing up EEO issues. However, it is the gaps between roles, raising equal value
issues, where little is said, other than to note that female median salaries are low in female
dominated work.
A draft overview paper being prepared by the Pay and Employment Equity Unit includes
material on pay and employment equity issues for several specific groups of employees. One
such group is administrative/clerical support workers. In particular, they have been recognised
in many reviews as a group whose pay, opportunities and experiences of fairness and respectdeserve attention. The DHBs response plan recommends investigating whether there is scopefor a full pay investigation for clerical workers. In the majority of reviews administrative
support staff have been found to be the lowest paid occupation, and in every case they are afemale-dominated group. Administrative staff also typically have limited or no opportunities
for career (and pay) progression. In some reviews they have been found to work overtime thatis unpaid when other staff groups receive overtime pay. Some reviews have recommended a
pay increase for these employees (and in some cases this has occurred already). A number ofreviews have recommended that the pay of administrative staff be the subject of an in-housejob evaluation. Some organisations have introduced limited career steps for clerical workers.

2

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15

Ongoing monitoring is essential in this and many other areas, including starting salaries. One
review saw this as simply a market issue while others suggested educating managers andhaving greater transparency about pay rates – the latter against many recent trends. The
assumption that this would enable women to be able to bargain their starting rates more
assertively, however, removing the gender disparity, is disputable. There is literature showingthat gender related socialisation is an important factor on behaviour differences in this area.
Consistency of offers based on standard criteria may be a better approach.
An informative forum, organised by the Unit, was held in April 2008, where its Director,
Philippa Hall, outlined the progress to date on these reviews, the tools, and the extension of
the review process. One important upcoming development is a limited extension to the private
sector, covering responsible contract policy for government-funded outsourced services inparts of the health sector. In November 2007, Cabinet agreed that pay and employment equity
should extend to all DHB employees delivering services that a DHB has an operational
obligation to ensure are provided, irrespective of whether they were employed directly by the
DHB or by an organisation contracted to it. Another is a start on the first two pay
investigations recommended by reviews, covering CYFS social workers and special education
support workers. The latter work one-to-one with special needs children and are a female
dominated group, working part time and without security of tenure, earning from $13 to$17.60 per hour. The starting wage is now only just above the national minimum of $12 perhour, as of April 1 2008. Gender neutral job evaluation (the EJE scheme) has been used tomake comparisons of the value of the work against prison officers and hospital orderlies andthe results will be available shortly.
Two other PEE sponsored projects under way are broader exercises to evaluate female
dominated work in the services sector. The first is designed to identify and value hidden
service sector skills common in female dominated jobs. In working with sick older people, thepossible unnamed skills outlined included tact, taboos (managing to talk about areas normally
too hard to raise, such as organ harvesting), tactility (subtle responsiveness to physical cues)and tacitness (fast responses to situations through unofficial knowledge). This approach has
been used to generate a typology of three types of skill sets and levels in service work,
awareness shaping, interaction/relationship shaping, and coordinating skills. The final productwill include tools and guidelines for use in recruitment and performance management.
The second is the application of the Equitable Job Evaluation scheme–designed by PEE
consultants – to community support workers for people with intellectual disabilities living inhouses provided by the not for profit and private sectors. With very low wages determinedprimarily by public sector funding formulae, this female dominated job (top rate $16.20 per
hour: 76% female) makes emotional, sensory, and physical demands and carries
responsibilities which could be missed in many job evaluation schemes. Employers, several ofwhich were experiencing staff and skill shortages, supported the project, being powerless toraise wages unless the government is prepared to fund such increases. Comparators used weretherapy assistants employed by DHBs, a fairly similar female underpaid group but higher paid
than the support workers, and correction officers, a male dominated group with considerably
higher pay than both. All were at ANZSCO skill level 4 and all were found to have similar
total job point scores, albeit with different patterns on the various factors. Correction officers’
pay increases with internal training to $51,257, $17,551 more than community social workers(DOL PEE Steering Group, 2008).

3

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15

There is no policy or legislation enabling these results to yield pay increases, but they make apowerful union campaigning case, and one for employers to use in contact negotiations withgovernment. All these detailed examples from the health and education sectors in caring,support and other services work, ultimately rely on increased government expenditure fromtaxation to fund adequate wages for undervalued female dominated work. Funder-provider
splits, contracts for services and hands-off industrial relations structures make it extremely
hard to improve wages in these areas, particularly when government budgets are tight andeconomic crises loom. These issues will continue long term, due to improved medical
knowledge and technology and greater longevity requiring ever more caring work, paid andunpaid. However, with government expenditure under pressure, especially given the preelection statements of the new National government, such funding is unlikely.
A case study of homecare by Janice Burns further reinforces the issues in female dominatedcaring work. Outlined on National Equal Opportunities Network (NEON), a partnership
between the Human Rights Commission and the EEO Trust (website
http://www.neon.org.nz/), this study outlined the triple bind faced by thousands of working
women in New Zealand – poor pay, an under-valued female-dominated occupation andgovernment-funded contracting arrangements for their industry. She concluded that solutions
still appear elusive and constrained by an ideological straightjacket. She explained the way inwhich the contracting arrangements under the funder/provider split are highly noninterventionist over staff conditions and stated that:“…there appears to be no logical or empirical basis for the contract price currently
offered to providers. Any institutional knowledge within the Ministry of Health on
how the funding formula was established and how its currency is maintained seems tohave long gone... At the moment the government funds at a level that does not support
the pay and employment equity goals it supports for its own staff” (Burns, 2007).
Burns recommended“four remedial steps:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Undertake an assessment of the actual skills required for quality homecare
work and the market rate for these skills
Assess the costs to the employer of building a quality and sustainable
workforce
Develop a funding formula that fairly includes all the costs to provider
businesses (including reasonable profit margins to assist business survival)
Develop government contracting minimum standards that requires evidence
based on good labour practices of those receiving homecare provisioncontracts. This would include fair pay and employment conditions, meeting
legal requirements around provisions such as sick leave and holiday pay,
and covering all costs associated with the performance of the job” (ibid).

The National Advisory Council on the Employment of Women celebrated its 40th anniversary
in September 2007. Their review of the period and surveys of critical issues today areexcellent resources (NACEW, 2007; 2008). The latter includes arguments for the efficiency
case, in addition to the equity case, for pay equity, or more particularly equal pay for work ofequal value.

4New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15“As well as considerations of fair pay, the lack of recognition of the full range of skills
and responsibilities involved in many female dominated occupations is inefficient.
Where occupations are undervalued, ‘productive potential’ tends to be constrained asa consequence of both inadequate recognition of qualifications, and limited access totraining or career paths. The establishment of autonomy along with pay parity for
midwives is an example of a productivity gain to society through the recognition thatmidwives had the skills to practice autonomously. NACEW supports the focus onachieving pay equity in the public sector being extended to the private sector in thenear future” (NACEW 2008: 15).
NACEW’s current work programme prioritises four areas: quality of work, Maori and Pacific
Women’s Employment, and caring and working.
Before turning to private sector issues and those covering all employees, it should be
mentioned that the ongoing provisions of the State Sector Act, 1988, require Public Service
CEOs to operate as ‘good employers’ which, inter alia, involve proactive Equal Employment
Opportunities programmes, covering at a minimum: Maori; women; ethnic minority groups;
and persons with disabilities. Some monitoring of progress for each group ensures a degree ofaccountability and some progress has been made for all groups.

Equal Employment Opportunity and the Minimum Code – Gender andFamily Issues
In the private sector, there are indicators showing that there is still a long way to go to achieve
gender equality. These include the low representation of women in the modern apprenticeshipscheme at one end of the employment spectrum and the miniscule improvement with respect
to directorships of private sector companies at the other. The top 100 firms on the New
Zealand Stock Exchange still had only 8.65% women directors in 2008, up from 7.13% in2006 and 5% in 2003 (Human Rights Commission, 2008a). The Modern Apprenticeshipscheme, covering about 10,000 young people, is mainly a male domain with the female
proportion having increased only from 6.6% in 2003 to 8.5% in March 2006 and then 9.3% inDecember 2007. Women were over one-third of participants in tourism, public sector, retail,hospitality and seafood, but a miniscule proportion in the male traditional areas (15 out of
1536 in engineering and 5 out of 1618 in building and construction, the two largest groups
overall). Clearly, thirty years of work to encourage women into these trades has had little
impact.
A piece of research undertaken by the New Zealand Council for Educational Research for the
Ministry of Women’s Affairs (Ministry of Women’s Affairs, 2008) investigated young
people’s career decisions with particular reference to gender segregation in the trades. It
showed that Industry Training Authority courses, covering a much larger group of over
125,000 employees, show similar gender segregation. While 28% of trainees at September
2006 were women, only similar areas to the Modern Apprenticeship Scheme were genderbalanced. In forestry, for example, only 9% of trainees were women while hairdressing andcommunity support services were female dominated.
The aim of the study was to examine the interconnections between gender, gendered ideas,
and career decision making on ‘how and why’ young people navigate to, or avoid tradesrelated pathways. It was commissioned as part of MWA’s plan to improve the economic

5New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15

independence of New Zealand women and to decrease gender segregation in the workforce.
The research included focus groups and interviews with young people ranging from juniorsecondary students to fully qualified employees, including 86 young women and men in
trades-related pathways. It found that:“…gender stereotypes and dominant hetero-normative discourse continue to have amajor influence on young people as they imagine and try out possible selves”, eventhough “the narratives of some of the young tradeswomen interviewed disrupted –transcended even – gender-normative discourses to varying degrees” (Ministry of
Women’s Affairs, 2008, p.v).
Recommendations included initiatives involving many agencies on career decision making
and extensions of the skill sets seen as needed in trade training to include financial
information technology, customer service, people and relationship skills, as well as problem
solving, innovation, creativity, design, complex project management, and the ability to adapt
to change.
The fact that women in trades and factory jobs still often have to deal with discrimination is
illustrated by one long running case. In June 2007, the High Court rejected Talley’s appeal
against the 2005 Human Rights Tribunal decision ruling that the company had discriminatedagainst Nelson woman, Caitlin Lewis. She had been a fish trimmer at Talley’s Motueka fishprocessing plant from 1999 to 2001, and was prevented from being a filleter because she wasa woman (for more detail on the earlier and recent material, see Hyman, 2007; 2008). The
Court ruled that this was a clear case of gender discrimination and awarded her compensation
for lost earnings. The Human Rights Commission described the decision as a ‘landmark’ win
against sex discrimination. The details of the judgement on the two jobs and practices atTalley’s make fascinating reading. As in so many jobs, the realities of work go well beyond
the job titles. The Court concluded that “the variations identified in the roles do not in ourview alter the essential similarity” (High Court, 2007: 43). The judgment noted that, thoughboth jobs required superior knife skills, Talley’s did not promote skilled trimmers, who wereinvariably women, to fill vacancies in the filleting line, preferring to employ totally untrained
people and give them minimal instruction.
“The reason she received less money was because she was made a trimmer, and thereason she was made a trimmer was because she was a woman - Talleys did not
directly pay her less because she was a woman, but discrimination need not bedeliberate” (ibid: 52).
It added that Talley’s was entitled to pay one position more than the other, but could notprohibit people from moving between the jobs because of their sex.
NACEW’s involvement in pay and employment equity includes a partnership with the Human
Resources Institute of New Zealand to make available resources adapted from PEE tools forthe private sector. It is “designed to assist employers to assess where they stand so they canbe confident about their practices and address any inequities that become apparent”, (HRINZ,
2008). It points out that:“…men can also be adversely affected by unequal pay and employment. Although
they are likely to earn more than women, the trade-off can be continuous, full-time,
long-term involvement in employment even if they would like more choice aroundwork and life options. New Zealand and international research shows that men,
6

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15

particularly young men, would like to be more involved with their children but lower
women’s pay is one reason why mothers continue to be the primary caregivers andfathers the primary breadwinners” (ibid).
The rationale for ensuring pay and employment equity is covered, together with downloadable
resources on the business case and how to do taster or full reviews.
Minimum code provisions, such as the minimum wage, sick leave, holiday provisions andparental leave, together with some government programmes, such as provision and subsidies
for child care, and policies, for example those on breastfeeding in the workplace, also have
EEO impacts. Those which particularly affect parents with dependent children havesubstantial gender impacts in practice, since women continue to take the major role in family
related responsibilities despite the point made above that many men would like to be more
involved. The CTU estimates that of the 91,000 workers for whom the latest minimum wage
boost (in April 2008 to $12 per hour) directly led to a pay rise, 61,000 were women. Theirsubmission in 2007 sought a minimum wage indexed to 66% of the average wage, which
would raise it to $15 per hour. They also sought an increase from 80% to 90% of theminimum wage for the trainee rate which recently replaced the youth rate. The Greens andMaori parties supported, in 2008 election, manifestos this immediate increase to $15. Maori
and Pacific workers, especially women, are even more concentrated than other women in low
paid work.
Further improvements to parental leave eligibility, particularly for casual and seasonal
workers, and to the length of leave and level of payment were foreshadowed in some Labour
pre-election speeches but cut from early plans when the economic crisis hit and are highly
unlikely to be taken up by a National led government. Creating family friendly workplaces
and assisting individuals to secure a satisfactory work life balance is now a common mantra.
The Flexible Employment Arrangements Act, 2007 guarantees a right to request flexible
working hours by parents with young or disabled children. While requests rather than major
obligations are imposed by this approach, it could change the climate as the case with similar
legislation in the U.K. However, there was clear evidence in the PEE reviews of part time
work and requests for flexibility being seen as a lack of commitment to the job and holdingback career options, especially for women. An area where some progress for women is being
made is that of the protection for breastfeeding in the workplace. In addition to legislating forminimum meal and rest break requirements, amendments to the Employment Relations Act in2008 require employers to provide, where reasonable and practicable, facilities and breaks forbreastfeeding. The qualification may limit real impacts, but at least a code of employment
practice and guidelines is supplied. However, some employers still flout anti-discrimination
law with respect to parenting. A waitress and a bar manager have recently been awarded
compensation by the Employment Relations Authority for wrongful dismissal following each
informing their employers of their pregnancy.
Clearly, issues of how to ensure that employees can combine paid and caring work arereceiving ever more attention, although as already indicated, there is a great deal of
ambivalence in dealing with them. The EEO Trust, the Families Commission and theDepartment of Labour are among the organisations advocating for family friendly culturesand policies, and a good edited collection explores the complexities and nuances for both
women and men, including unpaid caregivers, Maori and Pacific women, and older womenparenting for the second time (Waring and Fouche, 2007). The Families Commission
researched perceptions and experiences of flexible work using focus groups, case studies anda survey of 1,000 people. The benefits for families were clear in terms of reduced stress levels
7New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15

and improved quality of time with families. However, substantial numbers reported that they
did not have the flexibility they wanted while others experienced a trade off of flexibility forlower pay and status. The culture of a workplace played a big part in whether or not staff felt
able to seek flexible work arrangements, with negative attitudes of managers and colleagues
the main barrier, even when there were, theoretically, supportive policies in place (Families
Commission, 2008a). By investigating how parents working non-standard hours organisedcare for their preschool children, the Commission found that while a few had ideal childcarearrangements, others were not adequately supported or had to make complex arrangements(Families Commission, 2008b). An EEO Trust pilot research project covering employees
from 15 workplaces explored the relationships between work-life balance, employee
engagement, discretionary effort and productivity. The relationships which emerge arecomplex, but confirm previous literature including that of the Families Commission whichindicates that just having work-life initiatives is not enough to achieve increased performanceand productivity – there needs also to be a supportive workplace culture. Senior managers,
who are a crucial factor in the implementation of work-life strategies, tended to rate theirworkplace’s work-life culture higher than their lower level staff (EEO Trust, 2007).
Caveats about the reality of family friendly (or work life balance or flexibility in workplaces)
rhetoric and policies have already been raised. Some commentators go further in their
sceptical analyses, for example, arguing that social and economic goals in this area are notmutually compatible. One thesis on the politics of work life balance find that work life
balance has “negative implications for fairness and equality, amongst New Zealand workers
and between men and women. However, the gender-neutral and individualised language ofwork life balance masks its discriminatory systemic effects” (Domett, 2006: 1). Tania Domett
conducted two organisational case studies as well as interviewing key stakeholders. She
found, perhaps inevitably, that work life balance is primarily sold to business for its efficiency
gains – or “its capacity to reinforce and support rather than cushion market forces” (ibid: 58).
This tends to lead to a two-tier approach where valued white-collar professional workers,
mainly women, have easier access to its provisions, but, nevertheless, often lose out on career
progress, as suggested earlier from PEE work. Meanwhile, men tend to be constrained fromattempting to use such policies because of the persistence of the woman as caregiver, men as
breadwinner model and the threats to their pay and careers. “In this way, both men andwomen are captive to historically embedded gender roles, structures, and norms” (ibid: 58).
Lower level workers have even less bargaining power and their insecure patterns of perilous
work may be misrepresented as allowing work-life balance.
A related challenge to the whole basis of the approach of EEO implementation in practiceincludes a detailed case study of an unsuccessful application for some special conditions(Simon-Kumar, 2008). This concerned a full time woman employee in the public service
who, as a sole parent with child care issues, sought to work additional hours at one period(when her child was overseas with the father) to accumulate some time off in lieu for a period
when she would have sole custody. Such time in lieu was not within current policy in theemployee’s position but was viewed by the applicant as reasonable in her circumstances, andgiven the policies, guidelines, and strategies of her organisation, which is also covered by theState Sector Act EEO provisions mentioned earlier. It was declined on the basis that work life
balance initiatives “need to be balanced with fair and equitable treatment of all staff, meetingbusiness requirements, and being consistent with other HR policies” (ibid, p 28), with theparticular area of work seen as not suitable for time banking and the lack of normal time inlieu provisions in her position. Simon-Kumar (2008) uses discourse analysis to discuss thedifferent interpretations of fairness, equity, and discrimination adopted by the applicant andthe employers. For the claimant, fairness should recognise difference and social disadvantage,
8

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15

while for the employer it was interpreted in terms of equal and the same treatment for all. The
employer’s understanding of EEO is largely framed by a liberal managerial discourse, rather
than the more radical model which underlies the social justice EEO and collectivist claims for
disadvantaged groups

Gender Issues – Are Women still Disadvantaged in the Labour Market?
Earlier sections of this paper have pointed to areas where women remain disadvantaged in thelabour market, including their predominance in low paid work. In addition, there is only very
slow progress on closing the overall gender earnings gap – the female male earnings ratio in
the June 2008 Quarterly Employment Survey is 87.4% for average hourly earnings and 79.6%
for average weekly earnings. Furthermore, public sector and recent graduates starting salaries
data, from NZVCC surveys, appear to indicate an ongoing problem. However, with New
Zealand women’s educational achievements having caught up to or surpassed those of men’sin many respects, some commentators argue that equality has been achieved or exceeded andmale disadvantage needs addressing, at least in the education system. Women now constituteover half of new graduates; in 2006 63% of Bachelor degree completions, 58% of Masters
and 51% of Doctorates. However, achievements by women are, at times, portrayed as being at
the expense of men and any special provisions to lift the position of Maori and other ethnic
groups or women regarded with suspicion, whether in the educational system or in
employment. This seems unfortunate that as the educational outcomes for both genders is infact improving yet disadvantages in the labour market for women still continue. Alarm about
the female majority of students may be excessive when the number of tertiary students is still
growing fairly rapidly and the number of male students with it, the number of females is
simply increasing faster. More sophisticated analyses of gender and ethnic gaps, including theheterogeneity of choices and outcomes for both women and men and the role of choice arecalled for in a paper discussing the issues in detail – when does a minor difference become aworrying disparity? (Callister, Leather and Holt, 2008).
One aspect of these debates is whether there is an ongoing justification for women-only
scholarships. This has been queried by Paul Callister, lead author of the paper cited above,
who has asked the Human Rights Commission (HRC) to consider the question. The legal
justification for exemption of women-only scholarships from the gender discrimination
provisions of New Zealand human rights legislation rests on redressing past discrimination.
Callister believes that women-only scholarships should now be made gender-neutral soanyone in need could apply. He also asked the Commission to rule on the legality of men-only
scholarships in fields such as early-childhood-teacher training and nursing where men havelong been underrepresented. As this is analogous to the case for women-only scholarships, thecase is strong. The HRC is working on the broader issue, but has pointed out that wherescholarships for women, men or any other specified group are offered by charitable trusts,
they are exempt from the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1993. However, the social caseneeds examination, and there are indeed more scholarships for women only than for men
only. Many of these are aimed at helping women into areas where they are still
underrepresented – engineering, physical sciences, computing. A case can still be made forthese and for second chance scholarships for older women returning to education, given thatsocietal and family expectations meant that women were less likely to get a first chance when
they were young.

9New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15

Some raising similar issues have done so in a less reasoned manner. For example, Massey Pro
Vice Chancellor James Chapman, at a School of Education graduation in which only 15 of
158 graduates were men, referred to the significant decline in interest of males in primaryschool teaching. He speculated that one of the main factors was “the gradual feminisation of
education in New Zealand, in terms of policies as well as teacher gender”. Whether it isdesirable to attract more men to teaching, and if so how, is worth debating. One way might
be to pay teachers more, both male and female, particularly in technology and mathematics,
the chief areas of shortage. But Chapman went further, according to the Manawatu Standard,
22 May, 2007, saying “New Zealand now has one of the largest gaps in the world between
male and female achievers, with men coming out the losers.” Given the labour market genderdifferences outlined above, this cannot be substantiated.

Equal Employment Opportunity – Age, Disability and Ethnicity
With the only legislative underpinnings for EEO in the private sector being the antidiscrimination provisions of industrial relations and human rights law, the main developments
have been in education and provision of resources to encourage employers to make the bestuse of all groups of employees. This is together with a diverse workforce and the workplace
flexibility discussed earlier. For example, the EEO Trust’s Work & Life Awards give
publicity to firms making effective efforts with respect to such flexibility and hopefully
inspire others as well as suggesting specific approaches. The Trust also alternates annually aDiversity Survey and a Work-Life Survey. The Diversity Survey measures how well New
Zealand workplaces access and value the talents of a diverse population and tap into theircreativity, initiative, intelligence and skills. The 2007 Survey was completed by 364
organisations which employed 242,813 people. It found that best practice organisations had
lower staff turnover than others.
A combination of the ageing of the population and skill shortages that have led to seeking
employees overseas, have created a particular focus on older workers and migrants. The Equal
Employment Opportunities Trust (http://www.eeotrust.org.nz/) publishes research, makes
good practice awards and assists employers with EEO resources. Benefits to firms adopting
such policies are emphasised in terms of a satisfied workforce and productivity enhancement.
It should be noted that the research discussed throughout this section, particularly when
individual views of employers and employees are reported, is subject to a number of provisos.
Contribution to most of these surveys is entirely voluntary, so those who are the mostinterested and favourable to the perspectives of valuing diversity are likely to take part.
Employers and managers may also, inevitably, illuminate their organisations in the best
possible light. Many of the publications give a ‘half full, half empty’ evaluation of thesituation, which probably reflects realities, but there is little objective evidence to evaluate
how effective the resources are, what proportion of employers are convinced and behave
accordingly, and what proportion of disadvantaged groups are still subject to discrimination.
With respect to older workers, these guides to employers include Valuing Experience (Human
Rights Commission et al, 2008). It is based on the perspective that smart organisations are
redesigning work to retain older workers as they need to do with the ageing of the New
Zealand workforce. Almost a quarter of New Zealand’s workforce is aged between 50 and 64
and the proportion will increase, together with those over 65. The guide provides information
on older workers’ rights and responsibilities together with tips for employers. It includes
information on recruiting and retaining older workers, work design, job structure, effective

10

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15

supervision, managing performance, training and development, and motivation and rewards.
By recognising that older workers are a valuable resource for employers at a time ofdemographic change, skill shortages, changing markets, and the need for increased
productivity, the report emphasises the importance of retaining the skills, knowledge andexperience of older employees and of not overlooking their potential when recruiting. It
includes 12 tips for employing older workers and other downloadable checklists. Employers
are enjoined that they will need to pay attention to the needs, aspirations and expectations ofolder workers, involving a willingness to do the following (extract only):“Treat people as individuals – one size rarely fits all… Deliberately consider the needsof older employees and make sure that policies and practices work as well for them as
for younger employees. Involve older workers in decisions that will impact on them.
Develop a culture that values age and experience” (Human Rights Commission et al.
2008).
The EEO Trust is giving similar messages, with reports based on employers’ and recruitment
agencies’ experience. Research with EEO Employers Group members showed that many
place a high value on older workers, appreciating their reliability, experience, stability andloyalty (EEO Trust, 2008a), Recruiters reported more mixed experience of appreciation andresistance, the latter largely related to perceptions concerning energy levels, flexibility, andambition. They stressed the importance of a skills-based focus during the recruitment process
to ensure that the best person was hired, regardless of age. Some recruitment consultants stillheard of people in their 50s having difficulty obtaining an interview, let alone a job, but mostbelieved that employers’ attitudes to older workers were becoming increasingly positive (EEO
Trust 2008b).
The New Zealand Disability Strategy is a tool to improve the lives of people with disabilities,
including their position in the labour force. Its Implementation Review reported on the
progress made by central government agencies implementing the strategy between 2001 and2007. It involved wide consultation with disabled people’s organisations and support
providers as well as government agencies. One aspect of the strategy relates to meaningfulemployment and adequate income. Objective 4 requires the provision of opportunities in
employment and economic development. In 2001, an estimated 44% of disabled adults werein the workforce as against 74% of non-disabled adults, with a consequent large income gap.
While there has been considerable improvement in the provision of employment opportunities
and removal of barriers, there is a perception of a main centre-rural gap and less opportunity
for those with more complex needs or intellectual disabilities. The report states that,throughout the interviews, it was clear that many disabled people continue to feel a sense offrustration and disappointment at the slow pace of change (Office for Disability Issues, 2007).
Adoption of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities by the United Nations
on 13 December, 2006, with New Zealand signing in 2007, was followed by the passage ofnecessary changes in legislation for compliance prior to ratification. Giving voice, visibility
and legitimacy to disabled people and their issues, it should provide a further tool for reducing
discrimination and increasing opportunity, but clearly there is a long way to go.
Immigrants, especially those with high skills and often struggle to get them fully recognised
in New Zealand, are another group rightly targeted under the diversity umbrella. Some
industries such as dairying are increasingly reliant on migrant workers while others withlabour and skills shortages could benefit from actively recruiting among these groups. Again,
checklists have been developed for employers to demonstrate good practice, together with
examples (Human Rights Commission, 2008b). Necessary conditions include zero tolerance
11

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15

of racial discrimination in workplaces, accommodating religious diversity at work, goodtraining and induction systems, and assistance with improving English language
competencies. The HRC publication also encompasses both accounts of the barriers anddiscrimination that migrant workers face and success stories that profile businesses where
migrant employees are valued and crucial to productivity.
Outcomes for Maori and Pacific employees are gradually improving, in terms of employment
growth, reduced unemployment, wages and self employment rates, but average levels on all
indicators remain well below those of the overall population, and not all are narrowing. For
example, Maori average hourly earnings rose by an average of 4.2% per annum between June
2002 and June 2007, from $14.33 to $17.58, while the economy-wide rate grew by 5.1% on
average from $16.71 to $21.41, so that the ratio actually fell from 85.8% to 82.1%. On theother hand, the number of Maori employed grew by 8.7% in the year to June 2007, against an
employment growth of only 0.8% among non-Maori, while Maori unemployment fell to 7.6%
for the year to June 2007, the lowest rate ever recorded. However, this remains well above the
3.7 % overall rate (Department of Labour, 2007a) For Pacific peoples, too, the picture ismixed, with above average employment and wage growth in the same five years, reductions inunemployment rates and in the amount by which they exceed the general rate. However,
Pacific people are less than 1% of CEOs/company directors, only 2.1% of production
managers in manufacturing where they are 7.9% of all employees, and only 2% of senior
management in the public service, where they are 7% of employees (Department of Labour,
2007b). There is a long way to go with respect to EEO for these groups as employees, while
the improvements are largely a matter of favourable economic conditions and improved
educational outcomes rather than specific policies.
Generally, any such ethnicity-based special policies, whether in employment, social welfare,
health or elsewhere, have been politically challenged in recent years, resulting in a retreat
from them by the previous Labour government, under the mantra needs-based rather thanrace-based measures to mitigate disadvantage. Paul Callister (2007) has examined the natureand history of special measures in New Zealand, and their strengths and weaknesses,
reflecting on the circumstances which may make such measures effective, as well as
politically acceptable. The Human Rights Commission supported the research and has issued
guidelines for organisations on measures to ensure equality and reduce ethnic disadvantage,
pointing out that human rights legislation specifically upholds special measures in particular
circumstances. As with gender, discussed above, such special measures directed to aparticular ethnic group are not discriminatory when applied to “those persons or groups thatneed or may reasonably be supposed to need assistance or advancement in order to achieve an
equal place with other members of the community” (Human Rights Act 1993 at Section 73:
Measures to Ensure Equality) The Commission considers that such special measures remain
an important policy tool and that properly used, they can make a major contribution to
reducing the effects of discrimination.
Both Maori and Pacific communities, together with the relevant government agencies, placemajor emphasis on the realisation of the full potential of their peoples, based on autonomy,
entrepreneurship, self-direction, innovation, and internal leadership. Such a direction would
also make these populations less dependent on the behaviour of employers and managers
from outside their groups. “The success of future economic development will be based on
Maori having the capacity to lead, influence and make positive decisions for themselves toensure economic growth”. (Te Puni Kokiri, 2007:40). On similar lines, the three key
outcomes emphasised by the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs Statement of Intent 2008 –2011 (2008), accompanied by a 2007 Pacific Economic Action Plan and a Pacific Women’s
12New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15

Economic Development Plan, are for Pacific peoples to participate fully in New Zealand’s
economy, for the social wellbeing of Pacific peoples to be enhanced, and for Pacific peoples’
cultures and heritage to be supported, developed, and valued. Business development, growthindustries and entrepreneurial culture and leadership are again stressed in these plans.

Conclusion and Future Prospects
The picture outlined above of the last two years shows many reports and some progress, albeit
slow, in a number of areas. The prospects for the future are of concern at a time of world
economic uncertainty and likely increases in unemployment where low paid and EEO groups
are often the first to suffer. The election policies of the parties indicated that those elected togovernment are largely committed to market solutions, educational progress for all, andenhanced growth to improve the position of these groups rather than more specific policies
which the Labour led governments delivered, albeit to an increasingly limited extent.
Voluntary codes and educational resources are likely to continue to be promoted.
Most of the institutions discussed above are also likely to survive. The EEO Trust was
instituted by the 1990 National Government after it repealed Labour’s more interventionist
Employment Equity Act. NACEW has survived many National governments, while the PEE
Unit is supported by its department and has an assistance rather than interventionist role. The
Ministry of Women’s Affairs’ existence is safe for now. Don Brash, when leader of National,
had threatened to abolish it, but John Key, perhaps through concern for the gender gap inwomen’s votes between Labour and National, made Jackie Blue spokesperson when electedleader. He has now appointed Pansy Wong as Minister of Women’s Affairs, although
coverage of this appointment was miniscule and the budget may well be cut. However, theprospects for real outcomes from the work of the PEE Unit, NACEW, and the Ministry of
Women’s Affairs are even less rosy with respect to pay equity and dollars for pay increases incaring work under the new National led government than they would have been under aLabour led one. Regular speeches about the excessive size and cost of the public service andfurther freeing up of the labour market are far from reassuring. The National party, in
opposition, sponsored the Employment Relations (Probationary Employment) Amendment
Bill, which would have seen the introduction a 90-day probation period for new employees.
Its purpose was stated as enabling employers to take a chance with new employees without
facing the risk of expensive and protracted personal grievance procedures. Proponents argued
that it would enable people who have not had previous work experience to find their first job
and make it easier for people re-entering the workforce. It would have meant no right ofappeal against unfair dismissal in the first 90 days. Union critics argue that it would create acategory of ‘disposable worker’. It was defeated, but a somewhat less sweeping version(businesses with under 20 employees) is being debated under urgency during December 2008,
whether an even stronger version will be introduced in 2009 is yet to be seen. Either way,
reductions in labour market protections are involved, with the lower paid most affected.

13

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15

References
Burns, J. (2007). Who Cares?
http://www.neon.org.nz/newsarchive/jb/

Women

in

the

HomecareIndustry.

NEON.

Callister, P. (2007). Special measures to reduce ethnic disadvantage in New Zealand: an examinationof their role. Victoria University of Wellington Institute of Policy Studies.
Callister, P., Leather, F. and Holt, J. (2008). Gender and tertiary education: Is it useful to talk aboutmale disadvantage? Victoria University of Wellington Institute of Policy Studies. Working Paper
08/10.
DepartmentofLabour(2007a).
Maorilabourhttp://www.dol.govt.nz/publications/lmr/lmr-maori-outcomes.asp

marketDepartment of Labour (2007b). Pacific peoples labour market outcomes
glance .http://www.dol.govt.nz/publications/lmr/lmr-pacific-outcomes-summary.asp

outcomesata

Department of Labour Pay and Employment Equity Steering Group. (2008). October 2008 Newsletter
http://www.dol.govt.nz/services/PayAndEmploymentEquity/news/newsletters/oct08.asp
Domett, T. (2006). The politics of work life balance: the New Zealand case. MA thesis, University of
Auckland.
EEO Trust. (2007). Work-life balance, employee engagement and discretionary effort pilot researchdownloadable at http://www.eeotrust.org.nz/research/index.cfm?cache=120912
EEO Trust. (2008a). Older workers: employers
http://www.eeotrust.org.nz/research/index.cfm?cache=120912

speak

out

EEO Trust. (2008b). Boomers and beyond: recruiters tell their stories
http://www.eeotrust.org.nz/research/index.cfm?cache=120912

downloadableatdownloadable at

Families Commission (2008a). Give and take – families' perceptions and experiences of flexible
work in New Zealand downloadable at http://www.nzfamilies.org.nz
Families Commission (2008b). Juggling Acts - How parents working non-standard hours arrange
care for their preschool children downloadable at http://www.nzfamilies.org.nz
High Court. (2007). Unreported, High Court Wellington, CIV 2005-485-1750 (14 June 2007) Simon
France J, Ms S Inceson & Dr A Trlin. http://www.hrc.co.nz/hrc_new/hrc/cms/files/documents/15Jun-2007_13-26-56_Talleys_June_07.pdf
Human Rights Commission (2008a). New Zealand Census of Women’s Participation downloadable at
http://www.hrc.co.nz/home/hrc/newsandissues/eeocommissionerwomenlockedoutofboardroom.php
Human Rights Commission (2008b). From brain drain to brain gain: migrant workers in New
Zealand
http://www.neon.org.nz/documents/Brain%20Gain%20%20Migrant%20workers%20in%20NZ.pdf
Human Rights Commission, Retirement Commission, EEO Trust, Business New Zealand, CTU and
Canterbury Employers’ Chamber of Commerce (2008). Valuing Experience: a practical guide torecruiting and retaining older workers Report from Top Drawer Consultants, http://www.neon.org.nz

14

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):1-15
Human Resources Institute of New Zealand. (2008). Play Fair – Pay and Employment Equity
http://www.hrinz.org.nz/Site/HR_Info/Pay_and_Employment_Equity/default.aspx
Hyman, P. (2007). Talley’s Lose Fish Filleting Pay Aase – How big a victory for employment equity?
Women’s Studies Association Newsletter. 28(1): 9-10.
Hyman, P. (2008). Pay Equity and Equal Employment Opportunity – Developments 2004/2006 andEvaluation. In S.B. Blumenfeld and G. Lafferty (eds). Proceedings of Twelfth Conference On
Labour, Employment And Work. (pp.283-288) Wellington: Victoria University of Wellington.
Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs. (2008). Statement
http://www.mpia.govt.nz/resources/pdfs/SOI%202008.pdf

ofIntent

2008

–

2011

Ministry of Women’s Affairs (2008). Trading choices – young people’s career decisions and gendersegregation in the trades. Report prepared for MWA by NZCER. http://www.mwa.govt.nz/news-andpubs/publications/trading-choices-young-peoples-decisions-and-gender-segregation-in-the-trades
National Advisory Council on the Employment of Women (2007). Forty years of work 1967-2007
http://www.nacew.govt.nz/about/history/40/40years/40page01.html
National Advisory Council on the Employment of Women (2008). Critical issues for New Zealandwomen’s employment, now and in the future http://www.nacew.govt.nz/publications/general/criticalissues/critical-issues_02.html
Office for Disability Issues. (2007). New Zealand Disability Strategy Implementation Review 20012007. http://www.odi.govt.nz/nzds/progress-review/index.html
Simon-Kumar, R. (2008). Approve to Decline: A Feminist Critique of ‘Fairness’ and ‘Discrimination’in a Case Study of EEO in the New Zealand Public Sector. Women’s Studies Journal. 22(1): 20-36
Te Puni Kokiri. (2007). For Maori Future Makers http://www.tpk.govt.nz/en/in-print/ourpublications/publications/for-maori-future-makers/
Waring, M. and Fouche. C. (eds) (2007). Managing mayhem: work-life balance in New Zealand,
Wellington: Dunmore Publishing Ltd.

15

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

The Effect of Early Childhood Education and Care (ECE) Costs
on the Labour Force Participation of Parents in New Zealand
STEFAN KESTING* and SCOTT FARGHER**

Abstract
New Zealand suffers from labour and skill shortage, has a record low official unemployment
rate, one of the highest figures of working hours per capita per annum and at the same time
one of the lowest labour force participation rates of women in the 25-34 age group among
OECD countries. The feminist economic literature stresses the unfair distribution of paid andunpaid (mostly caring) work between men and women. Moreover, it also emphasizes a strongcausal link between childcare arrangements and labour force participation and success. Basedon these arguments we suggest that the comparatively low female labour force participation
rate of mothers with dependent children in New Zealand can be explained at least in part by
how childcare is organized. Evidence from the relevant literature supports this contributing topolicy changes. The transaction cost approach is also used to explain the participation patterns
for women in the 25-34 year age-group and questions whether provision of childcare shouldbe public or private. In conclusion we suggest a variety of avenues for New Zealand to makebetter use of its labour force and achieve a more potentially more efficient balance between
paid and unpaid activities.

Introduction
The New Zealand early childhood education and care sector is in a state of flux as it adjusts tochanges in the regulatory and funding environment. Efficient early childhood education andcare expands the employment and education options of parents, their potential productivity
and equality. This paper first provides an overview of the nexus between childcare and labour
market activity found in the relevant economic literature, including recent insight provided by
the feminist critique. We then look at recent patterns in female labour force participation andtime budgets in New Zealand and describe recent developments in the childcare sector interms of provisions and funding arrangements. This leads us to question recent emphasis on
more market based provisions. Our focus then shifts to transaction and other costs incurred byparents using outside home childcare and further examine the question of private versus public
provisions of childcare. We conclude the article by examining alternative models for family
and labour market policies from Scandinavia in order to identify a more efficient distributionof paid and unpaid work in New Zealand.

*

Stefan Kesting is Senior Lecturer in Economic at the Auckland University of Technology. Private Bag 92006,
Auckland 1142, New Zealand. Stefan.kesting@aut.ac.nz**
Scott Fargher is Senior Lecturer in Economic at the Auckland University of Technology. Private Bag 92006,
Auckland 1142, New Zealand. Scott.fargher@aut.ac.nz

16New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

Feminist Economics on the nexus between care and labour market activity(theory)
All OECD countries have a persistent or ever growing need for caring (unpaid) labour(OECD, 2006 and Folbre, 2001) which, as in the past, is still mostly provided by women(Statistics New Zealand, 2001). At the same time, developed countries are experiencing
increased female (waged) labour force participation. This leads to a dilemma because what
may be regarded as good for gender equality might actually lead to neglect of children, theelderly and other persons dependent on care. It could also be accompanied by the so-called
double burden and result in an experience of overworking among many mothers withdependent children (Folbre and Bittman, 2004) and/or a decline in fertility rates exacerbatedby aging populations (Folbre, 2001; 2003).
So long as the traditional gender division of labour within and outside the household persists
and the assumption that child welfare is strongly related to the care given by parenting
persons, the problem of child welfare is placed at the core of this dilemma resulting in lesstime devoted to childcare. The OECD in its report Starting Strong II explicitly stresses that
aiming at increasing women’s labour market participation, reconciling work, family
responsibilities on a more equitable basis for women and addressing issues of child poverty
and educational disadvantage are linked (OECD, 2006: 19). Moreover, these goals can beachieved simultaneously by governments investing in early childhood education and care
(ECE)1 (ibid: 19). How can social policy in New Zealand tackle this trade-off between labour
market productivity and care? Several Treasury papers, written to develop a logical basis forsocial policy evaluation, try to address this policy and welfare inherent problem in modern
family life. However, as criticised by Kesting (2007) the Treasury papers by Jacobsen andothers (Jacobsen, May, Crawfod, Annesley, Christofeel, Johnston and Durbin, 2002; Jacobsen,
Fursman, Bryant, Claridge and Jensen, 2004; Bryant, Jacobsen, Bell and Garret, 2004;
Varuhas, Fursman and Jaconsen, 2003) suffer from two major shortcomings. First, theirpluralist approach does not include the feminist critique of Human Capital Theory, nor does it
discuss the alternative economic theory developed by feminist economists and philosopherslike Folbre (2001) and Nussbaum (2000). However, without questioning the assumptions
underlying orthodox economics (see Kesting, 2005), any integration with other social science
approaches, which are not based on methodological individualism and some variant of rational
choice can hardly be successful in an attempt to develop social policy that ensures care andsupports labour market productivity. Some feminist economists have, at least in part, alreadydemonstrated how such an integrative approach could work (see for example Himmelweit,
2000; England and Folbre, 2002; Himmelweit and Sigala 2004). Although feminist economics
has many debates and strands, one of its defining characteristics is the particular attention to
the gendered division of labour.

Female labour force participation and time budgets in New Zealand
New Zealand has a relatively high labour force participation rate (the 6th highest in the OECD)
which, consistent with developments in other industrialised countries, is largely due toincreased participation by women. However, as highlighted in a recent Treasury paper, New
Zealand has a relatively low participation rate amongst women of the key child bearing age(25-34). In 2001, participation for this group was amongst the lowest in the OECD, ahead of
only Italy and Japan (Bryant et al. 2004: 16). Three of the top five countries in terms of labour

17New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

force participation of women in this potentially highly productive age group are theScandinavian welfare states (Iceland, Norway and Sweden); the other two are the USA (the“Overworked American”, see Schor, 1992) and Canada.
As Lindert (2004) points out, interrupting work by mothers leads to a loss in human capitaland consequently lower life-time earnings compared to childless women and men. This is not
only because mothers do not work and do not get paid in the period of their life while caring
for children, but also because of the discontinuity resulting in “statistical discrimination”. In
other words, the perception that there is less need to invest in the careers of young women
because childbearing is likely to take them out of the labour force. He presents some indicative
evidence that government investment in infant day care, noticeably in Finland andScandinavia, seems to erode the aforementioned disadvantages for mothers (2004: 256). Thiseffect is much lower in countries where childcare demands are only met in private markets. In
general, he concludes: “even though specific numbers still elude us, it makes sense that themore committed welfare states’ career supports for mothers are likely to have a strong payoffin jobs and GDP” (ibid. 257).
Callister (2005) integrates the problems of care (that is children’s well-being), labour market
productivity and gender equality in his contribution to the Treasury’s working paper series. He
draws on the feminist economists’ arguments about the unequal distribution of paid andunpaid work between men and women as an obstacle for the support of replacement fertility
levels and growth of business productivity. Moreover, his enquiry is based on a wide range ofcross country comparative statistics including Sweden and Finland.
According to Callister, “overwork” is common for the average New Zealander:“a comparison of the proportion of employees working 50 or more hours per weekamong a selection of OECD countries shows that New Zealand has one of the highest
proportions of workers putting in long hours of paid work (Messenger 2004). Whenconsidering couples, international comparative data also suggest New Zealand is at thehigh end of the working hours spectrum” (Callister, 2005: 8).
However, this phenomenon has a particularly strong gender dimension in New Zealand as it isfathers who, on average, work long paid hours, while mothers do most of the unpaid carework: “As Johnston (2005) shows, New Zealand has relatively low employment rates formothers with young children, but when total paid working hours are considered across thewhole of society, New Zealand is near the top of the OECD” (Callister, 2005: 9).
In this general context, Callister identifies what might be called a life cycle squeeze forfamilies with young children in New Zealand2. This life cycle squeeze is characterised by anextreme scarcity of time and/or money in a particular phase of family life:“When the New Zealand sample is restricted to partnered men and women with a childunder five, Stevens (2002) demonstrates that total hours of work (paid and unpaid) arehigher for parents of young children than for men and women without children. Again,
this is a pattern seen in all industrial countries” (Callister 2005: 14).
However, there are basically two extreme models of dealing with the problem of the life cycle
squeeze: the Anglo-Saxon and the Scandinavian way. Callister picks the USA and Sweden as
examples of these two scenarios:

18

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33“Comparing the United States and Sweden, which are both high-income countries witha high level of gender equity, reveals two quite distinct models. In the United States
the high level of gender equity is achieved by both partners in couples working relative
long hours. In contrast, both mothers and fathers work relatively short hours in
Sweden” (Callister 2005: 13).
The US model is based on “low-income professionalism” that is, middle class children arecared for by low-skilled immigrants. In Sweden, government policies provide universal
entitlements to paid parental leave and universal, high-quality subsidised childcare. This isembedded in an overall trend to support relatively low working hours and high income
equality (Callister 2005: 17). The Swedish model allows parents to avoid the life cycle
squeeze and instead to achieve a much more positive work-life balance compared with manyother countries.
According to Callister, surveys demonstrate that mothers would prefer to spend more timeearning money while fathers would want to have more time available for their children. Thus,
considering overall family welfare, gender equality and sense of autonomy over one’s own
life, New Zealanders would probably wish to follow the Scandinavian example. Watkin(2005) verifies this citing Statistics New Zealand reports on the September quarter 2004: “…
only 2200 women were working, wanted to work more, but couldn’t because of a lack ofsuitable childcare. Another 3200, who weren’t seeking work, gave a lack of childcare as their“main reason” for not working” (2005: 26). The recent introduction of free childcare is anattempt to alleviate these pressures.

The pre-school care industry in New Zealand
The provisions of childcare in New Zealand are undertaken by a wide range of groups, bothprivate and community owned, and attract considerable State funding. In July 2007, there were
4,479 establishments providing childcare to nearly 191,000 children (Ministry of Education,2007). Nevertheless, childcare can be expensive, according to White (2006), parents in
Auckland typically pay fees for different kinds of ECE providers varying between $275 and$475 a week.
“The Early Childhood Council Survey of Fees of its members nationwide found that,for a child over two, hourly fees ranged from $2 to $15 per hour, with an average of$5.13 per hour. The average weekly rate for 30 hours of childcare was $144.75 per
week and the range from $10 to $255 per week. The average weekly rate for more than
30 hours was $161.58, ranging from $40 to $360” (White 2006: 30).
In terms of financial burden, the mean rate per week reported by White equates to 12.75% to14.24% of average household income as recorded in the 2006 census. Moreover, White points
out that expensive does not necessarily mean better. Not-for-profit centres are able to provide
high quality care at the low end of the fee spectrum. Childcare centres received relatively
substantial state subsidies beginning in March 2005 to cover the costs of employing qualified
staff. The net effect was a subsidy of approximately 50% of average cost of providing
childcare in 2006, however, according to White, none of them reduced their fees. One might
conclude that private ownership in this sector leads to publicly subsidised profits hence, can be
regarded as an expensive way to ensure quality in ECE. Statements by industry experts

19

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

confirm this: White quotes Anthony Gilbert of ABC Affiliate Business Consultants as saying:“Childcare is profitable, and there is a big demand for it” (2006: 32). Demand generally
outstrips supply, for example, in inner Auckland suburbs, it is so high that a place for a twoyear old has to be secured more than year in advance (White, 2006: 30) and there are longwaiting lists (White, 2006: 34 and Watkin, 2005: 24). As a consequence, parents are obliged
to pay for services at times that they do not need for fear of not having them when they willneed them in the future. The OECD report on ECE (2006) points to problematically highchildcare costs for parents in other “liberal economies” like Canada and Ireland.
Parents in New Zealand do not seem to question why they have to pay for ECE in the firstplace and why it is not a government responsibility paid for mostly by the tax payer as in a lotof other countries (OECD, 2006). Moreover, fees are not the only type of costs parents have tobear. The recent changes to government funding of childcare is discussed below.
As White observes, in the case of Auckland,“Childcare is booming. Across the city, there are myriad ways other people will lookafter your children, in kindergartens, in home-based care, and in all sorts of daycare
centres, otherwise known as crèches, childcare centres, preschools and early education
centres” (White 2006: 28).
This diversity means that parents need to gather all kinds of detailed information to evaluate
the kind of service they will get for their child (White, 2006: 28). In other words, choiceamong a large variety of providers leads to transaction costs for parents. Reports on the qualityof specific providers by the Education Review Office website only partly reduce theseinformation gathering and evaluation costs. Similarly the booklet of the Ministry of Education“Choices in Early Education”, helps identify the different types of childcare options. “It also
provides an extensive check list of what to look for in a licensed childcare centre, such as theparent-child ratios, the quality of resources, their approach to discipline and so on” (White
2006: 30).
A report prepared by the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research (NZIER) for the Early
Childhood Council entitled Putting Children First – Early childhood education for a new
tomorrow defends the relatively unique policy of moving toward almost exclusively private
provision of childcare that was introduced in 1989 and pursued in the 1990s (NZIER, 2005).
The report claims that currently in the New Zealand Early Childhood Education (ECE) sector:“Quality is generally good” and “Participation in early childhood education is high” (NZIER
2005 executive summary: IX). Nevertheless, as acknowledged in a footnote in the main text
(pages 27 and 28) of the report, this is a very crude indicator because it does not show theamount of time that each child attends. As observed above, given the relatively high fees inthis model of provision, parents tend to minimize attendance. An aspect of this is the unequal
distribution of the availability of places, as a Salvation Army report points out:
“The availability of early childhood education (ECE) opportunities appears to beheavily biased against poorer urban communities. Between 2001 and 2006 there was a
25% increase in licensed ECE centres and a 7% increase in the number of pre-school
children attending these centres. These increases have almost entirely been in the forprofit sector while the not-for-profit and community sector has lost ground with thenumbers of kindergartens, play centres and kohanga reo actually falling” (Johnson,
2008: 5).

20

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

Statistics show a clear bias against poorer areas:“In both 2006 and 2005 the age standardised enrolment rate for pre-schoolers in ECE
centres was 64.9% up from 59.7% in 2001. There is however significant variation
around this national average with average enrolment rates of nearly 86% in Tauranga
City down to 44% in Manukau City. The availability of ECE places in poor urban
suburbs is nearly half the national average suggesting a large and lingering inequalityof access for poor…” primarily Maori and Polynesian children (Johnson, 2008: 6).
Johnson (ibid) emphasises this disparity observing that in Otara there were ECE places for just
33% of pre-schoolers; 35% in Mangere and Manurewa; just 31% in the Massey ward of
Waitakere City and 37% in Poriura East.
While the government programme of Working for Families seems to entice sole parents into
work it also creates a dilemma in terms of the ‘care versus paid work’ trade-off:“The incentive appears to have worked in part by encouraging single parents withdependent children to take up work. … A question emerges around who is looking
after the children given that early childhood education facilities and after school care isleast common in low-income communities where single parents and welfare
beneficiaries most commonly live” (Johnson, 2008: 18).
Although the aforementioned NZIER report points out that market based provision creates
difficulties in terms of “information on the quality of provision [being] poor”, “childprotection and agency issues” and “equity issues” (NZIER, 2005) which according to theOECD all apply to early childhood education (2006), it overlooks the relevance of these
problems for the ECE industry in New Zealand where: “Indeed, the ECE sector is virtually all
privately owned” (ibid. 17). The report bases its conclusions merely on Anglo-Saxon
examples overlooking Scandinavian best practices. Since early child care education is a public
good, according to feminist economist Nancy Folbre3 and the OECD (2006), private
provisions leads to undersupply in certain areas and to inflated user costs with potential
negative consequences for labour market participation of parents. A treasury paper by Varuhas
et al (2003) confirms this conclusion: “Changes in the relative costs and benefits will change
the payoff to working at home or in the market” (2003: 21).
Since transaction costs for parents are quite high, there is good reason for government
ownership of childcare facilities. Moreover, the State has also a role to play in setting andmonitoring quality criteria (OECD, 2006). Again, this is in the best interest of ECE consumers(children and their parents) because of the quite substantial transaction costs involved. The
easiest way to do this is through ensuring staff are highly qualified (e.g. a requirement beingthat staff hold at least a Diploma of Teaching), which is a standard practice in schools anduniversities, and to ensure low child-staff ratios, be it for private or public childcare facilities.
In New Zealand the qualification required since 2000, is a diploma in Early Childhood
Education. Since 2005, the government set a financial incentive structure which rewards highnumbers of staff with such a diploma present on the floor and leading childcare centres. “By
2007, half the number of staff required to meet government teacher-child ratios – must havethe diploma. By 2012, all staff meeting the government ratios will be obliged to have it”(White, 2006: 31). The State also provides for institutions and training incentives to attain thisqualification. While the replacement of formally unqualified staff with employees holding the21New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

diploma seems to create some difficulties for the industry (White, 2006; Watkin, 2005), theempirical evidence of best practice models in other OECD countries seems to support suchpolicies (Fallow, 2004; Eichhorst and Thode, 2002, BMFSFJ, 2005; OECD, 2006). Ministryof Education (2007) statistics show that approximately 90% of ECE establishments were
‘teacher-led’ by July 2007. Moreover, OECD research (2006) suggests that diversity as well as
high and uniform quality can be better provided in a mixed, however, publicly dominatedsystem: “Another option is to avoid complicated regulation of dispersed systems, and opt for awell-funded, universal public system based on decentralisation and democratic participation,
including the participation of private providers within the public system” (OECD 2006: 119).
In the 2007 Budget, it was announced that the government would provide funding for up to 20
hours per week in teacher led ECE services for all 3 and 4 year olds. The policy was designed
to boost the level and quality of participation in the labour market by reducing the costs forparents. The initial take-up of the free service has been documented by the Ministry of
Education which reported an overall take-up of 62% of all eligible entitlements. Significantly,
the take-up was higher in the rural sector (over 90% in Northland, Gisborne, The West Coast,
Southland and Tasman) than in the urban sector (just 51% in Auckland) with 76% ofcommunity owned establishments joining the scheme compared to only 57% of those that are
privately owned. Funding is made available to providers on the condition that they do not
charge any additional fees for the free hours. This change in policy has led to increased
funding for the ECE sector and should alleviate some of the issues highlighted in this section
although it does not change the ownership structure within the sector.

Principal Agent Model and transaction costs
It is not only evidence from best practice models that can be used to question the market based
provision of ECE. Modern economic theory can also demonstrate why reliance on privately
provided childcare is bound to be sub-optimal and why state regulation and/or public
provision is necessary to ensure an efficient and satisfactory quality and quantity of childcare.
The market for childcare provision is characterised by uncertainty about the future andasymmetric information. Child health and mental development is contingent on a plethora of
influences, therefore, the formation of a child’s personality and capabilities are hard to predict.
The latest OECD report on ECE lists a plethora of standards and quality criteria that are nearly
impossible for parents to monitor (OECD, 2006). Not surprisingly, parents, thus, find it hard
to control whether childcare providers act in the best interest of their child. To leave the childat the gate of the childcare centre clearly constitutes a situation of asymmetric information in
the sense of New Institutional Economics (NIE). It is probably also safe to assume that mostparents are rather risk averse when it comes to the safety and comfort of their children(Himmelweit and Sigala, 2004).
Since the conditions described above with respect to the parent child care centre relationshipseem to fit with all the usual elements of the principal-agent-model we decided to apply thisconcept to it. To our knowledge, such an application of one of the core models of NIE has notbeen done before4. Some applications of NIE to the family have been attempted. However,they focus on transaction costs and use this concept to analyse merely internal family relations(Pollak, 1985 and Wittman, 2005).

22

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

In New Institutional Economics, a situation where someone leaves a task to be done withsomeone else can be modelled as a principal-agent relationship. In a principal-agent model
where the parents are the principals and childcare providers the agents, Q or the outcome
would be an optimal child development in terms of health, social skills and personal
development as well as educational achievement. In other words, Q broadly stands for thehuman capital gains of the child. If the aforementioned characteristics of uncertainty about the
future, asymmetry of information and highly risk-averse principals are included, formal
modelling shows that principals will not be able to maximize Q solely with the help of acarefully calibrated incentive structure (Furubotn and Richter, 1997; Sappington 1991). In
other words, even if parents are willing and able to pay very high and/or performance based
fees, a welfare optimum is not attainable in a market for childcare provision.
In formal modelling, such an incentive structure: w = r + αQ, 0 ≤ α ≤ 1, where w represents thechildcare centre fees, which would include r as an outcome independent component of
remuneration and α as the reward paid dependent on the achieved human capital (Q) in thechild. Since privately owned childcare providers have little interest in attaining a high Q
because it would drive up their costs and the variance for modelling the high uncertainty of Q
will be substantial. According to the logic of the principal-agent model r will have to be highand α will be close to zero. Consequently, there will be little scope for setting incentives toensure high performance and optimal conditions in childcare centres. In the terms of formal
modelling, the achieved human capital Q is going to be dependent not only on reward (α) but
also effort (e) plus some random effect (µ). In other words: Q = αe +µ. However, the variable
e (effort), which in our application stands for the quality of care cannot be sufficiently
controlled and, as a consequence, the model would predict a “second best solution” withunavoidable welfare losses (Furubotn and Richter, 1997).
Following the logic of the principal-agent model leads to the further conclusion that in a
private market for ECE, owners will become managers, in other words, parents will care for
their children themselves. This will only change if the agent (childcare provider) is aparticipant in Q or has an interest in attaining high levels of human capital (in the wider sense)in children. This seems to be the case where the State acts as a public provider of regulations
and facilities. State regulation can play an equivalent role to signalling in principal-agent
models. It basically works towards the exclusion of false opportunistic signals (Erlei, Leschke
and Sauerland, 1999). In this setting State subsidies may be distributed according to quality
rankings of childcare centres in cases where they are private (Erlei et al. 1999; Sappington,1991). The more optimal outcome associated with State provision of childcare is even morecompelling given the principal-agent model is based on the assumption that e (the effort of theagent) is observable which is not the case in childcare provision as argued above. Publicly
regulated and provided childcare also reduces search costs for parents. These transaction costs
are not included in the principal-agent model.
According to Textor (1998), to reduce information asymmetry, parents need to gather or be
given the following measures of quality for particular childcare centres: First, the number ofchildren in class expressed in the ideal teacher: child ratio. The maximum should be “… 1:4
for children under 2 years of age, 1:6 for 2-year-olds, or 1:10 for older preschool children”(Textor, 1998: 168). Second the classroom: “… important is that the room is furnishedaccording to children’s needs and that play materials are of high quality” (ibid. 168). The
number of materials or the size of the room are much less important so long as the room is notovercrowded. Third, Textor lists and explains the importance of teachers’ behaviour. He
stresses the continuity in the teacher-child relationship and the amount and quality of23

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

interaction between teacher and child as well as between children: “Much of the work of goodteachers is observing the children in order to be able to give feedback, to help if aid is needed,
and to give new ideas to children who are bored” (ibid. 168). A further criteria, he mentions, isthe carefully and clearly structured balance of time between teacher-guided activities and freeplay, expressed in a curriculum and yearly and/or weekly plans.
Fourth, Textor highlights: “High quality childcare is also characterized by frequent contacts,
intensive communication and a good cooperation between teachers and parents” (ibid. 168).
For the teacher, this involves being open to any relevant information about the child and its
family, informing parents about the goals of the centre and even trying “… to influencechildren’s development indirectly by improving their families’ childrearing” (ibid. 169). Lastand definitely not least: “All of this requires a very high qualification of teachers” (ibid. 169).
However, Textor cautions against this general emphasis on qualification, emphasising that too
much routine and too much academic orientation can have a negative effect. In addition, good,
open and people-oriented leadership of childcare centres, which involves parents as well as
parent-staff communication, is important for ensuring high quality childcare institutions.
These criteria for reducing the ECE transaction costs for parents were summed up well in a
recent Listener article:“A reasonable teacher: child ratio. For under twos 1:4, and for over-twos: 1:8. Staff
involved with professional development, keeping up with trends. Strong interaction
between teachers and children, and parents and teachers. Happy and busy children”(Nippert, 2005: 25).
The OECD report Starting Strong II (2006) supports Textor’s particular emphasis on ECEteachers’ qualification as the most important of all quality criteria. Nevertheless from an
economic point of view, high quality has its price:“However, governments often fear the funding consequences of raising staff
qualifications. Higher qualifications can be followed by increased wage demands,
which, in turn, contribute significantly to the costs of services. Although the evidence
is strong that improved training and qualification levels raise the quality of interaction
and pedagogy in ECE services – similar evidence exists in favour of teacher
qualifications” (OECD, 2005: 161).
Governments tend to ask: Is this the best way to spend the available budget? An emphasis on
funding of ECE by the government, however, is a conscious decision to invest in humancapital of future generations. In other words, it is an investment in the overall productivity of
the labour force. The OECD report suggests that good remuneration and conditions of workfor teachers as well as diversity of staff in terms of gender and ethnicity are key to achieving
high quality ECE (ibid. 2006). A similar argument is put forward by May (2001; 2007)
reflecting on the history of ECE in New Zealand. Moreover, transaction costs for information
processing by parents can be avoided if the government moves to direct provision of ECE or
somehow guarantees quality standards.

24

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

Private versus public
Since the debate of private versus public ownership and/or regulation in social philosophy aswell as economics was present as an undercurrent in the development of the argument so far,an explicit discussion of its application to the ECE sector is appropriate. May (2007) has
traced the ideological discourse back to the ECE policy development in New Zealand.
According to her, public sentiment was in favour of regarding ECE as a private matter until in
1960 when the government took some responsibility in regulating childcare after a scandal ofabuse in an Auckland centre. However, funding remained low until the late 1980s. May quotes
former Prime Minister David Lange who described the deprived state of the sector as follows:“Like Cinderella, early childhood education has had three sisters – primary, secondary andtertiary, not necessarily ugly, but who have in various ways, bullied, ignored and exploited her… yet early childhood was the sister with potential (Lange, 1988)” (2007: 136).
Peculiarly, Lange forgets to mention the role played by the mean stepmother in the fairytale.
To take the analogy a bit further, it is actually her neglect which curbs Cinderella’s potential
much more severely than the behaviour of her sisters. Thus the government in the role of thestepmother acted in New Zealand in the 1990s. May (2007) points to the ideological shortsightedness that led to under-funding and under-regulation of the ECE sector as follows:“Disappointment followed as the ‘door’ did not open fully (Dalli, 1994) because of achange of government and a philosophical shift favouring a downsizing in the role ofgovernment. One consequence was a rise in the private childcare sector and a ‘market
forces’ approach to provision that sharpened the divide between community andprivate sector interests. Similarly, there was a deregulation of training providers that
led to a plethora of different training programmes that were not always inclusive or
integrated” (May, 2007: 137).
This policy direction changed considerably in 2002 when the Prime Minister Helen Clark
launched Pathways to the Future – Ngā Huarahi Arataki (Ministry of Education, 2002). “Thegovernment made a commitment to new funding and regulatory systems to support diverse
early childhood services to achieve quality early childhood education” (May 2007: 138). This
shift in interest and focus of the government in the ECE sector ensued, according to May(2007), from researchers and activists who had fired up the public debate in the preceding
years. However, as May sceptically emphasises that universal access to high quality childcare
still hinges on an ideological debate under the spell of neo-liberalism and is:“…complicated by the growth in the privately owned childcare sector, which has seen
investment opportunities in an area attracting increasing government funding. The
government does not intend to be a provider of early childhood services and, in themain, leaves the initiatives to community and private interest” (2007: 140).
Her arguments are indicating that private ownership and provision of ECE curbs quality andaffordability. In economic terms this is not an efficient institutional arrangement for theindustry and its consumers.

25

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

Kamerman and Waldfogel (2005) support such a conclusion in their evaluation of the mostly
private ECE sector in the United States:“The private sector may have a role in delivering of early childhood education and care
(ECEC) programs in the United States and internationally, and it certainly has had,both historically and at present. But we would argue that the private sector should nothave the dominant role because there are larger public interests involved, such as
equality of access and opportunity, and because there are good reasons to believe thatmarkets in this area will fail – in particular, with regard to the quality of care provided
in general and the supply and quality of infant and toddler care” (2005: 186).
There are three reasons for this conclusion which Kamerman and Waldfogel weigh as more orless important. Market failure in ECE is due to problems of limited information (as one would
expect from our application of the principal-agent model), imperfect capital markets, and theissue of externalities. The authors stress particularly the third one which moves away from theview that parents and their children are the only beneficiaries of ECE. Instead, it is particularly
the positive externalities of ECE which make a strong case for government investment. A
further justification they give is based on equity grounds. The inequity of childcare provision
is well documented for New Zealand in the State of the Nation Report from the Salvation
Army (Johnson, 2008). Kamerman and Waldfogel emphasise, for the USA, that: “Children of
affluent families and children in families with highly educated parents are far more likely to beenrolled in ECEC than poor children or those with parents with limited education” (2005:
198).
As Kamerman and Waldfogel note the private sector in the United States consists mostly of
for-profit providers and fewer not-for-profit providers. This is seen as a problem since theweight of the evidence suggests that these providers do operate differently and that, on
average, for-profit providers offer lower quality care Kamerman and Waldfogel (2005).
Anecdotal evidence seems to suggest that a similar conclusion can be drawn for New Zealand.
Mike Bedford on Childcare Forum in Wellington January 2008 told the audience thatcommercial operation (in tendency) leads to just meeting the minimum requirements to cut
costs. According to Bedford, an example of the negative impact of commercialisation is theuse of safety surface instead of grass in outdoor play areas. This is done to reduce costs not
because of health or safety issues. In a study comparing for-profit with not-for profit centres in
the USA, Helburn (1995) found that: “…structural elements of quality (staff-to-child ratio,group size, staff qualifications and training) varied with profit status and were significantly
higher in nonprofit than in for-profit centres” (cited in Kamerman and Waldfogel 2005: 203).
The study also documents lower staff turnover in not-for-profit compared to for-profit centres
although the process quality (e.g. caregiver interactions with children) seems to be equally
good in both. The Helburn study also underpins our conclusions of applying the principal
agent model in that it confirms the existence of information asymmetry. A problem of
inadequate consumer knowledge “… arises because parents simply do not have theinformation, lack the ability to evaluate quality, or do not understand that differences inquality make a difference in the impact on their children” (Kamerman and Waldfogel, 2005:
203). Thus Kamerman and Waldfogel conclude that regulation by the government is
indispensable. However, regulation requires monitoring which is costly and tends to focus on
merely measurable quantities (2005: 204) leads to their recommending a dominance of public
provision in a mixed system.

26

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

The OECD is also largely in favour of public provisions because of the public good aspect of
ECE:“Despite current economic orthodoxy, the experience of the OECD reviews suggeststhat for the moment at least, a public supply side investment model, managed by publicauthorities, brings more uniform quality and superior coverage of childhood
populations (1 to 6-year-olds) than parent subsidy models” (OECD, 2006: 114).
The report argues society, as a whole, would benefit if children were in high-quality ECE(OECD, 2006), because it allows for reconciling work and family responsibilities on a basisthat is more equitable for women and alleviates child poverty and educational disadvantage(e.g. for immigrant children). In their report for the Australian government, Wise, da Silva,
Webster and Sansan, (2005) further support the importance of including externalities in anencompassing cost-benefit analysis of early childhood interventions5. While a monetaryevaluation of such spill-overs is riddled with conceptual and empirical difficulties, Wise et al.
(2005), review of international studies point to lower crime rates and fewer welfare
dependants as examples of positive externalities arising from early childhood intervention.

Scandinavian benchmark and best practice model
The OECD emphasises that the European Union basically agreed to Scandinavian standards in
ECE for Europe:“The move towards universal provision in Europe has been given a further stimulus by
the 2010 objectives set by the European Union at its Barcelona meeting in 2002,
encouraging member countries to supply subsidised full-day places for one-third of 0to 3-year-olds, and for over 90% of all 3- to 6-year-olds” (OECD, 2006: 77).
The bulk of the countries already fulfilling the benchmark criteria are Nordic:“To date, about five countries – Belgium (Flanders), Denmark, France, Norway, andSweden – have reached the Barcelona targets for both groups of children, although at
different levels of quality. Finland also may be said to have reached the target as
although the coverage rate for children under 3 (municipal and private) is 24.7%, if
children under 1 are left out (in Finland, almost all parents take leave) the percentage
rises to 36.7%” (ibid. 78).
The OECD report also provides an overview of entitlements to ECE provision across OECD
countries. Half day free care is standard for 3-6 year olds in Finland and Sweden (ibid). The
percentage of 0-3 year olds using licensed childcare arrangements: Denmark 83%, Sweden
66%, Norway 44%, USA 38%, Finland 35.7% and UK 26%, Ireland 15% (ibid. 86).
Sweden is probably the most advanced of all Nordic countries with respect to ECE provisions.
What is important from a New Zealand perspective is the clear cap on what parents will haveto pay for decent ECE services:“In the middle and late 1990s, Sweden guaranteed a place for all children of working
parents and students from the age of one year and shifted the administration of its ECE
program from the National Board of Health and Welfare to the Ministry of Education.
In the early twenty-first century, Sweden set a maximum fee for ECE programs for all

27

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

children at no more than 2 to 3 percent of family income and guaranteed a place for all
four- to five-year-olds even if their parents were not in the labor force” (Kamerman
and Waldfogel, 2005: 191).
An important social policy complementary to subsidised universal high quality childcare isparental leave legislation. Again, it is the Nordic countries (Sweden, Finland, Norway and
Denmark) that lead the way. However, some central European countries (Hungary, Czech
Republic, Austria and Germany) provide as generous or effective (number of weeks weighted
by the level of payment) parental leave provision as the Nordic countries (OECD 2006). The
parental leave legislation in Sweden is one of the most generous in Europe so far:
“The parental insurance is probably the most important part of Swedish family policy.
It is for parents, not just for mothers. It started at a relatively modest level in 1974, but
has been gradually extended over the years, and the current situation is that there is aparental cash benefit for 480 days, roughly 16 months, most of which is paid at 80% of
the parents’ qualifying income” (Bernhardt, 2007: 141).
This Swedish social policy is, however, grounded in a particular cultural value system which
may or may not be agreed to and taken up by other countries:“The desire for greater equality between the sexes is an important reason why
childcare is a priority issue in Swedish public policy. This is also one of the importantreasons behind the extensive system of childcare centres (both public and private) all
over Sweden – the provision of childcare should enable parents to combine parenthoodwith employment or studies, i.e. the purpose of childcare centres is not only to create
conditions which are beneficial for children, but childcare is also for the sake ofparents. It is important to understand that the Swedish welfare state is based on a dual
breadwinner model. The majority of families with children in Sweden have two
incomes, i.e. both parents are employed. Therefore, the benefits that encourage workand make work possible for parents, such as availability of childcare, tend to be more
important than the level of, for example, child allowance” (Bernhardt, 2007: 141).
There is more emphasis on the latter in German public policy, but growing understanding
among policy makers (see BMFSFJ, 2005)are such that individual payouts are less successful
than the Scandinavian investment in social infrastructure (these countries mainly use supply
funding instead of subsidies paid to parents. OECD, 2006).

Conclusion: adopting a Scandinavian Model?
The essence of the recommendation following from the arguments above can be found in thisquote from the OECD report: “Another option is to avoid complicated regulation of dispersed
systems, and opt for a well-funded, universal public system based on decentralisation anddemocratic participation, including the participation of private providers within the public
system” (2006: 119). Given the historical development of the ECE sector in New Zealand it islikely a mixed system is more viable. However, a greater role in terms of public provision
should be aimed for by policy makers. This could be achieved through:••Continued regulation according to international quality standards.
Turning public Kindergartens into full time providers.

28New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33••

The purchase of private childcare centres to increase the share of publicly owned andadministered centres.
Opening new publicly funded and run child care centres in undersupplied areas.

The funding of up to 20 hours free ECE for every 3 and 4 year olds is an encouraging start.
However, it is important to emphasise that ECE policy should not be looked at in isolationfrom other social policy as issues such increased working time flexibility and improved
support for parental leave also impact on child care options.
In this critical review of recent literature regarding the interlinked economic issues of childwelfare and parental labour market productivity and equality, a high emphasis was placed on
the missing feminist economic theory and Scandinavian best practice role models in social andeconomic policy advice. The practical examples are universally provided high quality
childcare, universal entitlements for parental leave and facilitating change in cultural rolemodels for fathers. We do not include in our analysis whether parents prefer to stay at homewith their kids or not. The interesting question, whether a shift from a culture of“maternalism” and the “male breadwinner family model” toward dual earner parenthood ishappening in New Zealand remains unanswered in this article6. We simply start from theassumption that being financially independent and having work as a means of self-fulfilment
and self-confidence is potentially beneficial for both parents. Moreover, from a macroeconomic perspective well-educated, highly skilled and motivated stay at home mothers are aloss of potential economic growth.
However, the question is: “What is needed for New Zealand to overcome the trade-off
between equality and efficiency and to follow the lead of Denmark, Finland, Norway or
Sweden?” Apart from an (unlikely) acceptance of much higher per capita and much steeper
progression of tax levels (Callister, 2005), there are a number of other considerations. For
example, partially because of strong and sustainable labour unions, and a tradition of tripartite
consensus oriented negotiation in employment relations, Scandinavia has a much higher
average wage level compared to New Zealand. Are such path dependent traditionstransferable from one country to the other? Moreover, a different institutional and ideologicalcontext led to the prevailing perception in Scandinavia that raising children is a public
responsibility not solely a private one. Additionally, it is more widely accepted that fathers
have a distinctive and active role to play in child rearing. Thus, while the vision might be
attractive, the question of a possible transformation toward a ‘Scandinavia of the South Seas’
would require far more sweeping change.

Notes
1

In much of the international literature the acronym ECEC is used emphasising the social pedagogy approach tocare, in New Zealand the shorter version ECE is used interchangeably
2

The term family life cycle squeeze was coined by Valerie Kincaid Oppenheimer (1975) ‘The Life-Cycle
Squeeze: The Interaction of Men’s Occupational and Family Life Cycles’, in Demography, 2(2), 227-245 todescribe particular periods when families find it financially difficult to make ends meet. She empiricallydemonstrated that the squeeze is experienced by working class and middle class families at different points intheir life time (considering the age of parents and children) and with different degrees of tightness.
3“To say that children are public goods is not to say that everyone should raise them or that we need a greaternumber of them. Rather, it is to say that once they are brought into this world, we all have something to gain fromfully developing their capabilities. Parents should take responsibility for their children. By the same token, the29New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

public should accept responsibility for recognizing, rewarding, and supplementing parental efforts” (Folbre,
2001: 111).
4

Others have applied this model to social policy areas like: ‘transfers to families’ (Cigno, Luporini and Pettini,2003) or ‘long-term care insurance’ (Zweifel and Struwe, 1998).
5

Note that interventions as used by Wise et al. include more than just provision of childcare

6

A recent study that began to explore this question by examining the decisions related to paid work made bypeople with child care responsibilities was undertaken by Gendall and Fawthorpe (2006), see also McPherson(2006).

References
Bernhardt, E.M. (2007). Female Employment, Social Support and Fertility. Pharmaceuticals Policy
and Law. 9: 135-146.
BMFSFJ (ed.) (2005). Zukunft: Familie – Ergebnisse aus dem 7. Familienbericht, Deutsches
Jugendinstitut Munich and Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend, Berlin.
Bryant, J., Jacobsen, V., Bell M,. and Garrett, D. (2004). Labour Force Participation and GDP in New
Zealand. New Zealand Treasury Working Papers 04/07, June. Wellington.
Callister, P. (2005). The changing gender distribution of paid and unpaid work in New Zealand. In
New Zealand Treasury Working Papers 05/07, June. Wellington.
Cigno, A., Luporini, A., and Pettini, A. (2003). Transfers to Families with Children as a PrincipalAgent Problem. Journal of Public Economics. 87(5-6): 1165-1177.
Dalli, C. (1994). Is Cinderella back among the cinders? A review of early childhood education in theearly 1990s. In H, Manson (ed), New Zealand Annual Review of Education 1993. (pp.223-253).
Wellington: New Zealand Education Institute.
Eichhorst, W. and Thode, E. (2002). Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf – Benchmarking
Deutschland Aktuell. Bertelsmann Stiftung: Gütersloh.
England, P. and Folbre, N. (2002). Involving Dads: Parental Bargaining and Family Well-Being. In
C.S. Tamis-LeMonda and N. Cabrera (eds.). Handbook of Father Involvement: Multidisciplinary
Perspectives. (pp. 384-387). Mahwah, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Erlei, M., Leschke, M., and Sauerland, D. (1999). Neue Institutionenökonomik. Stuttgart: Schäffer
Poeschel.
Fallow, B. (2004, 19 February). Building the work force takes child care. The New Zealand Herald.
p.C2.
Folbre, N. (2001): The Invisible Heart – Economics and Family Values. The New Press: New York.
Folbre, N. (2003). Holding Hands at Midnight. In D.K. Baker and E. Kuiper (eds.). Toward a Feminist
Philosophy of Economics. (pp.213-230). Routledge, London and New York.
Folbre, N. and Bittman, M. (2004). Family Time – The Social Organization of Care. Routledge:
London and New York.

30

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

Furubotn, E.G. and Richter, R. (1997). Institutions and Economic Theory: An Assessment of the New
Institutional Economics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Gendall, K. and Fawthorpe, L. (2006). Decisions About Caring and Working: A qualitative study.
Report prepared for the Department of Labour and the National Advisory Council on the Employment
of Women, Wellington, October.
Helburn, S. (ed). (1995). Cost, Quality, and Child Outcomes in Child Care Centers. Denver:
University of Colorado.
Himmelweit, S. (2000). Alternative Rationalities, or Why Do Economists Become Parents. In Open
University, Open Discussion Papers in Economics, no. 28. Milton Keynes, Economics Discipline,
Faculty of Social Sciences, The Open University.
Himmelweit, S. and Sigala, M. (2004). Choice and the relationship between identities and behaviour
for mothers with preschool children – some implications from a UK study. Journal of Social Policy.
33(3): 455-478.
Jacobsen, V., Mays, N., Crawford, R., Annesley, B., Christoffel, P., Johnston, G. and Durbin, S.
(2002): Investing in Well-being: An Analytical Framework. In New Zealand Treasury Working Papers
02/23, December: Wellington.
Jacobsen, V., Fursman, L., Bryant, J., Claridge M. and Jensen, B. (2004). Theories of the Family and
Policy. In New Zealand Treasury Working Papers 04/02, March: Wellington.
Johnson, A. (2008). A State of the Nation Report from the Salvation Army. The Salvation Army Social
Policy and Parliamentary Unit: Manukau City.
Johnston, G. (2005). Women’s participation in the labour force’, in: New Zealand Treasury Working
Papers 05/06, June: Wellington.
Kamerman, S.B. and Waldfogel, J. (2005). Early Childhood Education and Care. In R.R, Nelson (ed).
The Limits of Market Organization. (pp. 185-212). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Kesting, S. (2005). Care and Capabilities – Enriching the Human Capital Concept. Australasian
Journal of Human Security. 1(3): 43-57.
Kesting, S. (2007). Scandinavia of the South Seas? – Transaction Costs of Early Childhood Education
and Care effecting the Distribution of Paid and Unpaid Work in New Zealand. Paper presented at
AIRAANZ conference in Melbourne 6-8 February 2008.
Lange, D. (1988, 3 August). Laying the Foundation. Dominion Sunday Times. p.3
Lindert, P. (2004): Growing Public – Social Spending and Economic Growth Since the EighteenthCentury, Vol. 1, Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press.
Le, T.; Gibson, J. and Oxley L. (2005): ‘Measures of Human Capital: A Review of the Literature’, New
Zealand Treasury Working Papers, 05/10, Wellington, November.
May, H. (2001): Politics in the Playground – The World of Early Childhood in Postwar New Zealand,
Wellington: Bridget Williams Books and New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
May, H. (2007). ‘Minding’, ‘Working’, ‘Teaching’: childcare in Aotearoa/New Zealand 1940s-2000s.
Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood. 8(2): 133-141.

31

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

McPherson, M. (2006). New Zealand Cultural Norms of parenting and Childcare and How These
Relate to labour Force participation Decisions and Requirements. Blue Skies Report No. 14/06,
November: Families Commission Wellington
Messenger, J.C. (2004). Finding the balance: Working time and workers’ needs and preferences inindustrialized countries – A summary of the report and its implications for working time policies.
Paper presented at the 9th International Symposium on Working Time, Paris, 26th – 28th February.
Ministry of Education, (2002). Pathways to the Future – Ngā Huarahi Arataki. Wellington: Learning
Media.
Ministry of Education, (2007). Education Counts. Wellington: Information Office.
NZIER, (2005). Putting Children First – Early childhood education for a new tomorrow. Report
prepared for the Early Childhood Council, retrieved 12-01-2006 from: www.nzier.org.nz.
Nippert, M. (2005, 25 February). Preschool Excellence. Listener. p. 25.
Nussbaum, M. (2000). Women and Human Development. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge UK.
OECD (2001): The Well-being of Nations: The Role of Human and Social Capital, OECD, Paris.
OECD. (2005). Teachers Matter: Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers, OECD,
Paris.
OECD (2006). Starting Strong II – Early Childhood Education and Care, OECD, Paris.
Sappington, D.E.M. (1991). Incentives in Principle-Agent Relationships. Journal of Economic
Perspectives. 5(2): 45-66.
Pollak, R.A. (1985). A Transaction Cost Approach to Families and Households. Journal of Economic
Literature. 23(2): 581-608.
Schor, J.B. (1992). The Overworked American: The Unexpected Decline in Leisure. Basic Books: NewYork.
Statistics New Zealand (2001). Around the Clock – Findings from the New Zealand Time Use Survey
1998-99. Wellington.
Stevens, D. (2002). Equity or equality: A study of the time men and women spend in paid and unpaid
work in New Zealand households. Paper presented at the International Time Use Conference: ‘Time
Pressure, Work-family Interface, and Parent-child Relationships, Kitchener-Waterloo, Ontario
Canada, March 21st – 23rd.
St John, S. and Craig D. (2004): Cut Price Kids: Does the 2004 ‘Working for Families’ Budget Work
for Children? Child Poverty Action Group, Auckland.
Textor, M.R. (1998). International Perspectives on Quality Child Care. Early Childhood Education
Journal. 25(3): 167-171.
Varuhas, J., Fursman, L., and Jacobsen, V. (2003). Work and Family Balance: An Economic View. In
New Zealand Treasury Working Papers 03/26, September. Wellington

32New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):16-33

Watkin, T. (2005, 19 February). Childcare – The Numbers Game. Listener. pp.22-26.
White, M. (2006, March). Mind That Child. Metro. pp.26-34.
Wise, S., da Silva, L., Webster, E. and Sanson, A. (2005). The Efficacy of Early Childhood
Interventions. Australian Institute of Family Studies. Research Report 14.
Wittman, D. (2005). The Internal Organization of the Family: Economic Analysis and Psychological
Advice. Kyklos. 58(1): 121-144.
Zweifel, P. and Struwe, W. (1998). Long-term Care Insurance in a Two-Generation Model. Journal of
Risk and Insurance. 65(1): 13-32.

33

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):34-44

The role of the State in family-friendly policy: An analysis ofLabour-led government policy
KATHERINE RAVENSWOOD*
Abstract
Since 1999, the Labour–led governments have introduced several public policy initiatives toencourage women into the paid workforce. However, this article argues that the changes havenot gone far enough, and they require families to fit around work rather than change the waythat paid work is organised. In particular, the article suggests that legislation, policy
discussions and government sponsored research have largely been based on the ‘businesscase’ rationale. Reliance upon the ‘business case’ has resulted in the importance of unpaid
care work being overlooked with an emphasis on individual responsibility for balancing workand family life. Overall the needs of working parents are not being fully met.

Introduction
New Zealand appeared in approximately the bottom third of countries in the gender equality
index of a recent international comparison of parental leave policies in 21 wealthy countries(Ray, Gornick and Schmitt, 2008).The gender equality index was based on the portion ofleave available to fathers and the percentage of earnings replaced during periods of leave.
Overall in the analysis of parental leave for both parents, New Zealand was only just above
the median of all countries. The key best practices identified by the study were “(1) generous
paid leave; (2) non-transferable quotas of leave for each parent; (3) universal coverage
combined with modest eligibility restrictions; (4) financing structures that pool risk among
many employers; and (5) scheduling flexibility” (Ray, Gornick and Schmitt, 2008: 3).
New Zealand government policy has addressed these issues through paid parental leave, andgranting employees the ‘right to request’ flexible work schedules, including part-time hours.
However, this paper argues that policy and legislation is based on a strong business caserationale to improve business, or economic outcomes. The effect of this is that responsibility
for ‘managing’ work and family life remains with the individual and “the structural
constraints that frame work-life choices are made invisible” (Hall and Liddicoat, 2005;
Zacharias, 2006: 33). The risk, for individuals, in this is that once the economic imperative
for these policies is removed, the policy may too be seen as unnecessary and working parents
will struggle to manage their work and home responsibilities.
New Zealand has had minority led Labour governments since 1999. During this period theLabour-led governments have introduced significant changes to employment legislation andsocial policy in order to improve conditions for working parents (see Table 1 below). Besides
being in accordance with Labour’s policy platforms, these changes have been in response to*Katherine Ravenswood is a Lecturer and recipient of the VC Scholarship at AUT; email address:
katherine.ravenswood@aut.ac.nz

34New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):34-44

several labour market changes, including changes to workforce demographics. Statistics
show higher overall participation rates and consistently low unemployment rates in the newmillennium. With more people overall in paid work, it is not surprising that the number offamilies with two parents working has increased. Census data from the 2001 New Zealandcensus show that the percentage of women working in two parent couples with children had
increased significantly:“In 2001, 36.8 per cent of mothers in opposite-sex couples with dependent children
were employed full time, up from 31.4 per cent in 1991, while 30.9 per cent were
employed part time, up from 26.9 percent in 1991 (Statistics New Zealand 2001b).
The high level of working families has been confirmed by preliminary results from the2006 Census data. It is also similar to the experience of Australia where ‘60 per centof women and 90 per cent of men in the workforce [are] part of a two-parent
household with dependent children”. (Burgess, Strachan and Henderson, 2007: 415)
Therefore, as it might be expected, the female participation rate for the March 2008 quarter
was 61.1 per cent (Statistics New Zealand 2008). This rate is close to the highest recorded
rate of 62.2 per cent in the June 2006 quarter (Statistics New Zealand, 2001a). However, the
New Zealand Household Labour Force Survey shows that, overall, unemployment levels for
the March 2008 quarter are at a low level of 3.6 percent and that the labour participation rate
is at 67.7 per cent (Statistics New Zealand 2008). These levels are consistent with those ofrecent years with the labour participation rate reaching a high of 68.8 per cent, which wasreported in survey results in the June 2006 quarter (Statistics New Zealand 2001a).
Table 1: Summary of policy, legislation
Date
2002

Title
Parental Leave and Employment
Protection (Paid Parental Leave)
Amendment Act 2002

2004

Parental Leave and Employment
Protection Amendment Act 2004

2005

Working for families

2005

Parental Leave and Employment
Protection Amendment Act 2004
Parental Leave and Employment
Protection Amendment Act 2004
Employment Relations (Flexible
Working Arrangements)
Amendment Act 2007
20 hours’ free child care

2006
2007

2007
2008

Employment Relations (Breaks,
Infant Feeding, and Other
Matters) Amendment Act 2008

Key points
To include12 week government payment for eligible
employees. Leave under the act falls into 4 types: maternity
leave of up to 14 weeks, paternity/partners’ leave (unpaid)of up to 2 weeks, extended unpaid leave. Total amount ofleave between two parents is 52 weeks.
Period for above payments extended to 13 weeks
Eligibility for leave changed to average of 10 hours per
week from the minimum of 10 hours per week immediately
preceding 6 or 12 month period
Financial package offering combinations of housing
assistance, childcare subsidies and tax credits for working
families
Period for paid parental leave payments extended to 14
weeks
Amended to include paid parental leave for those who are
self-employed
Employee who are responsible for the care of any person
has right to request flexible working practices (hours, daysor place of work)
Up to 20 hours free child care for 3 and 4 year olds at
eligible early childhood centres.
Required designated facilities and breaks for employees
who wish to breastfeed in the workplace or during work
periods.
Employees provided with rest and meal breaks.

35

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):34-44

The focus of these recent government initiatives, listed above, is on increasing labour force
participation by encouraging parents into paid work with more government support available
for working families. While it could be said that this is in response to the need to increaselabour force participation, particularly women, it also recognises that there are an increase infamilies with two parents working, and that there are increased costs associated with thereturn to work, such as childcare (Hall and Liddicoat, 2005; Pocock, 2006).
This paper will discuss how, rather than recognising the importance of unpaid care work,
government initiatives support childcare for parents in paid work, thus making families fit
around current work practices rather than promoting long-term change to the way we work
(Black, 2006a; Lewis, Gambles and Rapoport 2007; Zacharias, 2006). These initiatives
aimed at persuading parents to enter back into the workforce are consistent with the businesscase approach found in most of the research conducted by government departments andcommissions (summarised below in Table 2).
Table 2: Summary of relevant Government research and publications
Government
Departmental Objectives
Key points
Department
Department of
To improve the performance of the‘personal’, ‘managing family
Labourlabour market and, in turn,life’, individual choice
strengthening the economy andincrease the standard of living for
those in New Zealand
Ministry of Social
To help families and whānau be safeLong and short term benefits
Development
and resilient; to be successful andhave the ability to provide for theirown needs.
The Families’
To highlight issues that affect families Long term benefits, publications
Commission
still focus on ‘individual choice’
for work-family issues.
Ministry of Women’s Action plan for Women
Focus on importance for women
Affairs
to be in paid work (Kahu andMorgan, 2007)

What is the business case for family-friendly policies?
The rationale for the business case is formed on the basis that family-friendly policies will
improve the bottom-line and outcomes such as recruitment, retention and performance. The
business case rationale for introducing family-friendly policies justifies the introduction offamily-friendly policy on the basis that it will improve bottom-line business outcomes such as
recruitment, retention and performance (Charlesworth and Baird, 2007; Hyman and Summers,
2007; Liddicoat, 2003; Zacharias, 2006). Doherty (2004) finds the business case to be strong
motivation for employers to implement family-friendly policies and this has also been provenin New Zealand. An EEO Trust survey found that the foremost reason for having work-lifebalance policies was to recruit the best employees. Productivity and general business benefits
were also important, with social responsibility listed as the last reason (EEO Trust, 2006).
Still, given the labour shortage being experienced in New Zealand, introducing familyfriendly policies for these reasons would be seen as an imperative.

36

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):34-44

However, the business case rationale has been criticised because business needs areprioritised over employee needs (Pringle and Tudhope, 1996). Furthermore, Zacharias findsthat the use of the business case for introducing family-friendly policies “takes the current
ways of organising workplaces and private lives for granted” (2006: 34), and as a result, runs
the risk of gendered organisations and work practices being left unchallenged (Zacharias,
2006). Work practices are largely based on gendered ideas of the ‘ideal worker’, someone
who has no care responsibilities or significant commitments outside of paid work.
Assumptions of this ideal worker contribute to workplace cultures of long hours and exclusive
loyalty (Eaton, 2003; Pocock, 2003; Williams, 2000). It has been suggested that family
friendly policies, such as child care support, place more importance on the ‘ideal worker’
while policies, such as flexible places of work or hours of work, integrate variations from thestandard (Budd and Mumford, 2004). Initiatives such as parental leave and sick leave to carefor dependents do not challenge the accepted ‘norms’ of work. They do, however, allow
temporary breaks from work for care of dependents, but upon return to work the norm must
be adhered to. These policies, therefore, aim to fit employees’ lives around the accepted way
of working rather than changing organisational culture. Furthermore, an emphasis onindividual responsibility in the business case focuses on creating more ‘choice’ forindividuals. The discourse of choice for individuals removes the responsibility fromorganisations, and society to change workplace practices; the onus is then on the individual to‘manage’ their own work and home responsibilities (Lewis et al. 2007).
While family-friendly policies are seen as a way of attracting and retaining good employees,
Doherty (2004) argues that use of the business case may lead to family-friendly policies being
seen as a short-term solution until business conditions change. Zacharias too suggests that thebusiness case is a ‘fair-weather’ solution and that “these policies may be discarded once thesefavourable economic conditions deteriorate” (2006:32).

Is government relying on business case?
Charlesworth and Baird (2007) noted that when organisational effectiveness was interpreted
as a ‘narrowly framed business’ case, the link between gender equity and organisational
effectiveness was easily lost: “when the rationale for gender equity disappears, it becomesvery hard indeed [to] get gender on the agenda” (Charlesworth and Baird, 2007: 399). The
consequence, in terms of policy, is that if the business case is the rationale for the introductionof family-friendly policies, the focus of these policies is likely to be for the short term, and theunderlying conditions that create tension between paid work and family will not change. The
business case rationale justifies family-friendly policies because it is seen to improve businessoutcomes. The following section provides examples of how government policies andinitiatives to support working families have relied upon the business case rationale, inparticular:-

The Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Act 2007
The Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act 2004
Financial support for working families: Working for Families and free childcare
Government sponsored research

A significant amendment to the Employment Relations Act was passed by Parliament inNovember, 2007. The Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment
Act 2007 allows employees with children under the age of five or with disabled children the
37

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):34-44

right to request changes to their working hours (Transport and Industrial Relations Committee2007). The legislation constitutes as a clear example of the prevailing business case rationality
behind family-friendly policies. The Flexible Work Amendment Bill was introduced as a
private member’s Bill by Green Party Member of Parliament, Sue Kedgely in 2005. In its
original form, the Bill focused only on working parents with children, and entitled employees
to request changes to how they worked. It encouraged employees to challenge the currently
accepted modes of work and questioned the way that work is structured, and acknowledgedthat the ‘traditional’ way work is carried out is often unsatisfactory, particularly for parents.
The ‘business case’ rationale became apparent during the consideration of the Bill by theTransport and Industrial Relations Committee. The Transport and Industrial Relations
Committee recognised the benefits to employees and employers of a culture that allows
flexible working arrangements as they would widen the recruitment pool (Transport andIndustrial Relations Committee, 2007). Recruitment and retention is a key focus of thebusiness case rationale, as mentioned earlier.
Accordingly, business needs are prioritised over those of the employee and it is the individual,
rather than the organisation, who takes responsibility for ‘managing’ their family and work
lives (Lewis et al 2007). The emphasis in legislation is on the individual employee to take theresponsibility of managing their family-work balance, rather than the employer. Not only does
the employee have to signal that they want to make changes, they must also specify thechanges, provide information on how this might impact their work and suggest solutions to
mitigate any negative impact. Under the Act, the employee is required to make their request
in writing to the employer and state whether they were requesting a permanent or temporarychange, and, if temporary, when it would end. However, there are several grounds uponwhich the employer may refuse the request for change to working conditions. These include:
detrimental effect on quality, performance and ability to meet customer demand; inability toreorganise work among existing staff; inability to recruit additional staff; planned structuralchanges and burden of additional costs. Although the Act allows changes to working
conditions that do not necessarily fall within traditional ways of working, it places the
responsibility onto the individual employee rather than the organisation to find or suggest
ways that work and family/care responsibilities can be better combined. Thus, the needs or
outcomes of the business are prioritised over those of the employee.
A second example of the business case rationale in legislation is the Parental Leave and
Employment Protection Amendment Act. Under the Act, there are several types of leaveavailable to mothers and their partners. They include unpaid special leave of ten days to coverappointments associated with pregnancy; maternity leave; unpaid partner’s leave; paid
parental leave and extended leave. The maximum number of weeks leave that may be taken
between a couple is 52 weeks extended leave plus the unpaid partner’s leave entitlement. Allof the types of leave are based on continuous service for a minimum of six months and an
average of ten hours per week or more. Women with six months’ service would be entitled tothe special leave during pregnancy and fourteen weeks’ paid parental leave. A partner withsix months’ service would be entitled to one week’s unpaid leave. A woman with twelve
months’ service would be entitled to have extended leave to a maximum of 52 weeks,
including the paid parental leave. Her partner, given the same service requirements, could
share the extended leave entitlement and would be entitled to two weeks’ unpaid partner’s
leave in addition to that. Self-employed women are entitled to paid parental leave with thesame service requirements. Women or their partners who do not meet the service
requirements are not entitled to parental leave (Department of Labour, 2007b).
38

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):34-44

In New Zealand, women make up the majority of part time and casual workers (Statistics
New Zealand, 2001b). The Paid Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Act
2004 has been criticised because eligibility is dependent on continuous service and minimum
hours of work. This means that many women who are employed casually or on fixed term
agreements may not be eligible for paid parental leave. Women who have worked part-time,
but not on consecutive week (as one hour per week is required with at least forty hours permonth), also, do not meet the requirements. The eligibility of women who have recently
taken maternity leave, and wish to do so again for a subsequent child is also restricted. They
must, once again, meet the continuous employment requirements with one employer criteria
in order to be eligible for the leave.
Thirdly, the government has, in recent years, introduced two initiatives aimed at encouraging
more parents into paid work. The first is Working For Families, which is a financial package
for only those parents who are in paid work. It offers a combination of housing allowances,supplementary payments, tax credits and childcare subsidies (both for pre-school and after
school care). It was introduced in 2004 and is available to all families earning $70,000 per
annum or less and some families (with several children) earning up to $100,000 per annum orless (Working for Families, 2007). One of the requirements for eligibility is a minimum total
hours of work per week for the household. The emphasis on paid work, again, reflects the‘business’ imperative of encouraging parents into paid work. A consequence of the minimum
cut off is families needing to fit around standard work organisation. The second initiative,
which was effective from 1 July 2007, was the introduction of twenty hours free childcare forall three and four year olds in New Zealand. While the impetus for this was to provide preschool education for children, it also supports parents in paid work by easing the financial
burden of childcare. The policy of supported childcare, again, assumes that work organisation
cannot be changed to accommodate families and instead families need to fit in around workrequirements.
The research and policy advice of governmental agencies follows a model that focuses on
individual choice and responsibility and, excluding that of the Families Commission, is driven
by a business case rationale to improve economic and business outcomes. An example of theprevalence of the business case in governmental research is the New Zealand Department ofLabour. The Department has been pivotal in providing research that investigates work
practices and how they can maximise economic productivity. The purpose of the Departmentof Labour is indeed “to improve the performance of the labour market and, through this,strengthen the economy and increase the standard of living for those in New Zealand”(Department of Labour, 2007). Its role, amongst others, is to provide information and support
to improve workplace productivity. The Department of Labour has two major research
initiatives; one is in work-life balance and the other, work productivity (Department ofLabour, 2007). The language used by the Department of Labour’s description of work-lifebalance, for example “…deciding on and maintaining an appropriate balance between ourwork life and our personal life is an individual responsibility”, focuses on individual choiceand needs, and describes managing family life as one would describe managing a business(see the Department of Labour report Lessons from the Workplace Project, 2008: 48). In linewith a business case rationale, this form of nomenclature is translated and normalised into
workplace practices.

39

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):34-44

In contrast to a focus on the economic prospects of the country, the Ministry of Social
Development undertakes social research on children, youth, family and community. The
Ministry works strategically to bring about long term benefits, while, also, endeavouring tofind short term solutions (Ministry of Social Development, 2007). This combined approach isevident in research published by the Ministry in 2006. The research Work, Family andParenting investigated the effect on children of work-family choices made by parents andhow families could be supported to minimise negative work spillover. The methodology
behind the research was one that focused on individual choice and preferences in combining
work and family life, which is in line with the business case’s emphasis on individual
responsibility. The research did recognise, however, that individual choices are often madewithin constraints such as financial constraints (Colmar Brunton, 2006).
Another Government Department that has undertaken research in the family-work area is the
Families Commission. The Families Commission’s purpose is to highlight issues that affectfamilies and disseminate this information across government agencies and the community(Families Commission, 2007c). The Families Commission takes an approach that centralises
family concern, rather than social and economic development. It included work-life balanceand quality flexible work as a focus for 2007. The Families Commission recently publishedresearch on parental leave in New Zealand, and its findings were that “New Zealand can dobetter to give parents real choices around how to balance their employment and family
responsibilities” (Families Commission, 2007b: 11).
The findings of the Families
Commission’s research will be discussed in detail later in this paper. However, despite its
family centred approach to work-life balance, in a pamphlet aimed at working parents, theFamilies Commission emphasises steps that individuals can take in order to provide betterbalance in their lives (Families Commission, 2007a). This is consistent with the business caseapproach of individual responsibility for achieving balance, rather than workplace change or
responsibility (Lewis et al. 2007).

How do we know that the policy changes are not enough?
As indicated earlier in this article, New Zealand does not perform particularly well ininternational comparisons of support for family-friendly policies (Ray et al. 2008). This isconfirmed by data from different sources within New Zealand – reports in popular media;
statistics showing women are over-represented in part-time work; level of payments made to
women on paid parental leave and research conducted by the Families Commission.
Reports in media indicate that New Zealanders still feel tension between work and family.
Laila Harre, who was instrumental in developing New Zealand’s Parental Leave and
Employment Protection (Paid Parental leave) Amendment Act 2002, has been quoted assaying that government and workplace policies do not give people genuine choice about
whether to work or not: “All our social policy is designed around the choice of whether towork or stay home being available only to people who have partners who can support themfinancially, so it’s not a choice” (Harre cited in Black, 2006b). In addition, an ACNeilsen
survey of 1000 New Zealanders published by Relationship Services found that of “more thanhalf of the population want more time with their children (66 per cent of men, 52 per cent of
women) and close friends (54 per cent on average)” (cited in Collins, 2006). A prominent
New Zealand journalist, who left the profession, amongst other reasons, to gain more timewith family and friends, was quoted as saying that: “…policy makers only look at work/lifebalance in terms of providing more childcare whereas the real answer will only come from
redefining work so that women can feel they are achieving and be perceived as achievers
40New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):34-44

without having their kids parked eternally elsewhere” (Black 2006a). In short, these media
reports indicate that the regulatory framework still does not support women in paid work withchildren.
While, according to OECD statistics, the average annual hours worked has decreased since2001, New Zealand still rates as one of the highest in terms of numbers of hours worked perperson. New Zealand ranks above Australia, Canada and Japan, amongst other countries(OECD 2007). Burgess and Rasmussen (2007) found that the average hours worked per week
has increased in both Australia and New Zealand since the 1990s. This increase includes anaverage growth in household working hours and a change to when the hours are worked.
Hours of work have changed so that the standard working week of daylight hours, Monday to
Friday, is no longer as common as they were previously. While average working hours in
New Zealand have decreased a little since 2001, Burgess and Rasmussen found that “there
appears to be a tacit acceptance that working hour trends have been reversed permanently andwill continue to either increase or stay at a high level” (2007: 9). One effect of a labour
shortage is, indeed, an increase in the number of hours worked by individuals (Callister,2005). While increased working hours poses many problems, it is of concern to employers
trying to attract parents of children into the paid workforce. The increase in working hours
also has an impact on parents’ decisions to work because they need to arrange childcare tocover longer hours and choose to spend less time with their family.
Another indicator of women’s efforts to combine paid work and family responsibility is the
proportion of women working part-time. Of those working part-time, the majority were
women “with almost two and a half times more females working part time than males”(Statistics New Zealand 2001c). In Australia, part-time jobs are held largely by women in
their childbearing years. Pocock’s interpretation is that “they have essentially adapted the
traditional Worker-man/Carer woman model by adding a half-time wage earning role to theduties of women” (2003: 165). It could be inferred that the reasons for most of part-timework being done by women in New Zealand are the same.
Strachan and Burgess (1998) found that if employment should generate enough income tosupport a family then paid parental leave should also provide sufficient income to support afamily. However in 2008, paid parental leave was paid at a maximum of $407.36 compared toa minimum of $480 per week for a 40 hour week under minimum wage legislation(Department of Labour, 2008). Minimum wages are based on a minimum standard required tomeet an acceptable standard of living. This would suggest that the parental leave payments
would not be adequate to provide a certain standard of living. It could also be implied that as
the maximum amount payable for paid parental leave is lower than the minimum wage, careor family work is, indeed, less valued than paid work, and that parental leave payments would
probably not be sufficient to support a family.
Following research with New Zealand families, the Families Commission found that while
recent changes to legislation had made improvements, there were further changes that should
be made. The recommendations of the report were that government funded paid parental
leave should be extended to 13 months by 2015; that eligibility should be extended to those
who had been in employment but may have experienced ‘gaps’ in employment or changed
employers in the previous 6 months and that requirements of minimum hours per week beremoved (Families Commission, 2007). They also found that the level of parental leave
payments should be increased in order to lessen the burden on families.

41

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):34-44

Conclusion
While several positive changes to legislation and government policy were made during theperiod of Labour-led governments in New Zealand from 1999, these changes were grounded
in a business case rationale. The significance of this is that they favoured individual
responsibility for ‘managing’ family and paid work responsibilities. They focused on thepositive outcomes for business and the economy in the short-term, rather than long-termchange and outcomes. While acknowledging the responsibilities of working families, thelegislation encouraged families to shape their lives around work rather than changing how we
expect work to be done. Furthermore, another criticism of the business case rationale is thatwhen the circumstances supporting the ‘business case’ change, the policies may be removed.
There could not be a clearer example of this than an announcement by the prime minister inthe lead up to a general election in November 2008. Prime Minister Helen Clark announced
that her party had intended to extend paid parental leave, but would now abandon the policy
given the emerging global financial crisis (Trevett, 2008).
It has been argued that, in order for working families to have real choice in how they balance
their responsibilities, systems and institutions of work must change. This has not yet
happened in New Zealand and it is predicted that the next few years, with a change ineconomic conditions and a newly elected centre-right government, it will show how Labourled policy was based upon the business case rationale and how this has weakened or restricted
the improvements possible for working families.

References
Black, J. (2006a, 28 January – 3 February). A New Morning. The New Zealand Listener. 202(3429),
http://www.listener.co.nz/issue/3429/features/5412/a_new_morning.html.
Black, J. (2006b, 18-24 February). The Mother Myth. The New Zealand Listener. 202(3432),
http://www.listener.co.nz/issue/3432/features/5517/the_mother_myth.html.
Brookers. (2007). Introduction to the Parental Leave and Employment Proctection Act. Retrieved
August 17, 2007, from www.brookersonline.co.nz
Budd, J.W. and Mumford, K.A. (2004). Trade Unions and Family-Friendly Policies in Britain.
Industrial and Labour Relations Review. 57(2): 204-222
Burgess, J. and Rasmussen, E. (2007). Too much of a good thing: Longer working hours in Australia
and New Zealand. Paper presented at the Association of Industrial Relations Academics of Australia
and New Zealand Conference 2007, Auckland, New Zealand.
Burgess, J., Strachan, G., and Henderson, L. (2007). Equal Employment Opportunity Legislation and
Policies: The Australian Experience. Equal Opportunities International. 26(6): 525-540
Callister, P. (2005). Overworked Families? Changes in the Paid Working Hours of Families with
Young Children, 1986-2001. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand. 24: 160-184
Charlesworth, S. and Baird, M. (2007). Getting Gender on the Agenda: The Tale of Two
Organisations. Women in Management Review. 22(5): 391-404

42

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):34-44
Collins, S. (2006, 29 August). Children’s Hour the Most Important for New Zealand Parents. The New
Zealand Herald.
Colmar Brunton. (2006). Work, Family and Parenting Study: Research findings. Wellington, New
Zealand.: Ministry of Social Development.
Department of Labour. (2007). About Us. Retrieved August 21, 2007, from www.dol.govt.nz/about/
Department of Labour (2008). Minimum pay. Retrieved October 28, 2008 from www.dol.govt.nz.
Department of Labour (2008) Lessons from the Workplace Project: an evaluation of a work-lifebalance programme initiative. Retrieved from December, 2008,
www.dol.govt.nz/worklife/research/work-life-balance.asp
Diamond, C. (2004). Gender equity, work-family conflict and telework [Electronic version]. Paper
presented at the Association of Industrial Relations Academic of Australia and New Zealand, Noosa,Australia. Retrieved July 20 2005, from http://www.griffith.edu.au/school/gbs/irl/airaanz2004/
Doherty, L. (2004). Work-Life Balance Initiative: Implications for Women. Employee Relations. 26:
433-452.
Dye, S. (2007, July 2). Third of pre-schoolers not covered by 20-hours scheme. The New Zealand
Herald.
Eaton, S. (2003). If You Can Use Them: Flexibility Policies, Organizational Commitment andPerceived Performance. Industrial Relations. 4(2): 145-166
EEO Trust. (2006). Work life survey 2006. Auckland, New Zealand: EEO Trust.
Families Commission. (2007a). Even Up: Balancing Work and Family. Retrieved August 21, 2007,
from www.familiescommission.govt.nz/even-up.php
Families Commission. (2007b). It’s about time: Towards a parental leave policy that gives New
Zealand families real choice. Summary report. Wellington, New Zealand: Families Commission.
Families Commission. (2007c). What does the Families Commission do? Retrieved August 21, 2007,
from www.familiescommission.govt.nz/
Hall, L. & Liddicoat, L. (2005). Challenges to Developing Effective Family Friendly Work Practices:
Findings from New Zealand, Research and Practice in Human Resource Management, 13(1): 1-17.
Hurrell, K., Botcherby, S., & Darton, D. (2007). Out of work or working below potential - assessing
the impact of increasing flexible working opportunities. London: Equal Opportunities Commission.
Hyman, J. and Summer, J. (2007). Work and Life: Can Employee Representation Influence Balance?
Employee Relations. 29(4): 367-384
Kahu, E. and Morgan, M. (2007). A Critical Discourse Analysis of New Zealand Government Policy:
Women as Mothers and Workers. Women’s Studies International Forum. 30(2): 134-146
Lewis, S., Gambles, R,. and Rapoport, R. (2007). The Constraints of a ‘Work-Life Balance’
Approach: An International Perspective. The International Journal of Human Resource Management.
18(3): 360-373

43New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):34-44
Liddicoat, L. (2003). Stakeholder Perceptions of Family-Friendly Workplaces: An Examination of Six
New Zealand Organisations. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources. 41(3): 354-370
Ministry of Social Development. (2007). About the Ministry. Retrieved August 21, 2007, fromwww.msd.govt.nz
OECD. (2007). Statistical Annex. In OECD Employment Outlook (pp. 243-277). Paris: OECD.
Pocock, B. (2003). The Work/Life Collision: What Work is Doing to Australians and What to do aboutit. Leichhardt, Australia: The Federation Press.
Pocock, B. (2006). The Labour Market ate my Babies: Work, Children and a Sustainable Future.
Leichhardt, Australia: The Federation Press.
Rapoport, R., Bailyn, L., Fletcher, J. K., & Pruitt, B. (2002). Beyond work-family balance. Advancing
gender equity and workplace performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ray, R., Gornick, J. C., & Schmitt, J. (2008). Parental Leave Policies in 21 countries. Assessing
Generosity and Gender Equality. Washington, DC: Center for Economic and Policy Research.
Strachan G, Burgess J (1998) The ‘family friendly’ workplace: origins, meaning and application atAustralian workplaces. International Journal of Manpower Studies 19(4), 250-265.
Statistics New Zealand. (2001a). Census 2001 families and household highlights. Retrieved June 3,
2007, from www.stats.govt.nz
Statistics New Zealand. (2001b). Census 2001 families and household snapshot. Retrieved August 29,
2006, from www.stats.govt.nz/census/
Statistics New Zealand. (2001c). Census 2001 work highlights. Retrieved June 3, 2007, fromwww.stats.govt.nz/census/
Statistics New Zealand. (2008). Household Labour Force Survey March 2008 Quarter. retrieved 12
May 2008, www.stats.govt.nz
Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. (2007). Employment Relations (Flexible Working
Hours) Amendment Bill (253-2). Select Committee Report 30th July. Wellington, New Zealand.
Trevett, C. (2008, 21 October), Clark tells of policies that might have been. The New Zealand Herald.
Williams, J. (2000). Underbending Gender: Why Family and Work Conflict and What to do abou it.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Zacharias, N. (2006). Work-Life Balance: ‘Good Weather’ Policies or Agenda for Social Change? A
Cross-Country Comparison of Parental Leave Provisions in Australia and New Zealand. International
Employment Relations Review. 12(2): 32-47

44

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

A Contested Workplace: Situating New Zealand’s OHSM
Regulatory Practice within the Literature – an Introduction to the
Policy History and Regulatory Debates
JOHN WREN*
Abstract
The implementation of New Zealand’s Occupational Health and Safety Management (OHSM)
regulatory regime has been subjected to sustained critique by the National Occupational Healthand Safety Advisory Committee (NOHSAC). The most recent critique focuses upon theperceived inadequacies of current standards and guidance documents about what occupational
health and safety management systems (OHSM systems) best practice means for employers. This
paper provides an introduction to the literature, history, and policy debates about occupational
health and safety (OHS) regulatory practice in advanced western nations. New insights in the
recent literature pointing to the importance of understanding ‘regulatory character’ and theoverlapping and often conflicting regulatory nature of the workplace space are identified. The
insights raise questions about the role of a workers’’ compensation scheme in promoting
workplace safety, and suggest that in order to implement a best practice OHS regulatory regime
in New Zealand action on a number of fronts is required.
Keywords: OHSM regulation, OHS management systems, policy, best practice, literature,
history, regulator, workers’ compensation scheme

Introduction
The functioning of New Zealand’s occupational health and safety regulatory system has been
under scrutiny by the National Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Committee (NOHSAC)
since 2003 (Pearce, Dryson,Gander, Langley and Watsatffe, 2007, 2008; Allen and Clarke et al
2006; Kendall, 2005, 2006; Access Economics et al 2006; Pearce et al. 2005; VIOSH et al, 2006;
Driscoll, 2006; Driscoll et al. 2004; Pearce et al. 2006; Driscoll et al. 2005; Health OutcomesInternational Pty Ltd, 2005). NOHSAC members represent a range of expertise within the broad
fields of occupational health and safety, and provide independent advice to the Minister ofLabour on occupational health and safety in New Zealand. The most recent advice to the Ministerof Labour is critical of the failure of the Department of Labour to develop adequate standards andguidance documents about what occupational health and safety management systems (OHSM
systems) best practice means for employers (Pearce et al. 2008).
This paper provides an introduction to the literature, history, and policy debates aboutoccupational health and safety (OHS) regulatory practice in advanced western nations. New
insights in the recent literature pointing to the importance of understanding ‘regulatory character’*

Dr John Wren, Adjunct Research Fellow, New Zealand Institute of Work and Labour Studies, Auckland Universityof Technology

45

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

and the overlapping and often conflicting regulatory nature of the workplace space are identified.
These insights suggest that in order to implement a best practice OHS regulatory regime in New
Zealand requires action on a number of fronts.
The review is organised around the following themes:
1. Contours of the OHS policy literature and policy issues;
2. Outline of the current dominant regulatory approach to OHS regulation in advanced western
nations;
3. Issues relating to current regulatory approach in advanced western nations, and evidence for
effectiveness of the approach;
4. New Zealand specific issues within the current regulatory regime;
5. Based on the proceeding evidence, identification of questions about the possible the role ofworkers’ compensation authority.
An inductive approach was also used to inform this literature review. The approach serves three
purposes:
1. The identification of the range of theories and methods that have been used to describe andexplain the process of OHS regulatory change, and the outcomes that have occurred invarious countries.
2. The identification of “enduring patterns and relationships” (Hakim, 1987) across time andcultures about the origins of OHS regulatory change, the factors that commonly determine thefinal outcome, the policy issues commonly debated, and the policy positions taken byparticipants in the debates.
3. The development of a cumulative and critically aware body of evidence that can be used to
inform the discussion of New Zealand’s occupational safety and health policy as expressed inits current regulatory form.
Wren (1997; 2002) argues that the literature can be classified into approaches informed by
Pluralist theory, Marxist theory, Industrial relations, Historic-legal method, Public choice theory,
and Critical theory (Wren 1997; 2002). This review summarises and updates Wren’s original
analysis.

Contours of the OHS Policy Literature and Policy Issues
Over the last 30 years a sizable and diverse body of literature has developed describing andexploring the origins, causes of change, and policy debates around OHS regulation in many
advanced western nations (Wren 1997; 2002). The general shape of this literature is characterisedin Figure 1.

46

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

Figure 1: Types of occupational safety and health policy research and their explanatoryorientation
Spectrum of Research Orientation
Types of Policy Research Questions
Question 1
Basic

Question 2
Focus

Types of Explanatory Emphasis

Question 3
Approach

Explanatory
Orientation 1

Comparative

Analysis of Policy

Process
Content
OutputSource ofConflict

Number of
CausesAnalytical
CritiqueTestability of
Hypotheses

Level of
Evidence

Individuals
Interest Groups
Elite Groups

Ideas andValuesSingleTechnocratic(Values andnorms of thesocial system unquestioned.)HighfalsifiabilityHigh

Pluralist theory

Pluralist theory

Marxist theory
Industrial
Relations
Pluralist theory

Pluralist theory

Descriptive
Explanatory
andPolicy as:

Level of Evidence

Key
AgentsHistorical-legal
MethodHistorical-legal
MethodIndustrial Relations

Industrial Relations

Marxist theory

Marxist theory

Class

Material(Economics)

Historical-legal
MethodPluralist theory
Historical-legal
MethodIndustrial
Relations

Industrial
Relations

IndependentorHistorical-legal
MethodMarxist theory

Dependent
variable

Explanatory
Orientation 2

Evaluation
Analysisfor Policy

MarxistHistorical-legal
MethodPluralist
Industrial
Relations

Marxist theory

Multiple

Radical (Values
and norms of thesocial system
questioned.)Lowfalsifiability

Low

Public Choice

Information
Theory{ Policyadvocacy } Feminist Critiques
Process advocacy

Green Critiques,etc.

Source: Adapted from Wren (1997).

The taxonomy suggests that there a number of types of OHS regulatory policy literature each ofwhich have a predominant explanatory orientation. The orientations are towards:••••

Either ‘analysis of policy’ or ‘analysis for policy;
A foci upon process, content, output type research questions, or towards evaluation;
information, policy advocacy or policy process type questions
Particular sets of explanatory emphasis;
Different types of research evidence to support the conclusions reached.

Analysis ‘of’’ policy refers to analyses aimed at achieving understanding of the policy change
process and the issues involved. Analysis ‘for’ policy is concerned with solving the policy issues,
and advocating for a particular solution (Ham and Hill, 1993; Hogwood and Gunn, 1981). Thisdistinction has also been referred to as ‘writing about public policy’ and “referring to public
policy” (Ilchman and Uphoff 1983). In contrast, the problem of research orientation has beenphrased as a ‘unit of analysis question’, is the unit of analysis the policy ‘process’ or the policy‘network’, or is it the policy ‘program’ (Rainey and Milward, 1983).

47

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

Theoretically inclined Marxist accounts of occupational safety and health policy change are
predominantly found within the sociology of health and illness and the sociology of law literature
respectively (Wren 1997; 2002). The accounts emphasise class conflict, and that the content ofany policy is determined by who has control of the legitimate core decision-making apparatus.
Countries studied include the United States (Berman, 1977; 1978; Craig, 2007; Curran, 1984;
Navarro, 1983; Wysong 1992; 1993; Calavita, 1983; Navarro 1978; 1980; Coye, 1979), Canada(Sass, 1986; 1989; 1993; 1995; Walters, 1983; 1985; 1991), United Kingdom (Clutterbuck, 1983;
Dalton 1992), Italy (Assennato and Navarro, 1983; Navarro, 1983), Mexico (Laurell, 1979), India(Vilanilam, 1980), and Australia (Pearse and Refshauge, 1982; Carson, 1985; 1989; Carson andHenenberg, 1988). Cross-national surveys looking at the reasons for the various forms ofgovernment occupational health service provision that can be found in some capitalist countries
and former east-European socialist states have also been undertaken (Elling, 1977; 1980; 1989;
Greenlund and Elling, 1995).
In Marxist analyses the origins of change in OHS policy in the 1970s are attributed to pressure
from rank and file trade union members upon organised union leadership for more attention to be
paid to health and safety at work. The advent of this pressure has been linked to the perceptionthat the then existing arrangements were not working, and were incapable of controlling new
hazards arising out of new technologies and production methods. In explaining the change
outcomes, emphasis is placed upon the historical conflict between workers’ and employers overcontrol of the means of production. In addition, where change has been deemed favourable toworkers’, this has only occurred where labour has had the political and or economic advantage.
The policy issue of particular attention is the workers’ right to know about the hazards of the job,
the right to be informed about the results of any monitoring of their health or the work
environment, and the right to refuse dangerous work.
Within this stream of literature a diversity of opinion exists about how to explain the changes. A
number of writers for example, emphasise the determining influence of the level of politicalpower that can be mobilised by the representatives of labour. Other authors highlight thefunctional role played by the state in maintaining the economic system. Some researchers focus
upon the role of ideology in constraining the way OHS policy is thought about by policy makers,
academics, practitioners, and managers. Still more authors have argued that much OHS law isonly of symbolic value, while others have commented that even symbolic law can come to have apositive effect in the longer term.
In contrast, pluralist analyses, argue that often a particular policy reflects the current level ofknowledge, values and beliefs of decision-makers, and emphasise the role of conflict overdifferent values and ideas as the motivation behind change. The influence of different
institutional political arrangements in the United States, Canada, United Kingdom and Germany
are highlighted as explanations for different policy outcomes (Ashford, 1976; 1988 ; Kelman,
1981; Singleton, 1983; Wilson, 1985; Doern, 1977; 1978; Doern and Wilson, 1974; Kelman,
1980; Mendeloff, 1979; Grabe, 1991; Boehringer and Pearse, 1986). Political science
perspectives put emphasis upon the contingent and incremental nature of much policy change,and highlight the role of organisational behaviour and power (Lindblom, 1959; 1979; Lindblom
and Woodhouse, 1993; Mendeloff, 1979).

48

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

Historical-legal studies represent a large part of the literature on OHS policy in western nations.
The studies tend to highlight four factors. First, as pointing to the existence of a combination ofstate and society centred technological, economic and industrial factors as influencing change.
Second, there is an inclination towards emphasising the historical specifics and contingency oflegislative developments. Third, a focus upon changes in the ‘legal interpretation’ of the law
pertaining to health and safety and accident compensation, which is particularly applicable tostudies that appear in the legal literature on changes in British health and safety law. The last is
the use of comparative social-historical narrative for explanation. The literature draws attention
to the importance of understanding how different legal systems and terms reflect differences invalues and ideas about the role of law in controlling safety at work, the economy, and efficiency
in government intervention. Studies have been undertaken on change in the United States(Altman, 1976; Levenstein, 1988; Orloff and Skocpol, 1984; Szasz, 1984; Brodeur, 1974;Davidson, 1970; Moss, 1994; Page and O’Brien, 1973; Donnelly, 1982; Heath, 1986; Peters,
1986; Muraskin, 1995), Australia (Biggins, 1993; Creighton and Gunningham, 1985; Gunn,
1990; Gunningham, 1984; 1987; James, 1993), France (Cassou and Pissarro, 1988), Germany(Hauss and Rosenbrock 1984), Italy (Bagnara, Bioca and Mazzonis, 1981), United Kingdom(Hutchins and Harrison, 1966; Steemson, 1983; Thomas, 1970; Woolf, 1973; Baldwin, 1990;
Barrett and James, 1988; Eberlie, 1990; Harrison, 1995; Barrett, 1977; Howells, 1972; 1974;
Lewis, 1974). Other authors have undertaken similar studies that combine an element of social
history with an emphasis on legal interpretation (Burrows and Mair, 1996; Dawson, Willman,
Bamford and Clinton, 1988; Drake and Wright, 1983; Fitzpatrick, 1992; Friedman and Ladinsky,
1967; Hepple and Byre, 1989; Barrett and Howells, 1995; Holgate, 1994; James, 1992; Miller,
1991). Cross-national comparative studies of the development of factory legislation in advanced
western economies have also been done (Gordon, 1988; Singleton, 1982;1983; Weindling, 1985).
Public choice theorists and economic rationalists though, argue that decisions about OHS policy
should be determined by economic rationalist models of the behaviour of organisations andindividuals in a free market. Rationalist models conceive of the policy process as analyticallyseparable components or ‘boxes’ that form a sequence of events called the policy process, andthat policy-making is about maximising social gain and policy-making should be about therational consideration of all alternatives, including competing values, costs, and benefits (Dye,1987; Pierson, 1991). Rationalist approaches to occupational safety and health policy fit within
the area “analyses for policy” in Figure 1, and uniformly present economic arguments about thedegree to which government should or should not intervene in occupational safety and health(Diehl and Ayob, 1980; Smith, 1974; Steigler, 1971; Viscusi, 1979; 1983; 1996; Coase, 1960;
Dorman, 1996; Oi, 1973; 1974; Rinefort, 1980).
While it can be seen that the literature is quite diverse in the explanations put forward, there is aremarkable consistency across all the studies and countries about what the core policy issues arein advanced industrialised nations irrespective of the dominant political ideology, type of legal
system, the particular experience of industrialisation, or country examined (Wren, 1997; 2002;
Frick, Jensen, Quinlan and Wilthagen, 2000; Bohle and Quinlan, 2000). The first issue, aroundwhich there is extensive debate, concerns what is the appropriate role for workers’ and theirrepresentatives in promoting workplace safety? Another important issue, in recent years, is thedebate about the extent to which the state should intervene in regulating occupational safety andhealth. The question of ‘extent’ means the degree to which government should be involved in49New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

health and safety. In other words, what level and type of resources should government commit to
the control of injuries and illnesses in the workplace?
Closely related to the issue of the ‘extent’ to which government should intervene, is the questionof how government should intervene and it is at this point in the discussion that the question
about which prevention system to use returns. For instance, should government have nothing to
do with health and safety at work and leave employers and employees to work it out between
themselves? Or should the state set specific criteria in statute by which the performance of
employers and employees would be measured? Alternatively, the state could intervene bypromulgating highly detailed sets of prescriptive technical regulations that would be rigorously
enforced. The state could also intervene, by empowering workers’ and or their representatives toact on their own behalf. Another issue implicit in these debates, of particular relevance incountries with a British legal heritage, are debates about the legal “standard of care” that shouldbe imposed upon employers and employees. Should the standard of care be an “absolute”
standard, or a lesser one of a “strict” duty of care that provides for a defence of “all reasonably
practicable”? Another issue concerns what is an appropriate level of resource allocation by
government for implementation of the OHS policy regime?
The research clearly highlights the contested and connected nature of OHS policy to industrial
relations and workers’’ compensation policy. However recent Australian research has argued that
not only is OHS policy connected, its effectiveness is compromised because of inherent
philosophical conflicts between regulatory regimes working in the same space (Haines andGurney, 2003; Johnstone and Sarre, 2002). In their analysis Haines and Gurney (2003) argue thatwhile there may appear to be a superficial congruence at a high level between regulatory regimes
operating in the same or overlapping space, in fact because the regimes originate from different
philosophical perspectives and are designed for different policy outcomes/agenda, they in factcompete with each other. The example they give is between competition law and health andsafety law in Australia. Both competition and health and safety law regulate business behaviour,
however competition law operates in a paradigm of promoting a free market while health andsafety operates from a welfare paradigm. Consequently, private enforcement behaviour aimed at
improving the safety behaviour of a subsidiary or supplier company can be challenged on thebasis that it is restricting trade and is consequently illegal behaviour.
Using Haines and Gurney’s (2003) analysis, it could be argued that the same situation applies in
New Zealand. On one hand we have a workers’’ compensation regulatory regime that is a nofault welfare system, on the other the OHS regime is a substantially a punitive fault based onethat prioritises the responsibility of employers to manage workplace health and safety. The
difference in approach has implications for how accident investigations take place and where one
thinks prevention should focus. The former approach might encourage a systems thinking andavoidance of laying blame, while the latter could focus more upon individual behaviour andblame. Another good example of the tension between regulatory regimes operating in the same
space is the obligation of employers to respect on one hand individual worker’s rights while on
the other having to actively promote health and safety in the workplace. In this context,
employers may wish to impose drug testing upon their workforce, although this may be resisted
by unions on the basis that it breeches individual workers’ rights. Consequently, it can be argued
that the regulatory regime protecting individual rights compromises the ability of the OHS
regulatory regime to promote improved worker safety.
50

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

Based upon the review, Figure 2 below presents a contextual framework for considering theoverlaps between regulatory regimes and OHS regulation in New Zealand operating in theworkplace space.
Figure 2: A Contested Workplace: A Policy Framework of OHSM Regulation in New
ZealandFree Market Regulation –Competition Law

OHS Policy

OHS theory &practice

Accident
Compensation Policy

Bill of Rights

Industrial Relationsand Labour Market
PolicyPublic Health andEnvironmental Law

Source: Adapted from Wren, 1997

Current dominant regulatory approach to OHS management and regulationin advanced western nations
The previous section presented an overview of the general debates about OHS regulation.
However, it has been argued that how OHS is regulated is closely tied to dominant theories about
the causes of workplace injuries (Frick et al. 2000). The theories are important because theysignificantly influence the way OHS practitioners and researchers think about the causes andprevention of workplace injuries and ill-health.
While there are many injury causation and prevention theories, the dominant theories originate
within the following schools of thought: Medicine, Industrial Hygiene, Occupational
epidemiology, Individual and Organisational Psychology, and Ergonomics, Systems theory

51

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69(Quinlan, 1993; Quinlan and Bohle, 1991). In New Zealand, Domino theory and Loss Causation
theory which originated in the early psychological literature, Epidemiology and more recently
Interactive/Systems theory are seen as being the dominant perspectives (Slappendel, 1995; Wren,
1995). It is interesting to note that Slappendel attributes the prominence of these theoretical
approaches to the “endorsing role of three key organisations”: 1). the National Safety Associationin the 1950 and 1960s; 2). ACC particularly during the late 1970s and early 1980s; and, 3). theDepartment of Labour (Slappendel 1995; Wren 1995).
Associated with these dominant paradigms was a general regulatory approach that emphasisedprescribing in some detail “what” work hazards should be controlled, and “who” should control
them (Bluff and Gunningham, 2003). However, during the 1970s it became increasingly acceptedthat prescriptive technical regulation was failing to deliver better workplace health and safety.
The 1972 British Roben’s Report with its call for a shift towards employer self regulation wasparticularly influential agent for guiding change, as was the Scandinavian work environment law
reforms that introduced concepts around worker’s rights to participation in OHS decision-making
and seeing OHS as a systemic part of the total workplace environment. These reforms began aninternational process throughout the 1980s of seeing OHS regulatory regimes shift towards a
regulatory emphasis upon encouraging employers to proactively adopt a systematic management
approach to controlling their workplace hazards (Frick et al. 2000). By the 1990s the process oftransition had resulted in a general acceptance by OHS practitioners and regulators of a new
dominant paradigm in advanced industrialised nations called Occupational Health and Safety
Management Systems (OHSM Systems). OHSM Systems are premised on the logic that argues:
•
•
•
•
•

OHS is an integral part of the production process;senior management is responsible of the production process and consequently OHS;
to minimise work place health and safety, decisions about OHS have to be integrated into
decisions about production;an essential pre-requisite to making OHS management decisions is the systematic assessmentof work hazards; andprevention requires adequate distribution of tasks and resources across the wholeorganisation, (Frick and Wren 2000).

Frick et al (2000) argue that accompanying the development of the OHSM Systems paradigm
have been the introduction of new Occupational Health and Safety Management (OHSM)
regulatory regimes in many advanced industrial nations. The OHSM regimes are characterisedby:• active promotion by government agencies and private consultants of the voluntary adoption
by employer’s of OHSM Systems into their workplaces;• an international debate on what constitutes minimum OHSM Systems standards, and whether
there should be an international OHSM Systems standard promulgated by internationalorganisations – such as CEN and the ILO;
• the introduction of national guidelines, particularly in EU member countries, on theimplementation of OHSM Systems, which is extending to making such standards mandatory
for all employers;52

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69••

the development of a mixed (“hybrid”) regulatory approach in Australasia and the USA thatboth promotes industry self-regulation / adoption of OHSM Systems and targeted complianceforcing the adoption of OHSM Systems on high risk groups;
a growing international literature debate about what does OHSM as a regulatory approach
really represents: is it a “sham”, or a “paper tiger” or is it a “success story”?

Within the overall OHSM regulatory framework, Frick et al (2000) have discerned a number ofcontrasting points of emphasis in its implementation by western nations:•••

Quality control approach that places emphasis upon the use of production engineering andsafety design rather than controlling worker behaviour to improve safety.
Safety behaviour approaches that emphasise controlling behaviour rather than relying uponengineering solutions to maintain safety and quality.
A emphasis upon either:o encouraging voluntary adoption of OHSM Systems through the promotion of OHSM
Systems by the private sector including workers’’ compensation organisations; oro forcing compliance with a set of national or international standards for OHSM
Systems similar to the ISO standards for product quality (ISO 9000 series) or theenvironment (ISO 14000 series).

These differences have meant that in practice how OHSM is implemented in law, and enforced,
varies between countries making comparisons of effectiveness problematic.

Issues relating to the Current Dominant OHSM Regulatory Approach, and Recommendations
to Promote Effectiveness
The OHSM regulatory approach represents one end of the regulatory spectrum (Bohle andQuinlan, 2000; Dwyer, 1991; Frick et al. 2000; Hopkins, 2005; Johnstone and Sarre, 2002;
Quinlan, 1993; Quinlan and Bohle, 1991; Wilpert, 2008). At one extreme are approaches that aredescribed as ‘prescriptive or norm / rule compliance orientated’, at the other are approaches suchas OHSM that are characterised as ‘performance or goal’ orientated (Hopkins, 2005; Wilpert,
2008).

What does Compliance Mean?
Hopkins argues that a significance issue with the performance approach is that it has created asituation where “the very concept of compliance has to some extent lost its meaning” (2005:7). In
the absence of technical standards, both employers and regulators have to make more informed
decisions about what the level of risk is in a workplace and how to best control them. However
both parties may not have the necessary level of information to make the decision, or there may
be significant disagreement about the best way to manage the risk or what the level of risk
actually is. Consequently, uncertainty arises for both parties as to whether compliance has beenachieved. Hopkins (2005) suggests that the best way to achieve compliance is for regulators to“go beyond compliance monitoring” with regulatory rules, to also undertake activities involving:53

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

•
•
•
•

auditing the auditors;
being more proactive about undertaking investigation of injury / health events;
supporting company staff by advising on organisational design;
exposing poor performance and creating a environment of regulatory ‘crisis’ in an
organisation.

The issue of what does compliance mean in a performance framework is also reflected in otherstudies. Wilpert, (2008) observes that “the concrete design options of goal-orientated regulation
are still somewhat vague”. Furthermore, the focus upon OHSM Systems as the means toachieving compliance are not readily amenable to observation and control through traditional
enforcement mechanisms such as inspections. A new approach is needed that requires both theregulator and the employer to first negotiate agreement about what is an acceptable level of
performance for the workplace and associated indicators to measure performance, and then tobuild a culture of organisational self-learning and minimising errors. Others have argued that the“overall effectiveness” of OHSM regime is determined by the adequacy of the OHS Standards
that may take a variety of forms and which inform the regime (Bluff and Gunningham 2003;
Frick et al. 2000). Bluff and Gunningham, (2003) suggest that Australian ‘21st century OHS
regulation’ should consist of regime where:(1) the OHS statutes comprise general duties and systematic process-based standards,
covering each of the principal relationships between risk producers and risk exposed;(2) OHS regulations provide comprehensive coverage of hazards encountered incontemporary working life, by achieving the right balance between carefully defined
performance outcomes and performance targets, and specification standards for
significant risks; and(3) evidentiary standards are the vehicle for industry and sector specific guidance, as
well as for some technical standards, where both a clear benchmark of complianceand flexibility are desirable features (Bluff and Gunningham, 2003:30).

Existence of a Sufficient OHS Infrastructure
Another significant issue raised in the literature is whether there is a sufficient OHS infrastructure
available to support the implementation of an OHSM regime (Bohle and Quinlan, 2000; Frick et
al. 2000; Quinlan, 1993; Quinlan and Bohle, 1991). A sufficient infrastructure is one where:• the private and government workforce is large enough to provide timely advice and undertake
inspections / audits;• the OHS work force is educated enough to fulfil the roles and functions required in anadvanced economy;• competency standards for the OHS workforce are promulgated and promoted;• regulators are supported by a judiciary that enforces compliance;• information in the form of standards and guidance documents is readily available about what‘best practice’ means.

54New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

Changing nature of the workplace and globalisation
Other issues that have been identified as currently posing major challenges to the regulation of
OHS in advanced industrialised nations include (Bohle and Quinlan, 2000; Quinlan, 1993; Weil,
2008; Quinlan and Mayhew, 2000):• the changing composition of industry;• the arrival of new technology and associated risks – many of which are unknown;• an increasingly diverse range of workplace employment relationships and increasinglyinternationally mobile workforce, which makes OHS management more difficult;• debate over the role and adequacy of International Standards versus local standards;• a reduced unionised workforce that contributes to monitoring and enforcing compliance.
In response to these challenges, Weil (2008) suggests that effective regulatory workplaceenforcement should:• prioritise resources on those industries and workplaces with the most vulnerable workers’;• undertake enforcement actions that have a deterrent effect beyond the immediate
workplace;• promote and introduce measures that require sustainable behaviour change in theemployer beyond the immediacy of an inspection;• undertake activities that have strategic systemic effects at the industry, geographic ortechnical level.

The Problem of Small and Medium Sized Workplaces (SMEs)
Small and medium sized businesses (defined as less than 50 employees) pose extra challenges forthe implementation of OHSM in many countries, yet they are responsible for the employment ofsignificant levels of the total employment in a country. In many industrialised nations SME’s are
responsible for employing 30 to 50% of the total workforce. Consequently, improving theeffectiveness of OHSM in these workplaces is critical to achieving an effective OHSM regulatory
regime and ultimately reducing injury rates and improving the health of the workforce.
In OHS terms, SME’s are seen as particularly at risk workplaces because they often lackmanagement expertise, operate in more hazardous environments, have higher rates of injury andlower rates of return to work for injured workers’, and they are often hard to reach to promote
OHSM Systems and to monitor compliance (Eakin, Lamm and Limborg, 2000).
Internationally, three approaches to promoting OHSM Systems in small workplaces have beentrialled. In Denmark the approach has focussed upon OHS professionals’ actively engaging in
dialogue and providing consultancy with SME owners and managers. The approach has beenshown to significantly increase the uptake of OHS services, however it requires a well trained
OHS workforce who are supported by education tools directly relevant to the needs of SME’s
and tailored to specific industrial settings. The Swedish approach has been to empower andsupport workers’ to have an active role in monitoring compliance. A different approach based
upon a community development model has been used in Ontario Canada, with support fromWorkplace Safety and Insurance Board. This approach builds upon the work and expertise of the55

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

Canadian Safe Communities Foundation, which is associated with the international Safe
Communities network. The approach focuses upon building a local community network ofpeople with an interest in promoting health and safety in the geographic area, who are supported
by a mix of private and government agency resources (Eakin et al. 2000). New Zealand specificresearch has shown how problematic managing OHS is for SME’s; many of whom who view
OHS with “indifference” and “hostility” (Lamm, 1999). Lamm suggests that to overcome thebarriers that exist, one useful approach to reach SME’s is for OHS professionals and regulators totarget the business advisors, such as accountants, who advise most SMEs (Eakin et al. 2000;
Lamm 1992; 1997; 1999). Similar results and recommendations have been reported by Lansdown
et al, to the United Kingdom Health and Safety Executive (Lansdown, Deighan and Brotherton,
2007).

Evidence for EffectivenessEvidence for the effectiveness of various OHS regulatory approaches is of perennial interest to all
those affected by it (Frick et al. 2000; Haines, 2002).
While a commonality in approach to OHSM can be seen, in practice evaluation of effectivenessis highly problematic because of differences in the how the approach has been implemented inlaw, change over time between countries, differences in type and extent of regulatory activity
between countries, and differences in data collections systems (Kendall 2006). Frick et al (2000)
have also commented that because of the long causal chain between types of OHS management
and workers’ safety and health it is virtually impossible to establish with any certainty which
OHSM regime or OHSM system is more effective than another.
In spite of the difficulties, Frick et al (2000) have suggested that there three general points ofview about the effects of the OHMS approach, and evidence for all three can be found. The views
are that OHSM is a:•••“sham” in that it is represents an exercise in deregulation rather than an effective method for
improving standards;“paper tiger” in that the while the standards are in theory high, the implementation of theapproach is difficult, tends to focus upon documenting a management process which directs
resources away from more useful activities, and does not fundamentally represent that muchof a change from how OHS is traditionally managed in the workplace;“success story” in that it significantly raises the goal for what is deemed acceptable practice.

Kendall (2006) in her comparative study for NOHSAC, of the OHSM regimes in Australia, UK,
Finland, Canada, US and New Zealand concludes that effectiveness “is hard to quantify for anumber of reasons” and that there is no “reliable evidence as to which compliance or enforcement
system is most effective”. Kendall is left with recommending the “embracing (of) a mixture of
methods” that reflect a “congruence of underlying philosophy for OHS between the five countries
studied.

56

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

However, the generation of such generic observations and desire for “best practice” is not without
its critics. Haines (2002) argues that such approaches tends to emphasise the importance of“technocratic management” that does not adequately engage with the local political andeconomic environment, nor the effects of globalisation on local regulation. Consequently,
understanding regulatory effectiveness requires understanding the interaction between cultural,
economic and political elements that produce a local “regulatory character”, which informs the
behaviour of regulatee and regulator. Eakin et al (2000) also caution that in regard to SME’s inparticular, we need to know more about which aspects of generic models are tightly integrated
into the local economic, political and social conditions – the regulatory character – and thosewhich are not and consequently may be applicable in other environments. In this context, it could
be argued that the Ontario Safe Communities Foundation workplace initiative may be more
appropriate for New Zealand to consider promoting than either the Danish or Swedish examples
identified earlier.

NZ Specific Issues - Achieving Better Regulatory Compliance
In 2006, Allan and Clarke undertook, on behalf of NOHSAC a comprehensive review of New
Zealand’s regulatory approach (Allen and Clarke et al. 2006). The study involved in-depth
interviews with key stakeholders, reviewing New Zealand focussed research on the subject, andanalysis of documents supplied by agencies. In their report Allan and Clarke identified a wide
range of issues with the performance on New Zealand’s regulatory approach, many of whichhave been identified and described in the literature reviewed.
The authors concluded that New Zealand’s OHSM regulatory regime represents a significant
change in philosophy from the previous approach and that duty holders need support to assist
their compliance with the performance focussed approach of the regime. However guidancematerial currently available is limited, not up-to-date, often inconsistent with current bestpractice, and inappropriate for the target audiences. In addition there are interface issues between
the Health and Safety in Employment Act and the Hazardous Substances and Noxious Organisms
Acts, particularly in relation to differing applications of the performance approach, and to
duplication of material that assists duty holders to comply under both Acts. Compliance costs
associated with the performance-based framework do not fall equally on all businesses, withsmall businesses likely to bear greater costs per person than larger businesses.
Other issues identified include arguing that the resourcing available to government agencies has
not kept pace with economic growth, inflation, and changes in the composition of the economy.
There is an insufficiently, trained workforce to implement and support the regulatory regime, nor
is there an adequate educational and technical infrastructure to develop and support the existing
workforce. It is also not clear who should lead work to ensure the development and delivery ofvarious types of guidance documents to support compliance with the regulatory regime and theadoption of best practices. Furthermore, the problems associated with New Zealand’s
surveillance system for occupational health and safety has been clearly articulated by NOHSAC
in previous reports, however agencies do not appear to have addressed the issues. Another issue
concerns the nature and extent of the interface between the rehabilitation and compensation
scheme and the compliance and enforcement system. The issue is that liaison and collaboration
between the enforcement and compliance system and the compensation and rehabilitation system
57

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

is required to ensure that the overall health and safety system operates effectively. It can beargued that it is important that the health and safety regulator know about incidents of serious
harm occurring in businesses that are part of a workers’’ compensation scheme incentive
programme so that it can ensure that the workplace is safe. Similarly, the workers’’ compensation
scheme needs to know if the regulator is investigating a workplace or organisation of a memberthat it is insuring. However, to what degree is there a responsibility for organisations to share
information if one party considers the information to be confidential to the organisation and its
release may undermine its working relationship with the client?

Conclusions
The review and analysis presented suggests the following conclusions about where New
Zealand’s current OHSM regulatory regime fits within international experience as described in
the literature, and how it could be improved. First, New Zealand’s OHSM regulatory regime fits
within a internationally accepted generic model of OHSM best practice. Second, generic models
do not adequately describe national differences, and this makes undertaking international
comparisons of effectiveness highly problematic. Because of the national differences in how
OHSM is implemented there is no real evidence on the effectiveness of different OHSM regimes
from which policy makers can learn. Third, it has been argued that the effectiveness of any
particular OHSM regulatory regime requires acknowledging that the OHSM regime fits within awider workplace regulatory environment that is likely to include other regulatory regimes counterproductive to effective compliance with the OHSM one. Moreover instead of focussing upon‘technocratic management’ mechanisms to understand compliance behaviour, a focus uponunderstanding and shaping the ‘regulatory character’ may provide useful insights into how todevelop new enforcement strategies and compliance promoting behaviours by agencies. Fourth,there is agreement that effective implementation of an OHSM regulatory regime requires theexistence of an adequate OHS infrastructure. In particular, it requires a workforce able toimplement, advise and monitor compliance within the framework that sits in a complex andchanging environment. It is necessary that the workforce will have to assess different levels of
risk; provide advice about a range of options to manage the risk, and advocate for the
implementation of management systems that are ‘self-learning’ and promote ‘continuous
improvement. Other requirements are:
•
•

•
•

A legislative environment where the judiciary is willing to enforce compliance.
The development and promulgation of a range of types of Standards and Guidance
documents that inform employers what OHSM Systems performance means in terms ofoutcomes and indicators, and how OHSM Systems can be incorporated within theireveryday practice.
Adequate resourcing of OHSM at the government level that is appropriate for the size andcomplexity of the industry being regulated.
Development and implementation of enforcement strategies that move ‘beyond
monitoring’ to include targeting resources and activities toward:
o protecting the most vulnerable workers’;
o focus upon the most hazardous and at risk workplaces; and58

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69•

o achieving deterrence effects beyond the immediate in time and local workplace.
Acknowledging that in many countries small and medium sized businesses (defined asless than 50 employees) pose extra challenges for the implementation of OHSM, and they
are responsible for the employment of significant levels of the total employment in acountry. Improving the effectiveness of OHSM in these workplaces requires responses
that are appropriate to the ‘regulatory character’ in which they operate.

Given the conclusions, the evidence from the literature suggests that in order to implement a bestpractice OHSM regulatory regime in New Zealand action on a number of fronts is required as
outlined above in fourth point. The analysis also suggests that it could be useful to clarify theinterface between the workers’ compensation scheme and regulator activities. In order to improve
the performance of New Zealand OHSM regulatory regime, a number of questions need to beresolved. First, is there a role for a workers’ compensation scheme in developing and promoting
a range of OHSM Standards and Guidance documents that would aim to promote the adoption ofbest practice by employers such as those described by Bluff and Gunningham (2003)? To answer
this question some work would be required to clarify the respective functions and roles of theworkers’ compensation scheme agency and regulators in disseminating information about what
represents ‘best practice’ (conceivably an workers’ compensation scheme role) versus
information about expectations about what represents minimum compliance requirements (aregulator role).
Second, is there a role for the workers’ compensation scheme in building/supporting an OHS
infrastructure, in particular a workforce capable of implementing, advising and monitoring
compliance with the New Zealand’s OHSM regulatory regime? If yes, then what are the limits of
the role? When thinking about this question it may be useful to review the experience of the late1970s and early 1980s where the workers’ compensation scheme actively employed workplacesafety advisors to work alongside employers. Third, to what extent should a workers’
compensation scheme acting as an insurer with a privileged client relationship and possibly
confidential information be obligated to provide the regulator with information about noncompliance with regulatory standards? Fourth, is there a role for a workers’ compensation
scheme to use its influence as ‘insurer’ to promote higher standards of OHSM Systems practice,and to reward best practice through an enhanced incentives programme? Finally, what is the roleof a workers’ compensation scheme in facilitating the development of better data collection
systems and dissemination of information about what is happening in the workplace, given that
other government agencies also collect information in this workspace?

59

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

References
Access Economics., Pezzullo, L. and Crook, A. (2006). The economic and social costs of occupational
disease and injury in New Zealand: NOHSAC Technical Report 4. Wellington: NOHSAC
Allen and Clarke: Policy and Regulatory Specialist, Gribble, A., Mortimer, L. and Smith, R. (2006).
Occupational health and safety in New Zealand: Technical Report prepared for the National
Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Committee: NOHSAC Technical Report 7. Wellington: National
Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Committee.
Altman, S. (1976). Growing pains: a portrait of developing occupational safety and health in America. Job
Safety and Health. 4(8): 24-32.
Ashford, N. (1976). Crisis in the Workplace: Occupational Disease And Injury: A report to the Ford
Foundation. Cambridge: Mass: MIT Press.
Ashford, N. (1988). Federal regulation of occupational health and safety in the workplace. In Bs. Levy and
D.H Wegman. (eds). In Occupational Health: Recognising and Preventing Work-Related Disease.
Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
Assennato, G., and Navarro, V. (1983). Workers’ Participation and Control in Italy:
the Case of
Occupational Iedicine. In N. Navarro and D. Berman (eds). Health and Work Under Capitalism: An
International Perspective. New York: Baywood
Bagnara, S., Biocca, M. and Mazzonis, D. (1981). Trends in occupational health and safety policy in Italy.
International Journal of Health Services. 11: 431-450.
Baldwin, R. (1990). Why rules don’t work. The Modern Law Review. 53(3): 321-337
Barrett, B. (1977). Safety representatives, industrial relations and hard times. Industrial Law Journal. 6(1):165-178.
Barrett, B., and Howells, R. (1995). Occupational Health and Safety Law. (2nd ed). London: Pitman
Publishing.
Barrett, B., and James, P. (1988). Safe systems: past, present-and future? Industrial Law Journal 17(1):26-40.
Berman, D. (1977). Why work kills a brief history of occupational safety andStates. International Journal of Health Services. 7(1): 63-87.

health in the United

Berman, D. (1978). Death on the Job. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Biggins, D. (1993). The social context of legislative reform: Part 1 and Part 2: Nineteenth century origins
of health and safety legislation. Journal of Occupational Health and Safety – Australia/New Zealand.
9(3): 217-228.

60

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69
Bluff, E., and Gunningham, N. (2003). Principle, Process, Performance or What? New Approaches to
OHS Standards Setting. Canberra: National Centre for Occupational Health and Safety Regulation,
Australian National University.
Boehringer. G.H, and Pearse. W. (1986). Commentary: Commonwealth occupational health and safety
policy and practice – a critique. Community Health Studies. 10(1): 80-94
Bohle, P. and Quinlan, M. (2000). Manageing Occupational Health and Safety: A multidisciplinary
approach. (2nd ed). Melbourne: Macmillan.
Brodeur, P. (1974). Expendable Americans. New York: Viking.
Burrows, N., and Mair. (1996). European Social Law. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
Calavita, K. (1983). The demise of OSHA: A case study in symbolic action. Social Problems. 30(4): 437448.
Carson, K., and R. Johnstone. (1990). The Dupes of Hazard: Occupational Health and Safety and theVictorian Sanctions Debate. Australia New Zealand Journal of Sociology. 26(1): 126-41.
Carson, W. G. 1970. White collar crime and the enforcement of factory legislation." British Journal of
Criminology 10:383-98.
———. 1974. "Symbolic and instrumental dimensions of early British factory legislation." In Crime,
Criminology and Public Policy, ed. R. G. Hood. London: Heinemann.
———. 1979. "The conventionalisation of early factory crime." International Journal Sociology of Law
7:37-60.
———. 1980. "The institutionalisation of ambiguity: early British Factory Acts." In Collar Crime: Theory
and Practice. Chap 7, ed. G.Geis, E. White. Beverly Hills: Sage.
———. 1982. The Other Price of Britain’s Oil: Safety and Control in the North Sea. New Brunswick:
Rutgers University Press.
Carson, W.B. (1985). Hostages to history: some aspects of the occupational health and safety debate inhistorical perspective. In W.B. Creighton and N. Gunningham. The Industrial Relations of Occupational
Health and Safety. (pp.60-78). Sydney: Croom Helm.
Carson, W.B. (1989). Occupational health and safety: a political economy perspective. Labour andIndustry. 2(2): 301-316.
Carson, W.G., and Henenberg, C. (1988). The political economy of legislative change: making sense ofVictoria’s new occupational health and safety legislation. Law in Context. 6(2): 1-19.

Cassou, B., and Pissarro, B. (1988). Worker’s participation and occupational health: The French
experience. International Journal of Health Services 18(1): 139-52.
Clutterbuck, R.C. (1983). The state of industrial ill health in the United Kingdom. In V. Navarro and D.
Berman. (eds). Health and Work Under Capitalism: An International Perspective. New York: Baywood.

61

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

Coase, R.H. (1960). The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics. 3(1): 1-44.
Coye, J.D. (1979). Crisis: Control in the workplace a review of three major works in occupational health.
International Journal of Health Services. 9(1): 169-83.
Craig, R. (2007). Issue forum introduction: Cultural bias in communication theory. Communication
Monographs. 74(2): 256-258
Creighton, W.B., and Gunningham, N. (1985). The Industrial Relations of Occupational Health and
Safety. Sydney: Croom Helm.
Curran, D.J. (1984). Symbolic solutions for deadly dilemmas: An analysis of Federal coal mine health andsafety legislation. International Journal of Health Services. 14(1): 5-29.
Dalton, A.J.P. (1992). Lessons from the United Kingdom: Fightback on workplace hazards, 1979-1992.
International Journal of Health Services. 22(3): 489-495.
Davidson, R. (1970). Peril on the Job: A Study of Hazards in the Chemical Industries. Washington D.C:
Public Affairs Press.
Dawson, S., Willman, P., Bamford, M and Clinton, A. (1988). Safety at Work: The Limits of SelfRegulation. London: Cambridge University Press.
Diehl, A.E., and Ayob, M.A. (1980). Occupational safety and health standards:cost, effectiveness andallocation of resources. In J. Petersen and J. Goodales. (eds). Readings in Industrial Accident Prevention.
New York: McGraw Hill.
Doern, G.B. (1977). The political economy of regulating occupational health: The Ham and Beaudry
Reports. Canadian Public Administration. 20(1): 1-35.
Doern, G.B. (1978). The Regulatory Process in Canada. Toronto: Macmillan.
Doern, G. B. and Wilson, V.S. (1974). Issues in Canadian Public Policy. Toronto: Macmillan.
Donnelly, P.G. (1982). The origins of the OSHA of 1970. Social Problems. 30(1): 13-25.
Dorman, P. (1996). Markets and Mortality. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Drake, C.D., and Wright, F.B. (1983). Law of Health and Safety at Work: The New Approach. London:
Sweet and Maxwell.
Driscoll, T., Mannetje, A., Dryson, E., Feyer, A-M., Gander, P., McCracken, S., Pearce, N. and
Wagstaffe, M. (2004). The burden of occupational disease and injury in New Zealand: Technical Report.
Wellington: NOHSAC
Driscoll, T., Dryson, E., Feyer, A-M., Gander, P., McCracken, S. Pearce, N. and Wagstaffe, M. (2005).
Review of Schedule 2 of theInjury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001 (IPRC Act).
Wellington: NOHSAC.

62

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69
Driscoll, T. (2006). Review of Australian and New Zealand workplace exposure surveillance systems:
Technical Report 6. Wellington: NOHSAC
Dwyer, T. (1991). Life and Death at Work: Industrial Accidents as a Case of Socially Produced Error.
New York: Plenum Press.
Dye, T.R. (1987). Public Policy. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Eakin, J., Lamm, F and Limborg, H.J. (2000). International Perspective on the Promotion of Health and
Safety in Small Workplaces. In K. Frick, P. Jensen, M. Quinland and T. Wilhagen. (eds). Systematic
Occupational Health and Safety Management. Perspectives on an International Development. Oxford:
Pergamon.
Eberlie, R.F. (1990). The new health and safety legislation of the European Community. Industrial Law
Journal. 19(2): 81-97.
Elling, R. (1977). Industrialisation and occupational health in underdeveloped countries. International
Journal of Health Services. 7(2): 209-35.
Elling, R. (1980). Cross-National Study of Health Systems, Political Economies and Health Care. New
Brunswick: Transaction Books.
Elling, R. (1989). The political economy of workers’ health and safety. Social Science and Medicine.
28(11): 1171-1782.
Fitzpatrick, B. (1992). Community social law after Maastricht. Industrial Law Journal. 21 (3): 199-213.
Frick, K., Jensen, P.L, Quinlan, M and Wilthagen, T. (eds). (2000). Systematic Occupational Health And
Safety Management: Perspectives on an International Development. Oxford: Pergamon.
Frick, K., and J. Wren. 2000. Reviewing occupational health and safety management multiple roots,
diverse perspectives and ambiguous outcomes. In K. Frick, P. Jensen, M. Quinlan and T. Wilthagen. (eds).
Systematic Occupational Health and Safety Management. Perspectives on an International Development.
Oxford: Pergamon.
Friedman, L.M., and Ladinsky, J. (1967). Social change and the law of industrial accidents. Columbia Law
Review. 67(50): 50-82.
Gordon, S.M. (1988). Social Security Policies in Industrial Countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Grabe, S. (1991). Regulatory agencies and interest groups in occupational health and safety in GreatBritain and West Germany: A perspective from West Germany. Law and Policy. 13(1): 55-72.
Greenlund, K. J., and Elling, R. (1995). Capital sectors and workers’ health and safety in the UnitedStates. International Journal of Health Services. 25(1): 101-116.
Gunn, R.T. (1990). Worksafe Australia: To the McKay Report and Beyond. Community Health Studies.
14(1): 65-72.
Gunningham, N. (1984). Safeguarding the Worker. Melbourne: Law Book.

63

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

Gunningham, N. (1987). Negotiated non-compliance: A case study of regulatory failure. Law and Policy.
9(1): 69-95.
Haines, F. (2002). Regulatory Character and Regulatory Reform: Exploring the nexus between
globalisation and safety standards. Canberra: National Centre for Occupational Health and Safety
Regulation, Australian National University.
Haines, F. and Gurney, D. (2003). The Shadows of the Law: Contemporary Approaches to Regulation and
the Problem of Regulatory Conflict. Law and Policy. 25(4): 353-80
Hakim, C. (1987). Research Design: Strategies and Choices in the Design of Social Research. London:
Allen and Unwin.
Ham, C., and M. Hill. (1993). The Policy Process in the Modern Capitalist State. London: Harvester
Wheatsheaf.
Harrison, B. 1995. The politics of occupational ill-health in late nineteenth century Britain: the case of thematch making industry. Sociology of Health and Illness. 17(1): 20-41.
Hauss, F.O., and Rosenbrock. R.D. (1984). Occupational health and safety in the Federal Republic of
Germany: A case study of co-determination and health politics. International Journal of Health Services.
14(2): 279-287
Health Outcomes International Pty Ltd, King, J., Hibbert, P., Butt, H. and Schultz, L. (2005). Methods andSystems Used to Measure and Monitor Occupational Disease and Injury in New Zealand: Technical
Report 2. Wellington: NOHSAC
Heath, E.D. (1986). The evolution of safety management in the United States. Professional Safety. 15-21.
Hepple, B., and Byre, A. (1989). EEC labour law in the United Kingdom – a new approach. Industrial
Law Journal. 18(3): 129-143.
Hogwood, B.W., and Gunn, L.A. (1981). The Policy Orientation. Glasgow: Centre for the Study of Public
Policy: University of Strathclyde.
Holgate, G. (1994). Workplace health and safety: challenging regulatory standards. Industrial Law
Journal. 23(3): 246-252.
Hopkins, A. (2005). New Strategies for Safety Regulators: Beyond Compliance Monitoring. Canberra:
National Centre for Occupational Health and Safety Regulation, Australian National University.
Howells, R. (1972). The Robens Report. Industrial Law Journal. 1(1): 185-96.
Howells, R. (1974). Worker participation in safety: The development of legal rights. Industrial Law
Journal. 3(1): 87-95.
Hutchins, B.L., and Harrison, A. (1966). A History of Factory Legislation. London: Frank Cass.
Ilchman, W.F., and Uphoff, N.T. (1983). Organisational theory and public policy. In R.H, Hall and R.E.
Quinn (eds). Organisational Theory and Public Policy. (eds). Beverly Hills: Sage.

64

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

James, P. (1992). Reforming British Health and Safety Law: a framework for discussion. Industrial Law
Journal. 21(2): 83-105.
James, M. (1993). The struggle against silicosis in the Australian mining industry: the role of theCommonwealth government,,1920-1950. Labour History. 65:75-95.
Johnstone, R., and Sarre, R. (2002). Regulation: Enforcement and Compliance. Paper read at Current
Issues in Regulation: Enforcement and Compliance 2004. Melbourne.
Kelman, S. (1980). Occupational Safety and Health Administration. In J.Q Wilson. (ed). The Politics ofRegulation. New York: Basic Books.
Kelman, S. (1981). Regulating America, Regulating Sweden: A Comparative Study of Occupational Safety
and Health Policy. Cambridge: Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Kendall, N. (2005). International Review of Methods and Systems Used to Measure and Monitor
Occupational Disease and Injury: Technical Report 3. Wellington: NOHSAC
Kendall, N. (2006). Management and governance of occupational safety and health in five countries(United Kingdom, United States of America, Finland, Canada, Australia). Technical Report prepared for
the National Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Committee: NOHSAC Technical Report 8.
Wellington, 2006: National Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Committee.
Lamm, F. (1992). Persuasion or Coercion - Enforcement Strategies in occupational health and safety. In
Occupational Safety and Health Controlling Interests: Business, the State and Society in New Zealand.
(eds). J. Deeks and N. Perry. Auckland: Auckland University Press.
Lamm, F. (1997). Small Business and OHS Advisors. British Journal of Safety Science. 25(1): 153-161.
Lamm, F. (1999). Occupational Health and Safety in Australian Small businesses: What can be done to
reduce the lack of awareness and raise the level of compliance in Australian small businesses. Sydney:
Industrial Relations Centre, University of New South Wales.
Lansdown, T., Deighan, C. and Brotherton C. (2007). Health and safety in the small to medium-sizedenterprise: Psychosocial opportunities for intervention. London: Research Report RR578. United
Kingdom Health and Safety Executive.
Laurell, A. (1979). Work and health in Mexico. International Journal of Health Services. 9(4): 543-568.
Levenstein, C. (1988). A brief history of occupational health in the United States. In B.S Levy and D.H
Wegman. (eds). Occupational Health: Recognising and Preventing Work-Related Disease. Boston: Little
Brown and Company
Lewis, D. (1974). Worker participation in safety: an industrial relations approach. Industrial Law Journal.
3(1): 96-104.
Lindblom, C.E. (1959). The science of muddling through. Public Administration Review. 19: 79-88.
Lindblom, C.E. (1979). Still muddling, not yet through. Public Administration Review. 39(4): 517-526.

65

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69
Lindblom, C.E, and Woodhouse, E.J. (1993). The Policy Making Process. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Mendeloff, J. (1979). Regulating Safety: An Economic and Political Analysis of Occupational Safety and
Health Policy. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Miller, K. (1991). Piper Alpha and the Cullen Report. Industrial Law Journal 20(3): 176-185.
Moss, D.A. (1994). Kindling a flame under Federalism: Progressive reformers, corporate elites, and thephosphorus match campaign of 1909-1912. Business History Review. 68(1): 244-275.
Muraskin, W.A. (1995). The role of organized labor in combating the Hepatitis Band Aids epidemics: thefight for an OSHA bloodborne pathogens standard. International Journal Health Services. 25(1): 129-152.
Navarro, V. (1978). Class Struggle, the state and Medicine: an historical and contemporary analysis of
the medical sector in Great Britain. London: Robertson.
Navarro, V. (1980). Work, ideology, and science: The case of medicine. International Journal of HealthServices 10(4): 523-50.
Navarro, V. (1983). The determinants of social policy: a case study: regulating health and safety at theworkplace in Sweden. International Journal of Health Services 13(4): 517-561
Oi, W.Y. (1973). An Essay on Workmen’s Compensation and Industrial Safety. Supplemental Studies for
the National Commission on State Workmen’s Compensation Laws.
Oi, W.Y. (1974). On the economics of industrial safety. Law and Contemporary Problems.
(Summer/Autumn):669-99.
Orloff, A.S. and Skocpol, T. (1984). Why not equal protection? Explaining the politics of public social
spending in Britain, 1900-1911, and the United States, 1880s-1920. American Sociological Review.
49:726-750
Page, J.A. and O’Brien, M. (1973). Bitter Wages: Ralph Nader’s Study Group Report on Disease andInjury on the Job. New York: Grossman.
Pearce. N., Dryson. E., Feyer, A-M., Gander, P. McCracken, S. and Wagstaffe. M. (2005). Surveillance ofOccupational Disease and Injury in New Zealand: Report to the Minister of Labour. Wellington:
NOHSAC.
Pearce, N., Dryson, E., Feyer, A-M., Gander, P. and Wagstaffe, M. (2006). Surveillance and control ofworkplace exposures in New Zealand: Report to the Minister of Labour. Wellington: NOHSAC.
Pearce, N., Dryson, E., Gander, P., Langley, J. and Wagstaffe, M. (2007). National Profile of occupational
health and safety in New Zealand: Report to the Minister of Labour. Wellington: National Occupational
Health and Safety Advisory Committee
Pearce, N., Dryson, E., Gander, P., Langley and Wagstaffe, M. (2008). Review of the key characteristics
that determine the efficacy of OHS instruments: Report to the Minister of Labour. Wellington: National
Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Committee

66

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69
Pearse, W., and C. Refshauge. (1987). Workers’ health and safety in Australia: An overview.
International Journal of Health Services 17(4): 635-650
Peters, G.A. (1986). Safety law in historical perspective. Professional Safety. 46-49.
Pierson, C. (1991). Beyond the Welfare State. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Quinlan, M. (1993). Work and Health: The origins, Management and Regulation of Occupational Illness.
(ed.). Melbourne: Macmillan.
Quinlan, M., and Bohle, P. (1991). Managing Occupational Health and Safety in Australia: A
multidisciplinary approach. (eds.) Melbourne: Macmillan.
Quinlan, M. and Mayhew, C. (2000). Precarious Employment, Work Re-organisation and the Fracturingof OHS Management. In K. Frick, P.L. Jensen, M. Quinlan and T. Wilthagen. (eds). Systematic
Occupational Health And Safety Management: Perspectives on an International Development. Wilthagen.
Oxford: Pergamon.
Rainey, H.G., and Milward, H.B. (1983). Public organisations: policy networks and environments. In R.H
Hall and R.E. Quinn. (eds). Organisational Theory and Public Policy. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Rinefort, F.C. (1980). A New Look at Occupational Safety...A Cost Benefit Analysis of Selected Texas
Industries. In D, Petersen and J, Goodale. (eds). Readings in Industrial Accident Prevention. New York:
McGraw Hill.
Sass, R. (1986). Workplace Health and Safety: Report from Canada. International Journal of HealthServices. 16(4): 565-582.
Sass, R. (1989). The Implications of Work Organisation for Occupational Health Policy: The case of
Canada. International Journal of Health Services. 19(1): 157-73
Sass, R. (1993). The Work Environment Board and the limits of social democracy in Canada.
International Journal of Health Services. 23(2): 279-300.
Sass, R. (1995). A Conversation about the Work Environment. International Journal of Health Services.
25(1): 117-28.
Singleton, W.T. (1982). Accidents and the progress of technology. Journal Occupational of Accidents.
4:91-102.
Singleton, W.T. (1983). Occupational Safety and Health Systems: a Three-Country Comparison.
International Labour Review. 122(2): 155-182.
Slappendel, C. (1995). Dominant Theories of Work-Related Injury Causation. In C, Slappendel. (eds).
Health and Safety in New Zealand Workplaces. Palmerston North: Dunmore Press.
Smith, R.S. (1974). The Feasibility of an ‘Injury Tax’ Approach to Occupational Safety. In D, Petersen
and J, Goodale. (eds). Readings in Industrial Accident Prevention. McGraw Hill.
Steemson, J. (1983). Labourer’s Law: A History of Occupational Health and Safety Legislation. London:
Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents.

67

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69

Steigler, G. (1971). The theory of economic regulation. Bell Journal of Economics and Management
Science. 2(1): 3-21
Szasz, A. (1984). Industrial resistance to occupational safety and health legislation: 1971-1981. Social
Problems. 32(2): 103-16.
Thomas, W.T. (1970). The Early Factory Legislation. Connecticut: Greenwood.
Vilanilam, J.V. (1980). A historical and socio-economic analysis of occupational safety and health inIndia. International Journal of Health Services. 10(2): 233-249.
VIOSH Australia at the University of Ballarat, Brooke, D., Cowley, S,. Else, D., and Leggett, S. (2006).
International review of surveillance and control of workplace exposures: NOHSAC Technical Report 5.
Wellington: NOHSAC.
Viscusi, W.K. (1979). The impact of occupational safety and health regulation. Bell Journal of
Economics. 10(1): 117-140.
Viscusi, W.K. (1983). Risk by Choice: Regulating Health and Safety in the Workplace. Cambridge:
Massechusetts: Harvard University Press.
Viscusi, W.K. (1996). Fatal Trade-offs: Public and Private Responsibilities for Risk. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Walters, V. (1983). Occupational health and safety legislation in Ontario: an analysis of its origins andcontent. Canadian Review Sociology and Anthropology 20(4): 413-434
Walters, V. (1985). The politics of occupational health and safety: interviews with workers’ health andsafety representatives and company doctors. Canadian Review Sociology and Anthropology. 22(1): 57-79.
Walters, V. (1991). State mediation of conflicts over work refusals: The role of the Ontario Labour
Relations Board. International Journal of Health Services. 21(4): 717-29.
Weil, D. (2008). The Challenge of Workplace Regulation in a Global Environment. Paper read at
Workplace Regulation, 3 July, at Auckland University of Technology.
Weindling, P. (1985). The Social History of Occupational Health. London: Croom Helm.
Wilpert, B. (2008). Regulatory styles and their consequences for safety. Safety Science
Regulatory Issues, Safety Climate, Culture and Management Papers selected from the third international
conference Working on Safety (WOS2006), September 12-15th, 2006, Zeewolde, The Netherland. 46(3):371-5.
Wilson, G.K. (1985). The Politics of Safety and Health: Occupational Safety and Health in the UnitedStates and Britain. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Woolf, A. (1973). Robens Report – the Wrong Approach. Industrial Law Journal. 2(1): 88-95.

68

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3): 45-69
Wren, J. (1995). A Survey of New Zealand OSH Practitioners: Dominant Perspectives and the Efficacy ofGovernment Enforcement and Promotion of Occupational Safety and Health. Journal of Occupational
Health and Safety Australia – New Zealand. 11(4): 373-80.
Wren, J. (1997). Understanding the Process of Change in Occupational Safety and Health Policy inAdvanced Industrialised Democracies: An Examination of the International Literature, and theExperience of New Zealand Between 1981 and 1992. Doctor of Philosophy, Social Science, Massey
University, Palmerston North.
Wren, J. (2002). From the ‘Balkanisation of Control’ to Employer Management Systems: OHS Policy and
Politics in New Zealand 1981-1992. In M. Llyod. (ed). Occupational Health and Safety in New Zealand:Contemporary Social Research. Palmerston North: Dunmore Press.
Wysong, E. (1992). Professional Societies, Inter-Organisational Linkages and Occupational Health Policy
Reform. Social Problems. 39(3): 201-218.
Wysong, E. (1993). Conflicting Agendas, Interests, and Actors in Disease Prevention Policy-Making:Business, Labor, and the High Risk Act. International Journal of Health Services. 23(2): 301-322.

69

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

I love you – goodbye: Exit Interviews and Turnover in the New
Zealand Hotel Industry
DAVID WILLIAMS*, CANDICE HARRIS** and JOHN PARKER***
Abstract
Given the very tight labour market, skill shortages and staff retention have become major
issues in the hotel industry. Furthermore, voluntary turnover incurs considerable expense as it
is a labour intense service industry. This paper presents findings from data analysis of formal
exit interviews conducted in two hotel chains. The first sample covers a large New Zealandhotel chain with 15 sites, with interviews conducted in 2004 and 2005. The quantitative data
for this brand was collected nationally at multiple sites and is further illuminated byqualitative data focusing on a single site case study. The second set of interviews represents asingle site, with data gathered from 2001 to 2005. The literature review discusses thetheoretical foundations of employee turnover and exit interview efficacy. Particular focus isplaced on the antecedents of turnover in the organisational entry phase of the employment
relationship, with questions being raised around the importance of socialisation. In an
industry that has traditionally high employee turnover, the efficacy of exit interviews inproviding feedback on organisational entry is of crucial importance. Our findings raisequestions regarding the effectiveness of information provided by the exit interview processes
at both hotel chains. This leads the authors to ask how organisational improvement be
directed if there is a process in place that fails to provide applicable employee feedback.

Introduction
The Hospitality and Tourism industry is a large and rapidly growing part of the New Zealandeconomy. Several recent reports, The Draft New Zealand Tourism Strategy to 2015, theHospitality Standards Institute - LIASE Report, 2007, the New Zealand Tourism Industry
Association Leadership Group, 2006 - Tourism and Hospitality Workforce Strategy and The
Hospitality Standards Institute Employment Profile of the Hospitality Industry 2007, paint a
picture of a very important industry:
New Zealand has a total tourism expenditure of NZ$17.5 billion dollars, accountingfor 18.7% of all exports, contributing 9% of the Gross Domestic Product.
International visitor growth is projected to grow by 4% for the next seven years. The
industry employs 9.8% of the New Zealand workforce. The Hospitality sector
employed 136,000 people in 2007; a number which has increased by 20% since 2001.
Another 13,500 new positions are expected to be created in hospitality by 2011.
(Hospitality Standards Institute, 2007: 4-6)*

David Williamson is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Hospitality Tourism at the Auckland University ofTechnology. David.williamson@aut.ac.nz**
Candice Harris is a Senior Lecturer in Management and Employment Relations, The Business Faculty at the
Auckland University of Technology. Candice.harris@aut.ac.nz***
John Parker, School of Hospitality Tourism at the Auckland University of Technology. Johnpar00@aut.ac.nz

70New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

Representatives from industry associations and government departments as well as many
employers and academics in New Zealand are increasingly concerned about the high levels ofturnover in tourism and hospitality industries. A recent series of reports have highlighted thescope and potential damage that labour market pressures are bringing to the industry. The
following comments are typical of these reports:“The biggest impediment to achieving or exceeding forecast growth lies with ashortage of appropriately skilled labour for the sector. Significant tourist volume has
been possible through the availability of relatively cheap labour. Further growth on
this basis can be considered to be severely constrained.” (The Draft New Zealand
Tourism Strategy 2015, 2007: 16)“Based on forecast numbers through to 2010, we face a serious skills shortage and it
will take collective, concerted action to overcome it. The New Zealand Tourism
Strategy 2010 identified human resource issues as one of the key challenges facing the
tourism and hospitality sector.” (New Zealand Tourism Industry Association
Leadership Group, 2006 - Tourism and Hospitality Workforce Strategy, 2006: 1)“Industry representative, from every region, were unanimous is stating the current
labour shortages will increase over the next five years. There was also a clear
message that immigrant labour would be relied on even more in the future.”(Hospitality Standards Institute - LIASE Report, 2007: 13)
Employee turnover has been, and remains a major issue for the New Zealand hotel sector.
The current labour market conditions of low unemployment are exacerbating the criticallevels of employee turnover in the hospitality sector as a whole. According to Statistics New
Zealand (2006), the hospitality sector has a turnover rate of 29.2% for 2006 as opposed to a
16.7% national average for all sectors. However, turnover figures discussed at the 2006 New
Zealand Hotel Council Conference, put hotel employee turnover as high as 60%. This very
high turnover rate is occurring in a tight labour market with unemployment being below 4%(Statistics New Zealand, 2006). Thus, hotels are faced with the strategic human resource
management challenge of very high turnover in a time of intense labour scarcity and skills
shortage. In purely financial terms, The Society for Human Resource Management estimatesthat it costs US$3,500.00 to replace one US$8.00 per hour employee when all costs –recruiting, interviewing, hiring, training, reduced productivity – are considered. Given thatthe hotel industry employees 17,000 people and has a minimum annual turnover average of
29.2%, then, using the above equation, the annual cost of turnover to the hotel industry would
come to just over US$17 million (or NZ$22 million at current exchange rates).
Labour turnover and weak employee commitment to the organisation have the potential tonegatively impact on the quality of services. This is particularly important in a market whichis competitive at both the local and global levels as New Zealand attempts to increase its shareof international tourism. A major part of the attraction for international tourists is the qualityof the overall experience of New Zealand. Addressing these issues is, therefore, a matter ofincreasing the industry’s competitive edge, through providing a satisfying workplace for
employees. In order to develop appropriate strategies, it is necessary to discover theperceptions of employees themselves since they are the ones who make decisions regarding
voluntary turnover. Thus, this article explores skill shortages, turnover and retention by
examining exit interview data from two hotel chains in New Zealand. First, the article
considers the literature incorporating turnover and exit interviews. Second, using data from71New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

two hotel chains, the article analyses the push and pull factors influencing exiting employees
and compares how the classical reasons for turnover fit with the ‘happy goodbye’
phenomenon found in this study. Finally, conclusions are drawn regarding the reconceptualisation of exit interviews and the more fundamental problems associated with suchinterviews are discussed.

International Turnover Research
Turnover has been the focus of intense international research for many years (March &Simon, 1958; Porter & Steers, 1973; Mobley, Horner, & Hollingsworth, 1978; Steers &Mowday, 1981; Bluedorn 1982; Griffeth, Hom and Gaertner 2000; Dalessio, Silverman, &Schuck, 1986; Cotton & Tuttle, 1986; Wanous, 1992; Dougherty, Bluedorn & Keon, 1985;
Hom & Griffeth, 1995; Mobley, 1977). The body of literature on employee turnover is vast,
to the extent that it would challenge any author to cover it all. Instead Boxall, Macky and
Rasmussen (2003) refer readers to comprehensive reviews of the turnover literature in Price(1977), Cotton and Tuttle (1986), Tett and Meyer (1993), Hom and Griffeth (1995) and themost recent meta-analysis by Griffeth, Hom and Gaertner (2000). From these reviews, Boxall
et al. (2003) summarise the following key themes:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

While ethnicity and gender are not clear demographic predictors of turnover; age isstrongly positively associated with tenure length and thus negatively associated withturnover.
Turnover is higher in organisations with high employment instability, either perceived
poor job security or higher layoff rates.
Unemployment rates affect turnover – low unemployment and a tight labour market
affects employee perceptions of ease in gaining alternative employment.
Turnover may have a history (lateness, absenteeism, low productivity) that is relevant
to understanding its causes.
Job satisfaction is consistently negatively associated with employee turnover.
The extent to which employees feel their contributions are valued is inversely related
to their turnover rates.
Congruence between employee and employer preferences for work hours, shift
structures and employment types (full-time, part-time) reduce turnover.
Remuneration retains an important role in turnover.

Within the vast literature, the classical analysis of Wanous (1992) is of particular interest for
hospitality organisations, as it focuses on premature turnover and the role of socialisation inthat turnover. According to Wanous (1992) and Allen (2006), turnover is the highest among
new entrants across all organisations. Allen (2006) suggests that new entrant turnoverprovides hospitality organisations with little or no opportunity to recover a significant returnon their investment in recruitment, orientation, training, and uniforms. One of the principal
drivers of premature withdrawal is “inadequate socialisation” (Birchfield, 2001: 34).
Socialisation is seen to reduce uncertainty and anxiety and therefore create congruence
between individuals and an organisation, transforming an outsider into an effective andparticipating insider. Issues such as inadequate socialisation and the resulting dissonance canbe explored with departing employees in an exit interview.

72New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

Turnover and retention issues in the New Zealand labour market
As highlighted in Boxall et al. (2003), unemployment rates affect turnover; lowunemployment and a tight labour market affects employee perceptions of how easy it is toobtain alternative employment. In essence, employee perceptions that attractive alternative
employment opportunities exist have been shown to be positively related to employee
intention to quit (Gerhart 1990, Steel and Griffith 1989). However, the effect of labour
market opportunities is mediated by many complex variables, including financial rewards
offered by the organisations (Schwab 1991), quality and utility of alternative employment(Hom and Griffith 1995), and family issues (Abbott, De Ciere and Iverson 1998). Since themid 1990s, New Zealand has seen remarkable growth in employment and labour market
participation rates and a corresponding fall in unemployment – from 11% in 1992 to 3.4% in2007 (Statistics New Zealand 2007). Hunt and Rasmussen (2007) discuss the ‘skills shortage’associated with this ‘tight’ labour market. They point out that a combination of reduced
training investment and public sector reforms during the 1990s has seen skills shortages
become a regular discussion point in the media and a serious public policy issue in the newmillennium.
The New Zealand context of employee turnover has been explored in several industry specificcontexts such as nursing and call centres by Hunt and Rasmussen (2007) and by North et al.
(2005). These studies can provide comparative data and findings for this paper. Non-industry
specific employee turnover studies in New Zealand include Boxall et al. (2003) and Guthrie(2001). According to Guthrie (2001), high involvement organisational cultures are associatedwith positive organisational outcomes (e.g. employee retention). Guthrie (2001) further statesthat high involvement organisational cultures are pivotal to the retention process and act as asource of competitive advantage.

Turnover in the Hospitality Sector
Turnover has also been a topic of much international research in the hospitality sector(Wasmuth & Davis, 1983; Woods & Macaulay, 1989; Hogan, 1992; Hinkin & Tracey, 2000;
Lashely, 2001; Simons & Hinkin 2001; Brien, 2004). One stream of this research has
focussed on quantifying the cost of turnover in hospitality, with a variety of methods resulting
in a range of turnover cost estimates:• $1,500 per hourly worker to US$3000 per salaried staff member (Hinkin & Tracey, 2000);• US$3000 per hourly worker (Wasmuth & Davis, 1983; Woods & Macaulay, 1989);• US$1,700 to US$2,500 in direct costs and US$1,200 to US$1,600 in indirect costs per
average worker (Hogan, 1992);• UK 500 pounds per hourly worker to UK 1,441 pounds per skilled worker (Lashley,2001).
Simons and Hinkin (2001) approached the quantitative problem from a different perspective
and demonstrated the employee turnover is strongly associated with decreased profits.
A second stream of research has sought to uncover causes and provide solutions to hospitality
employee turnover (Woods & Macaulay, 1989; Wasmuth & Davis, 1983; Hogan, 1992;
Brien, 2004; Poulston 2005). These authors highlight almost every area of hospitality
management as a potential cause of employee turnover and this allows, therefore,73New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

considerable scope for improving retention. These areas include: overall strategic humanresource management aims, selection, recruitment, orientation and retention, the self-image ofthe industry, training, management skills and development, employee voice andempowerment, long term development, pay and rewards. Poulston (2005) has even postulated
constructive dismissals as a significant cause of turnover, finding from a survey of 28
Auckland hospitality workplaces and 535 under-graduate hospitality students, that
constructive dismissals are strongly associated with casual employee turnover within thehospitality industry. The pool of potential causes and cures for turnover appears nearly
limitless.

Exit Interviews
Exit interviews have been considered by some authors to be a powerful tool for analysing
turnover (Mok & Luk, 1995). However, many authors question the methodology and focus ofexit interviews and seriously debate the value of resulting data (Feldman & Klaas 1999,
Deery 2000, Fottler, Crawford, Quintana, & White 1995, Wood & Macaulay 1987, Phillips &Connell 2003, Wanous 1992). An exit interview has been described as a discussion between
the departing employee and the employer, which can vary in structure and formality, and isdesigned to get information about their employment experience and motivations for leaving(Evans 2006; Rudman, 2002; Stone, 2005). The content discussed in such an interview can bewide ranging, including: reasons for leaving, perceptions of management and organisation,satisfaction with job, working conditions, organisational climate, socialisation issues, training
received, and career opportunities. A principal aim of conducting exit interviews is to provide
employers with information to help prevent the loss of other employees later, for example,
through the identification of training and development needs (Green 2004).
Engaging employees in a dialogue just prior to their departure may encourage them toconsider returning in the future as an employee and/or as a longer term stakeholder in theform of a customer, organisational advocate, etc. For the conversation to be meaningful andthe data of value, it is vital for a climate to be created in which both parties feel comfortableto enable them to gain a direct insight into employees’ opinions of the job role, work
processes, relationships and the organisation. Accordingly, open-ended questions should be
asked and ideally the interview should be conducted by a human resource person or someone
other than the employee’s immediate supervisors (Schachter, 2005). Feldman and Klaas(1999) generated four hypotheses to test how exit interview procedures influence exiting
employees’ self-disclosure of their reasons for departure. They conclude that employees tend
to disclose their honest reasons for leaving when data is treated confidentially and fed back byhuman resource managers in aggregate form, when it does not result in a negative reference
from their direct supervisors, and when they believe that in the past the employer has taken
action on problems identified in exit interviews. Overall, Deery (2000) argues that employees,
who leave an organisation, can provide considerable insight into the problems they faced
during the tenure of their employment.
Conversely, exit interviews have been criticised as an intrusion into an employee’s right toprivacy and that they are of more benefit to the organisation than to the employee. Fottler etal. (1995) suggest that they can be a way to keep an employee that the organisation does notwant to lose, although for many departing employees actions taken as a result of an exit
interview may be too little too late to retain them.

74

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

According to research on 27 American hospitality organisations by Wood and Macaulay (1987),
the exit interview methodology used for data collection has an important impact on the quality of
the information collected. They found that organisations too often centred the interviews on thereasons for leaving, rather than the attitudinal and organisational causes for turnover. In no cases
were the interviews concerned with the “individual and organisation fit” (Wanous, 1992: 56).
This is a crucial point when considering the perspective of psychological contracting and exit
interviews. There is a danger that if the deeper issues of psychological contracting and ‘individualand organisation fit’ are not addressed adequately, exit interviews will be limited to superficial
explanations regarding turnover. In turn, this raises the issue of what other types of employee
feedback could supplement the possibly limited data gathered from exit interviews? Fottler, et al.
(1995) posits that employee attitude surveys yield far more reliable information than did the exit
interviews. They found that from these surveys that organisations could learn how employees
viewed their jobs, their supervisors, their working conditions and other aspects of theorganisation. They also noted that attitude surveys gave the organisation time to interveneconfidently and address the identified problems.
Another methodological consideration is that person-to-person interviews may negatively
affect the results of those interviews. Phillips and Connell (2003) argue that the inherent
power imbalance between the employee and the management interviewer will inhibit anhonest response from the employee. In addition, employee concerns over confidentiality andpossible negative consequences of honest criticism can reduce the accuracy of their responses.
Researchers have also found that the “responses given during exit interviews are often
substantially different from those given in interviews conducted a month or more after thetermination” (Wanous, 1992: 45). Despite these suggestions, hospitality organisations still
conduct exit interviews in a person-to-person format and run them on the day before or day of
departure (Macky and Johnson 2004). In addition, Wood and Macaulay (1987) mention thatfictitious reasons for departure are often cited at exit interviews. The authors argue that somereasons for this behaviour are that the employees are reluctant to cite reasons that condemn
the actions of the organisation, management and supervisors in open interviews, and that theemployee may want a good reference and feel that open criticism could endanger this.
Feldman and Klaas (1999) suggest that an exit questionnaire method is a better way to obtainvalid information than an exit interview. They also believe that exit questionnaires may
generate more reliable and valid information, while also being more efficient to administer interms of cost and time. Many organisations have also developed a web-based system for
conducting their exit questionnaires. The data gained from any form of exit process though
may be of questionable use if immediate line managers are not given meaningful results
and/or encouraged to make changes regarding training, relationships and processes based on
analysis of the feedback from departing employees.

Research Design and Findings
Hotel X worldwide consists of over 4,100 hotels. Hotel X Regional HR office is responsible
for the development and growth of the Hotel X New Zealand and the Pacific region. The data
for the research has been gathered by the Regional Human Resource Co-ordinator for a multisite hotel group in New Zealand. The national data represents the growth of the organisationfrom twelve hotels in 2004 to sixteen hotels in 2005. The data is based on standardised exit
interviews that are run by various human resource managers in the national operations. The
hotel group attempts to interview every leaving employee, but in cases of abandonment or
75

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

refusal, a small minority of employees are not represented in this data. Hotel X has been
experiencing high levels of voluntary turnover. In 2005, Hotel X New Zealand recorded a
total turnover rate of 67.5% (personal communication, July 6th, 2006).
Hotel Y represents a stand alone site that is part of an international chain. At this stage, only
one site carries the brand name in New Zealand. Hotel Y is a leading global hospitality
company, with over 2,900 hotels in more than 80 countries. Following initial consultation
about the research, exit surveys were provided by the Human Resource Manager of Hotel Y.
Approximately 170 exit interviews were provided. The exit interviews were conducted by the
HRM team with staff between 2001 and 2004 inclusive. The hotel group attempts tointerview every leaving employee, but in cases of abandonment or refusal, a small minority of
employees are not represented in this data.

Findings – Hotel X
The data from Hotel X is represented in two levels. Table 1 represents national data, based on
twelve hotels for 2004 and sixteen hotels for 2005. Data from this national level covers 661
exit interviews for 2004 and 911 exit interview for 2005. Tables 2 and 3 represent a single
hotel case study and show a more detailed attempt by the hotel to gain qualitative feedback
from the departing employees. This data covers 22 exit interviews for 2004 and 23 exit
interviews for 2005. Human Resource Managers of Hotel X collate all exit interview data at
the end of each month and enter the data into Excel spreadsheets which are sent to theregional offices. The data received for this report was obtained from the regional offices andwas analysed using Excel.
As depicted in Table 1, the seniority of employees, who left, is greatly influenced by whether
they are full-time or part-time workers. The great majority of part-time workers are in ‘coal
face’ roles, where as the full-time workers are more likely to be supervisors or management(up to 53% of exiting employees in 2004). Front line workers have more varied reasons forleaving and greater rates of abandonment, discipline related exits, returning to education and
fixed term contracts. They are more likely than managers or supervisors to be leaving forreasons of external opportunities, where as managers and supervisors are far more likely to beleaving for reasons of internal transfer. Thus, Table 1 contains a mix of turnover reasons andcovers more than voluntary turnover.
A clear trend in Table 2 is that employees state that ‘nothing’ could be done to stop them fromleaving, with almost 60% of employees exiting in 2004 stating this. In 2005, 53% of exiting
employees state that nothing could be done to stop them from leaving. The organisation could
take comfort from a slight drop in these figures from 2004-2005. The idea that ‘nothing’
could be done to stop these employees from leaving is followed up in most cases by aqualifier e.g. ‘personal reasons’, ‘temporary employee’, ‘travel’, ‘opportunities’, ‘newexperiences’. The employees offer a wider range of specific reasons for leaving in 2005 than2004. Examples of these specific reasons are ‘the family is moving’ or ‘would have liked
more job advancement’, or ‘more flexible shifts’.

76New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

Table 1: Exit Data by Reasons and Staff Position (National Data)
2004 Exits
Full Time Staff
Reason2005 ExitsPart Time Staff

Full Time Staff

Part Time Staff

Mgt

Sup

F/L

Mgt

Sup

F/L

Mgt

Sup

F/L

Mgt

Sup

F/L

Transfer
Overseas Travel
Home Obligations
Relocation
Pregnancy/Health
Own Business
Lack of Hours
Shift Work
Job Dissatisfaction
Visa Expired
Career Opp –Hospitality
Career Opp – Other
Industry
Education/Study
Retirement/
Redundancy
Travel Difficulty
Fixed Term Contract
Insufficient Promotional
Op.
Insufficient Training
Unhappy with Mgmt
Style
Monotonous Job
Lack of Recognition
Heavy Workload
Personality Conflict
Working Conditions
Rate of Pay
Job Performance
Termination by Hotel inprobation
Job Abandonment
Broke House Rules

14
5
2
2
1
1
1
4

17
10
8
2
1
4
16

11
12
4
8
3
1
1
2
6
17

1
-

2
2
2

12
108
40
28
9
4
26
3
4
5
25

19
5
4
2
2
1
7

22
20
8
6
1
5
2
5
8

11
15
5
7
2
2
1
14

-

4
3
1
3
1
1

17
86
56
44
14
4
24
13
29
9
19

9

11

12

-

2

37

6

11

14

-

2

63

-

1

6
-

-

-

38
3

1
-

1

5
1

-

1

60
4

1
-

-

2
-

-

-

3
45
2

1
-

1
2

8
1

-

1
-

8
88
-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1
-

1

1

-

1

2

1
-

1
2
1
-

1
1
3

-

-

5
1
2
3
6

2
-

1
2
1

2
5
2

-

-

3
2
1
10
3
10

1

-

1
-

-

-

28
1

-

-

1
-

-

1
-

47
5

Totals

42

74

91

1

8

438

51

97

97

0

19

621

Note: Mgt = Management, Sup = Supervisor, F/L = Front Line77

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

Table 2: Potential Measures to Prevent Staff Member Exits (Single Hotel Case)
Responses

Nothing at all
Nothing: Leaving for personal reasons
Offered more flexible hours/shifts or a
new role
Nothing: I was temporary
Paid me more
Nothing: I want to travel
Nothing: I have a new opportunity
Nothing: I need new experiences/skills
Use my skills, provide recognition
Family moving
No response
Total

2004 Exits
Total
responses
5332005 Exits

%

3
2
1
1
1
0
0
4
22

22
13
13

Total
responses
2
1
1

13
9
4
4
4
0
0
18
100

1
2
1
4
3
2
1
5
23

%
9
4
4
4
9
4
18
14
9
4
21
100

Table 3: Final Message for the General Manager (Single Hotel Case)
Responses

Thank you it was greatCommunicate better, thank staff in person
Nothing
Things are heading in the right direction
There are a few problems: Staffing and training
I want to come back after study
You have let a great employee slip throughyour hands
Pay staff more
No response
Total

2004 Exits
Total
response
s
9
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
3
22

2005 Exits

%

40.9
13.6
9
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5

Total
response
s
8
2
0
1
3
0
0

4.5
14
100

0
9
23

%

34.7
8.6
0
4.3
13.3
0
0
0
39.1
100

As Table 3 illustrates, a large percentage of employees (40.9% in 2004 and 34.7% in 2005)
stated that they really enjoyed working for the hotel. While the drop from 2004-2005 could
concern the hotel, the real problem with this finding is that most respondents do not give any
feedback about what could be changed to improve staff retention, or provide a clear indicationof why they are leaving. Although communication, staffing levels, pay and training areindicated as problems by some staff, the percentages attached to these issues are very low.
Figure 1 shows the age profile difference between New Zealand Hotel X employees and theworld wide employees. New Zealand has a significantly younger employee profile, withalmost double the percentage of workers aged less than 25 years.

78

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

Figure 1: Age profile differences between New Zealand Hotel X employees and the world
wide employees

Findings – Hotel Y
Table 4 summarises the employee reasons for leaving Hotel Y and in many ways reflects thedata represented in Table 1 for Hotel X. The exit interview for Hotel Y differs from Hotel X inthat the last four tables represent answers to question based around organizational themes –Working Conditions (Table 5), Relationship with Management (Table 6), Training (Table 7)
and Relationship with Colleagues (Table 8).
Table 4 presents the various reasons cited by the staff for leaving Hotel Y, based on an
analysis of the coded summaries of the reasons given in the exit interviews. Travelling has
been identified as the most common reason for leaving the job (13%) followed by movingfrom Auckland (13%) and dissatisfied with management (11%). The shaded responses below
depict ‘classical’ drivers of turnover due to lack of future opportunity and dissatisfaction withmanagement, job design and working conditions.
Table 5 shows that almost half of existing staff (48%) were of the opinion that everything wasgood. This finding of ‘all is good’ regarding working conditions mirrors a similar pattern tothat identified from Hotel X in Table 3, where the dominant message to the General Managers
was ‘thank you it was great’. The layout of facilities falls next in line with almost 13%
suggestive of the scope for improvement.
As demonstrated by the results in Table 6, managerial relations were considered positive(27% and 15% felt that their managers have good standards and considered them as verygood). But, on an operational level, peer-like performance is observed as the lowest, scoring
less than 2% of the responses.

79New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

Table 4: Reasons stated for exit
General reason statedGoing to travel
Moving out of Auckland
Dissatisfaction with management
Going to study
Another job offer
Better pay elsewhere
Pursue change in career away from hospitality
Better working hours elsewhere (inc. not doing
shift work
Other reason
No opportunity for future job development
Family reasons
Not getting enough work hours
To become self-employed
Time to move on
Job was not challenging enough
Cannot get to work (transport problems)
Physical stress of job
Disciplinary action
Total

Table 5: Working Conditions
General reason statedAll is good
Hard / long work hours
Don’t get breaks
Need more training
Equipment needs improving
Job is very physically demanding
Layout of facilities could be improved
Interdepartmental clashes
Lack of staff car parks – transport
Uniform problems
Kitchens to small – bad air flow
Bad staff food
Staffing problems
Total

No. of responses
22
21
18
12
12
11
11

% of responses
13.3
12.7
10.8
7.2
7.2
6.6
6.6

9

5.4

8
8
7
6
5
5
5
3
2
1
166

4.8
4.8
4.2
3.6
3.0
3.0
3.0
1.8
1.2
.6
100.0

No. of responses
72
7
1
5
11
5
19
1
2
4
8
8
7
150

% of responses
48
4.6
.6
3.3
7.3
3.3
12.6
.6
1.3
2.6
5.3
5.3
4.6

80

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

Table 6: Managerial Relationships
General reason statedManager is fair
Operates like a peerManagers are not supported by senior management
Manager is not supportive
Manager is good communicator, good mediator,
good organizer
Lack of communication with management
Managers hard to access or not there
Manager lacks skills
Manager is a liar
Manager has high standards – is very goodManager does not take action
Manager is goodManager is stressed
Manager is rude, confrontational, has temper, is too
demanding, has bad attitude
Total

No. of responses
83
55% of responses
4.7
1.7
2.9
2.9

20

11.9

14
13
9
4
26
5
46
4

8.3
7.7
5.3
2.3
15.4
2.9
27.3
2.3

6

3.5

168

Table 7 reveals that by and large employees feel training was good (34%), which was
followed by 14% of responses stating that the training imparted was basic and on the job.
Table 7: Training
General reason stated
Already new what do to
Too busy to get training done
Training was basic – mostly on the job
Good – plenty of training
Training is below average for Hotel of this type
Was not told about training options
Training not resourced sufficiently
Excellent, learnt allot
Fidellio training very goodTraining could be better
Training needs more management support
No formal training provided
Dropped in deep end, taught myself
Need refresher courses
Total

No. of responses
7
8
21
52
16
4
3
17
3
6
4
4
5
3
153

% of responses
4.5
5.2
13.7
33.9
10.4
2.6
1.9
11.1
1.9
3.9
2.6
2.6
3.2
1.9

Table 8 shows that more than half of the respondents (56%) enjoyed friendly and good
relationships with their colleagues, followed by 25% who did not have any problems. This
reinforces the ‘happy goodbye’ phenomenon that is apparent from findings in the above tables
on a range of exit issues.

81New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

Table 8: Relationship with colleagues
General reason statedFun, friendly, goodOK, no problems
Colleagues not focused
Don’t get on with workmate
Feel left out of workplace relationships
Workmates are rude, bully
Not good at all, worst staff ever worked with
Workmates don’t work hard
Workmates need more patience, need to listen
Total

No. of responses
75
34
5
4
3
7
2
2
2
134

% of responses
55.9
25.3
3.7
2.9
2.2
5.2
1.4
1.4
1.4

Discussion
The findings in this paper show the largest percentage responses in the tables for both hotels
indicated that employees feel “nothing” could be done to stop them leaving (almost 60% of
responses), that the working experience was “great” (40.9%), working conditions are “allgood” (48%), management has “high standards, is very good” (26%), training was “good,
plenty of training” (33.9%) and relationships with colleagues was “fun, friendly and good”(55.9%). This explains the title of the paper (“I love you – goodbye”) as significant numbersof employees, who are leaving these organisations, describe their experiences and conditions
with the organisations as predominately positive.
This raises concerns that exit interviews are failing to uncover relevant information regarding
the true nature of the employer/employee relationship and its eventual dissolution. On thatbackground, several questions will be addressed in this discussion:•••

Are these exit interviews the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff?
Do organisations need to use other employee feedback systems (employee climate
surveys) to capture problems earlier in the relationship?
Can the exit interviews be re-configured to be more effective?

When analysing the factors that underpin turnover, these factors can be conveniently
separated into push and pull factors.
Pull factors would include those that attract employee away from the hotels and makealternative employment options look attractive. These may be external factors, reflective ofthe labour market, or competitive factors that the hotels feel they can’t address. Based on themeta-analysis provided by Boxall et al. (2003), the hotel industry faces the “perfect storm”
regarding several of these pull factors:•

Age is negatively associated with turnover. Figure 1 shows that Hotel X has asignificantly younger age profile than the international outlets in the same chain. This fitswith the Hospitality Standards Institute 2007 Employee Profile Report which describes
hospitality employees as having an extremely young age profile with 40% of employees
younger than 25.

82

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90••

Low unemployment and a tight labour market affects turnover. During the interviews,
New Zealand has had very low unemployment and a very tight labour market with chronic
skill shortages.
Remuneration plays an important role in turnover. Hospitality pay rates remain amongst
the lowest in the country. The New Zealand Draft Tourism Strategy 2015 shows that
hospitality and tourism related industries had compensation rates 10% lower than nonhospitality and tourism related industries in 2003.

While we would not expect age or labour market conditions to be reflected in the exit
interview data, it is surprising to find remuneration to be so weakly represented! In Hotel X,
pay only manages 6.6% of potential responses in “General Reasons Stated for Leaving”, 4.5%
in “Message to the General Manager” and 9% in “Potential Measures to Prevent Staff Exits”.
Push factors could be described as internal conditions and perceptions that affect anemployee’s decision to leave the organisation. These factors are suggested as important
turnover reasons in Boxall et al. (2003). These factors can include job satisfaction, the extent
to which employees feel their contributions are valued and congruence between employer andemployee preferences for conditions. Some of the comments listed in Table 9 below can beseen as related to the push factors discussed by Boxall et al. (2003) but representation is very
weak in terms of percentages. For example, only 5.4% state the desire for better working
hours as their reason for exit.
Table 9 – Sample of Push Factors Identified
ReasonOffered more flexible hours
Use my skills, provide recognition
Communicate better
Staffing and training
Better working hours
Job was not challenging enough
Cannot get to work

% of Responses

Hotel Brand

4%
9%
8.6%
13.3%
5.4%
3%
1.8%

X
X
X
X
Y
Y
Y

Exit Interview
Period
2005
2005
2005
2005
2001-2004
2001-2004
2001-2004

Overall, the push factors do not appear to say much, though training and skill recognition do
warrant further attention. However, pull factors equate strongly with traditional drivers ofturnover pulling employees away from the organisations such as job opportunities in otherindustries, travel and relocation. The concern is that in all categories except (Managerial
Relationships and Training), the employee responses are predominately positive. The factorsthat are listed as reasons for leaving or reasons for dissatisfaction are both weakly represented
and questionable as the true cause of the turnover. For example, training is one of thecategories that is less positive in terms of employee feedback – yet the two hotel organisations
studied are amongst the top in their field in terms of quality training provision and investment
in career progression. Thus, we are left with the conclusion that the exit interviews don’t
appear to be capturing the drivers that turnover literature indicates would normally be present
in employee decisions to leave employment.
The ‘reasons for leaving data’ for both brands shows a strong trend towards transfer,
relocation, travel and external opportunities. While Hotel X part-time workers show much
more varied reasons for leaving (health, lack of hours, education) there is little evidence thatthe organisation has ‘done something’, or ‘failed to do something’ that has resulted in theemployee deciding to leave. The exception to this comment seems to be indicated by the83New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90“Managerial Relationships” and “Training” tables form Hotel Y. These tables present a
picture of managerial failure – not supportive, hard to access, lack skills, does not take action,
rude, confrontational, too demanding, bad attitude and below average training provision.
However, neither of these two categories features strongly in turnover literature as direct
determinants of turnover, other than as possible moderators of job satisfaction. Generally
employees state they are leaving because they have seen a better opportunity or else they have
had to move.
A recent personal interview with the Regional Human Resource Manager of a large New
Zealand Hotel chain highlighted the importance of new entrant turnover for hotels as a criticalissue for the industry. Service length within Hotel X’s properties illustrates, what Wanous(1992) refers to as ‘premature’ turnover, in which there is a lack of congruence between
individuals and the organisational culture. It is stated that when an individual enters anorganisation the early experiences are likely to be positive, creating a honeymoon effect. It issuggested that the hiring organisation presents their most favourable side to potential
individuals during the recruitment and entry processes. As stated by Boswell, Boudreau &Tichy (2005) this portrayal of the organisation in a more positive light contributes to higher
individual expectations. This “initial high” (Wanous, 1992: 4) of the new job is likely to wear
off, when individuals became established and their expectations are not met. This results in a
decline in job satisfaction, known as the ‘hangover effect’, which will eventually lead tovoluntary turnover. This could be partially due to the hospitality industry being characterisedby historical practices and accepting employee turnover as the norm. Unfortunately, no
service length data exists for Hotel Y to test this ‘premature turnover’ hypothesis.
Taken as a whole, the data provided by both hotel brands exit interview process is very
limited in its application to organisational improvement. The information contained in theexit interviews seems to be a classic example of describing the symptoms of a disease, andencouraging the treatment of the symptoms, while the underlying causes of the disease remain
unaddressed. The data sourced from the exit interview process is basically descriptive – wecan see percentages and breakdowns of position, service time, and ‘main reason for leaving’,
but at the end of this process we are left with the following conclusion: the vast majority of
employees, who are leaving voluntarily, are doing so because other activities appear to be
more rewarding or interesting to them. These activities may be travel, education, working foranother hospitality organisation or working in another industry. The majority of employees
state that there is very little the employer could do to stop this from happening. Given theconsiderable time and resources allocated to the exit interview process, this investment
provides the employer with scant return.
However, it could be argued that the reasons for leaving may be almost irrelevant – thereasons for lack of commitment are far more important. The results call for a radical reconceptualisation of what should be asked in exit interviews and how the exit interview
process should be undertaken. From the findings of this study, it is clear that exit interviews
alone will not capture the complex nature of turnover and employee relations. If very little
useful data can be generated for the hotel brands as far as organisational improvement isconcerned, then why continue investing time and money in this current process? The exit
interview content needs to be re-conceptualised so as to include questions that are more likely
to capture the nature of the employment relationship in all of its psychological contract
complexity. In addition, employee climate surveys and other types of employee feedback
need to be conducted to gather information about the employment relationship before it has
irretrievably broken down.
84

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

Re-conceptualizing Exit Interviews?
The above findings illustrate a largely positive picture; that is ‘everything is good’ appears tobe the opinion of the majority of exiting employees. However, given the high turnover rate,particularly of employees with tenure of less than six months, their exit demonstrates thateverything cannot be fine. This leads the authors to question the effectiveness of exit
interviews for capturing honest information that can be used to effect organisational change tolower turnover.
Moving forward, there are two directions that can be followed. We can either reconceptualise
exit interviews, or accept that there is a more fundamental problem – exit interviews simply
do not work. We will discuss both of these directions and based on the literature and theabove findings, several tentative suggestions are made for reconceptualising exit interviews.
Feldman and Klaas (1999) conclude that employees tend to disclose their honest reasons forleaving when data is treated confidentially, when it does not result in a negative reference
from their direct supervisors, and when they believe that in the past the employer has taken
action on problems identified in exit interviews. Hotel X and Hotel Y should consider
emphasising the confidential nature of the exit interview information to employees andconsider showcasing changes in hotel practice that have been brought about as a result of exit
interviews. This concrete linking of exit interviews to organisational change could
demonstrate the importance of exit interviews to employees and thereby improve the qualityof information given during these interviews.
Exiting employees may engage in ‘positive reporting’ if the interview is conducted while they
are still working in the organisation and they have yet to complete the exit process such ascollecting a final payment and securing a referee. On the other hand, researchers have foundthat the “responses given during exit interviews are often substantially different from thosegiven in interviews conducted a month or more after the termination” (Wanous, 1992: 45).
Hotel X and Hotel Y may wish to consider researching the validity of this finding by running apilot study using written exit interviews, one month after the employee has left theorganisation. There are obvious practical limitations regarding the tracking and contacting of
employees in this suggestion, but even limited feedback could shed light on the usefulness of
post-partum exit interviews.
Wanous (1992) and Fottler et al. (1995) argue that the exit interview methodology used fordata collation has immense influence on the quality of the information collected. They
conclude that organisations all too often focus on the immediate reasons for leaving ininterviews, rather than the attitudinal and organisational causes for turnover. It is thisquestion of what types questions should be asked in exit interviews which is of great interest
to the authors of this paper. Hotel X and Hotel Y could consider focusing exit interview
questions around key organisational and attitudinal hot spots, from which suggestions forchanges in organisational practice could be made. In addition, questions could be asked about
the nature of expectations that employee held before they started in their work roles, and how
these expectations were met, exceeded, or frustrated by particular aspects of the organisation.
Issues such as inadequate socialisation and the resulting dissonance could be explored withdeparting employees in exit interviews. Wanous (1992), Allen (2006), and Birchfield (2001)
all argue that premature turnover is of key importance to organisations and that issues aroundsocialization are crucial to the control of that turnover. The findings presented in this paper
85

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

further highlight the importance of premature turnover for Hotel X, with 83% of part-timeworkers leaving before one year of service in 2005.
If the thesis is accepted that exit interviews simply do not work, then there is a more
fundamental question of how to understand turnover. Exit interviews are only a limited partof a more comprehensive web of employee feedback mechanisms, yet they are often used as
an individual stand alone tool to gain information from employees. Even more concerning isthat few hotel Human Resource Managers were able to say what was done with the results ofexit interviews (personal communication – the authors). This is particularly concerning, as if
the results do not lead to any practices aimed at reducing turnover, then they are nothing morethan a ‘tick the box’ exercises. It is perhaps not surprising then that employees reported alargely positive feedback in such interviews, because if they had never seen the changes madeas a result of feedback given by previously exiting employees, then value did they see inbeing honest about their motivations for leaving. Two-way communication builds trust inorganisations, yet exit interviews appear to be an exercise in one-way communication with theemployee expected to be honest and frank with feedback, yet the organisation may be reticent
in acting on the feedback. While exiting employees will most likely never know how the
information they disclose at the exit interview will be used, current employees will be able togauge as to whether the organisation is prepared to act on factors affecting turnover throughwhether changes are made, or not, in the workplace.
The hotels should take the view that the quality and longevity of the employment relationshipis a result of complex psychological contracting from the start of the recruitment phase, all theway to the last word on the exit interview form. In order to make positive interventions inthis relationship, and thus reduce turnover, the organisations could consider a range of
employee feedback options that engage with the individual worker from the moment they join
the hotel. These could include traditional annual employee climate surveys, but could also
include confidential internet surveys and chat rooms, regular semi-structured interviews withhuman resource mangers and employee participatory forums.

Conclusion
Despite their shortcomings, there are advantages for Hotel X and Hotel Y continuing toconduct exit processes such as interviews. Gathering significant statistical data could allow
them to gain greater insight into motivations for departure and allow them to monitor trends
as well as forecast turnover levels. However, for Hotel X and Hotel Y to realise the realsynergies that can be gained from exit processes they need to address the suggested
deficiencies discussed in the literature and demonstrated in this paper. The practice of exit
interviews can be very costly and wasteful, particularly if the right questions are not asked,
and especially if the information collated is never used.
Unless an effective and safe process is designed there is also the added risk that people do not
divulge the truth in the exit interview about the real reasons of their departure, thus making
the process possibly redundant. Organisations typically focus in the exit interviews on thereasons of leaving, rather than the attitudinal and organisational causes for turnover. Thisfocus can result in data that fails to inform organisational improvement. Having argued that a
web of employee feedback mechanisms is a more useful approach, (including employee
attitude surveys, which unlike exit interviews, could generate high-quality reliable86New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

information about the employee relationships within the organisation), a serious question
mark hangs over the current efficacy of standard exit interviews.

References
Abbot, J., De Ciere, H. and Iverson, R.D. (1998). Costing turnover: implications of work/family
conflict at management level. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources. 36(1): 25-44
Adcorp. (2006). The changing workforce: Before and after generation Y. Business Report available
through the HRINZ news letter.
Allen, D.G. (2006). Do Organizational Socialization Tactics Influence Newcomer Embeddedness andTurnover? Journal of Management. 32(2), 237-256
Argyris. C. (1960). Understanding Organizational Behaviour. Homewood, IL, Dorsey Press.
Australian House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment, Workplace Relations andWorkforce Participation (2007). Current Vacancies: Workforce Challenges facing the AustralianTourism Sector. Australia: The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia
Birchfield, R. (2001). Cutting employee turnover costs. New Zealand Management. 48(9), 33
Bluedorn, A. C. (1982). A unified model of turnover from organizations. Human
Relations, 35, 135-153.
Boswell, W., and Boudreau, J. W. and Tichy, J. (2005). The relationship between employee jobchange and job satisfaction: The honeymoon-hangover effect. Journal of Applied Psychology. 90(5),882-982
Boxall, P., Macky, K., and Rasmussen, E. (2003). Labour turnover and employee loyalty in New
Zealand: a national survey of the causes and consequences of leaving and staying with employers.
Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources. 41(2): 195-214
Brien, A. (2004). Do I want a job in hospitality? Only till I get a real job! In K.A, Smith and C.
Schott. (eds). Proceedings of the New Zealand Tourism and Hospitality Research Conference 2004,
8-10 December. pp. 35-42. Wellington.
Cotton, J., and Tuttle, J. (1986). Employee turnover: A meta-analysis and review with implications forresearch. Academy of Management. 11(1): 55-70
Dalessio, A., Silverman, W. H., & Schuck, J. R. (1986). Paths to turnover: a re-analysis and review ofexisting data on the Mobley, Horner and Hollingsworth turnover model. Human Relations, 39, 245264.
Deery, M.A. (2000). Promotional Opportunity and Employee Turnover: A Re-examination of theRelationship. Melbourne, Victoria University of Technology.
DelCampo, R. G. (2007). ‘Understanding the psychological contract: a direction for the future’.
Management Research News, 30, 6, pg 432.
Dougherty, T., Bluedorn, A., & Keon, T. (1985). Precursors of employee turnover: A multiple-sample
causal analysis. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 6, 259-271.

87

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90
Draft New Zealand Tourism Strategy – 2015. (2007) Retrieved from: nztourismstrategy.com on 10th
September 2007.
Evans, J. (2006). Exit interviews provide insight into problems. Louisiana Contractor. Baton Rouge.
55(1): 36
Feldman, D., and Klaas, B. (1999). The impact of exit questionnaire procedures on departing
employees’ self-disclosure. Journal of Managerial Issues. 11(1): 13-26
Fottler, M., Crawford, M., Quintana, J., and White, J. (1995). Evaluating nurse turnover: comparing
attitude surveys and exit interviews. Hospital & Health Services Administration. 40 (2): 278-295
Gerhart, B. (1990). Voluntary turnover and alternative job opportunities.
Psychology. 75: 467-76

Journal of Applied

Green, R. (2004). Making exit interviews work. Journal of Organisational Excellence. 24 (1): 83-86
Griffeth, R., Hom, P., and Gaertner, S. (2000). A Meta-Analysis of The Antecedents and Correlates of
Employee Turnover: Update, Moderator Tests and Research Implications For The Next Millennium.
Journal of Management. 26(3): 563-88
Guest, D. E., and Conway, N. (2002). Communicating the psychology contract: An employer
perspective. Human Resource Management Journal, 12 (2), pg 22.
Guthrie, J. P. (2001). High-involvement work practices, turnover, and productivity: Evidence fromNew Zealand. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 180-190
Hinkin, T.R., and Tracey, J.B. (2000). The cost of turnover. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly. 41(3): 14-21
Hogan, J. J. (1992). Turnover and what to do about it. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, 33(1), 40-45.
Hom, P., and Griffeth, R. (1995). Employee turnover. Cincinnati, OH: Southwestern.
Hospitality
Standards
Institute–
http://ssl.ebits.co.nz/hsi/Article.aspx?ID=8

LiaiseReport2007.

Retrievedfrom:

Hospitality Standards Institute – An Employment Profile of The Hospitality Industry – 2007.
Retrieved from: http://ssl.ebits.co.nz/hsi/Resource.aspx?ID=762
Hunt, V. & Rasmussen, E. (2007). Turnover and retention in a tight labour market: reflecting on New
Zealand research. New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 32(1): 45-58.
Lashley, C. (2001).‘Costing Staff Turnover in Hospitality Service Organisations. Journal of Sevices
Research. 1(2): 4-24
Macky, K., and Johnson, G. (2004). Managing Human Resources in New Zealand. Auckland:
McGraw Hill New ZealandMarch, J.G, and Simon, H.A. (1958). Organization. New York: Wiley
Mobley, W. (1977). Inermediate linkages in the relationship between jon satisfactionand employee turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(2), 237-240.

88

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

Mobley, W., Horner, S., and Hollingsworth, A. (1978). An evaluation of precursors of hospital
employee turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology. 63(4): 408-414.
Mok, C., & Luk, Y. (1995). Exit interviews in hotels: Making them a more powerful management
tool’ International Journal of Hospitality Management, 14(2), 187-194.
North, N., Rasmussen, E., Hughes, F., Finlayson, M., et al. (2005). Turnover amongst Nurses in
New Zealand's District Health Boards: A National Survey of Nursing Turnover and Turnover
Costs. New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 30(1), 49.
Phillips, J., & Connell, A. (2003). Managing Employee Retention - A Strategic Accountability
Approach. New York: Butterworth Heinemann
Porter, L.W., & Steers, R.M. (1973). ‘Organizational, work, and personal factors in employee turnover
and absenteeism’. Psychological Bulletin, 80(2), 151-176
Poulston, J. (2005). Constructive dismissals in hospitality: Perceived incidence and acceptance’.
International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administratio. 6(1): 11 – 26
Price, J. (1977). The Study of Turnover. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
Rousseau, D. M. (1989). ‘Psychological and implied contracts in organizations’. Employee
Responsibilities and rights Journal, 2, 121-139.
Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written andunwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rousseau, D. M. (1998). The ‘problem’ of the psychological contract considered. Journal of
Organizational Behaviour, 19, 665-671.
Rousseau, D. M. (2001). Schema, promise and mutuality: The building blocks of the psychologicalcontract. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 511-541.
Rudman, R. (2002). Human Resource Management in New Zealand. Auckland: Pearson Education
New Zealand Limited.
Schachter, D. (2005). Exit interviews can provide valuable feedback. Business Management. 9(7): 910.
Schein, E. H. (1965). Organizational psychology. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Schwab, D.P. (1991). Contextual variables in employee performance-turnover relationships.
Academy of Management Journal. 34: 966-975
Simons, T., and Hinkin, T. (2001). The Effect of Employee Turnover on Hotel Profits. Cornell Hoteland Restaurant Administration Quarterly. 42(4): 65-69
Statistics New Zealand, Employment Summary. (2006). Retrieved July 12 2007, fromhttp://www.stats.govt.nz/people/work-income/employment.htm
Steel, R. and Griffith, R. (1989). The elusive relationship between perceived employment opportunity
and turnover behaviour: a methodological or conceptual artefact? Journal of Applied Psychology. 69:
846-5489

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):70-90

Steers, R., & Mowday, R. (1981). Employee Turnover and post-decision accommodation processes.
Research in Organizational Behavior, 3, 235-281.
Stone, R. (2005). Human Resource Management. Queensland: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
Tett, R., and Meyer, J. (1993). Job Satisfaction, Organisational Commitment, Turnover Intention, andTurnover: Path Analysis based on Meta-Analytical Findings. Personnel Psychology. 46: 259-77
The New Zealand Draft Tourism Strategy 2015. Retrieved from: www.nztourismstrategy.com/
Wanous, J. (1992). Organisational Entry - Recruitment, Selection, Orientation and Socialization of
Newcomers. New York: Addison-Wesley.
Wasmuth, W., and Davis, S. (1983). Managing Employee Turnover: Why Employees Leave’. Cornell
Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. 24(1): 11-18
Woods, R. and Macaulay, J. (1987). Exit interviews: How to turn a file filler into a management tool.
Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. 28(3): 3-10
Zhao, H., Wayne, S. J., Glibkowski, B. C., Bravo, J. (2007). ‘The Impact of Psychological Contract
Breach on Work-Related Outcome: a Meta-Analysis’. Personal Psychology, 60, 3, pg 647.

90New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):91-104

A Research Note: Employee-focused corporate social responsibility
reporting in the banking industry
KIRSTY RAUBENHEIMER*

Abstract
This research note explores the extent of publicised employee-focused corporate social
responsibility (“CSR”) initiatives in the banking sector. It assesses a number of New
Zealand/Australian (“NZ/AUS”) and European banks by comparing their current statedemployee-focused CSR practices and policies (by means of CSR reports, annual reports, andweb-based information) with current academic literature and international regulatory standards.
There is a general assumption in the literature that the European banks are superior in theirpractises and reporting initiatives in employee-focused CSR. However, based on this initialassessment of the NZ/AUS banks’ reports, there is some evidence the antipodean banks areperhaps more thorough and detailed regarding certain employee-focused CSR practices thansome of the Northern Hemisphere counterparts. The paper concludes with a summary of thelimitations of the extant research and suggestions for further research.

Introduction
Despite 70 years of intense academic debate surrounding the concept of ‘corporate social
responsibility’, there is still no universally accepted definition (Whitehouse, 2006). While thishas in part hindered its development, corporate social responsibility (CSR) has once again
received renewed interest and become part of mainstream business practice (Garriga and Melé,2004), due in part to the renewed strategic attention being given to employer branding and humanresource management (“HRM”) issues (Walker and Higgins, 2008). Environmental issues still
however dominate the CSR debate, while employee issues are yet to be highlighted as much inbusiness reporting and in academic literature, despite employees’ growing importance tobusinesses’ refocus on their customer service standards (Decker, 2004).
The central research question that underpins this paper is to better understand why CSR is
important to modern corporations, how employees fit into this increasingly broad subject, andwhat is being done to support them as an element of CSR, customer service and businessstrategy. In particular, this paper reports on the initial stages of a study – namely a review of theextent of academic research including Global Reporting Initiative standards and the corporate
literature surrounding employee-focused CSR. Based on the review of the literature, a number of
employee-focused themes will be established to assess the degree of employee-focused reportingin a selection of European/International and NZ/AUS banks.
*

Kirsty Raubenheimer is a PhD student at AUT and recipient of the VC Scholarship, Email address: Kirsty
Raubenheimer@aut.ac.nz

91New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):91-104

Literature Themes
There is an extensive debate surrounding CSR, dating back to the 1950’s when Bowen (1953, as
cited in Garriga and Mel, 2004) published his book ‘Social Responsibilities of the Businessman’.
Since the early 1990’s the field has grown substantially, leading to an increased global
consciousness of corporations, due to “a proliferation of media and NGO exposes on violationsof corporate behaviour with regard to human rights, environmental principles and labour laws”(Hill, 2006: 519).
With a significant increase in scope over the years, it has become apparent that CSR incorporates
a number of different elements (Decker, 2004: 714) and therefore, while there is still no finite
definition of ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’ a meaningful definition needs to be dynamic(ibid). For the purposes of this review, the definition by Holmes and Watts’ (2000: 1) will be
used:“CSR relates to a firm’s commitment to contribute to sustainable economic
development, working with employees, their families, local communities andsociety at large to improve general quality of life”.
Greater international interconnectedness (globalisation) has resulted in increased choice for
consumers but, in turn, has also increased competition for businesses (Bamber, Lansbury and
Wailes, 2004). For the service sector, this means vying for more informed and less loyal
customers (Boone and Kurtz, 2004). Services have therefore refocused on customer relations,relying increasingly on front-line staff to achieve this (Nixon, 2001). As a result, improving
relations and communication with staff has gained significance (National Australian Bank (NAB)
Ltd, 2004). Lehman (2007) has argued that in most cases this requires rectifying the internal
damage of 20th century rationalism of cost cutting, downsizing, outsourcing and bureaucracy. As
a result, building co-operative and positive relationships with employees should be a prioritisedbusiness strategy, in order to not only fulfil the needs of its customers, and other CSR
stakeholders, but to also meet the specific needs of one of its most valuable stakeholders: its
employees. Collaborative relationships between businesses and their employees could therefore
be regarded as an ideal for CSR: if a company does not assume a high level of responsibility for
its own staff (internal), it is unlikely to do so for its customers or to the social and naturalenvironment (external) in which it works. This is illustrated by the Figure 1 below:
The UK based Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (“CIPD”) has started to link
employee-focused CSR to employer branding and, identify the pivotal role HRM plays in theirstrategic implementation (CIPD, 2003). It believes that CSR offers HRM an opportunity todemonstrate its strategic focus, with employee-focused CSR addressing pivotal organisational
processes, including recruitment, training and communications. CSR is therefore viewed as an“active channel for building customer loyalty” (Arvinen-Muondo and Perkins, 2008: 129) andenhancing customer service (Pirsh, Gupta and Grau, 2007). Projecting an organisation’s image,
reputation and trustworthiness are also vitally important for attracting and retaining not only
customers but employees as well (Decker, 2004). As a result, businesses are realising the need toconnect with, attract and motivate their increasingly diverse and less loyal employees.

92New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):91-104

Subsequently, the role of employer branding has gained increased strategic attention fromorganisations (Barrow and Mosley, 2005).
Figure 1: Achieving integrated CSR: A value chain approach

Source: Bevan et al, 2004: 29

Employer Branding initially ‘took off’ in the late 1990s with the sudden focus on ‘the war for
talent’ (Michaels, Hadfield-Jones and Axelrod, 2001; Martin and Hetrick, 2006) and it is now
receiving renewed attention regarding its role within an organisation’s strategic direction (Barrow
and Mosley, 2005). The implies that an organisation needs to market what it stands for and has tooffer to both potential and existing employees, with the employer brand needing to adequately
connect to an organisation’s values, strategy and HR policies (Walker and Higgins, 2008). Thisview is, however, still not part of mainstream business strategic reality. As a recent
PriceWaterhouseCooper survey found that nearly 30% of CEO’s still feel CSR to be a
predominantly PR issue (Humpage, 2007), it is not surprising that employee-focused CSR has
received insufficient attention, with environmental issues still dominating what strategic focus isbeing given to CSR (Branco and Rodrigues, 2006). Employee-focused CSR appears to have been
marginalised and, although employees are considered active stakeholders within the context of
CSR, they seem to have only received peripheral mention (CIPD, 2003).
Although the body of literature surrounding employee-focused CSR is slowly expanding (Garriga
and Melé, 2004), the vast majority appears to originate from Scandinavian and European
countries, reinforced by European Union (“EU”) initiatives. In comparison, it has yet been lessformally promoted within Anglo-American countries. As such, one would presume that with theirincreased awareness and focus, European banks would have superior and advanced employee
policies in place in comparison to NZ/AUS banks.

93New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):91-104

Review of Secondary Data
The information reported in this paper are based on a review of secondary information sources. In
order to gain an insight into the field of employee–focused CSR and prior to conducting the
primary data collection, a comparative review was undertaken, with a focus on establishing theextent of academic research in this area and what information is publically available on selectedbanks. The banks chosen for the review are outlined in the tables below and were chosen on thebasis of their size, influence, industry reputation and overt references regarding their humanresource or CSR initiatives.
Table 1: New Zealand/Australian banks
New Zealand Banks
ANZ
ASB
BNZ
Westpac

Australian owners
Australia and New Zealand Banking group (ANZ)
Commonwealth Bank
National Australia Bank (NAB)
Westpac Banking Corporation

Table 2: European/international banks
European BankThe Co-operative bank
HSBC
Deutsche Bank
Barclays Bank
Danske BankCountry of origin
EnglandEnglandGermany
EnglandDenmark

A range of documentation from each bank was used for this review, including CSR reports,
annual reports, HR documentation and the banks’ websites. These were analysed to establish theextent of employee-focused initiatives. However, instead of merely comparing New
Zealand/Australian banking reporting practices with the presumed superior European ones (as is
the dominant view in the literature), this review aimed to identify what the primary focus was foreach bank with regard to its employee-focused CSR reporting, as a way of gauging the levels of
employee-focused CSR engagement.
In order to provide a comprehensive comparison between NZ/AUS and European banks, a set ofcriteria was also chosen so that all banks could be compared to the same points of reference. To
this end, Vuontisjärvi’s (2006) set of criteria was incorporated into the analysis as it is not only
focused within Europe but is also used by international reporting bodies, including ‘Business in
the Community’ (2000), ‘CEC’ (2001) and ‘CSR Europe’ (2001). The criteria is based on an
analysis of the annual reports of Finland’s 205 largest companies in which he identified the mostcommon employee-focused policies and practices.
Vuontisjärvi, (2006: 337), criteria in order of importance are:••••Training and staff development;
Pay and benefits;
Participation and staff involvement;
Values and principles;94New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):91-104

•
•
•
•
•
•

Employee health and well-being;
Measurement of policies;
Employment policy;
Security in employment;
Equal opportunities (diversity); andWork-life balance.

Building on Vuontisjärvi’s criteria, as well as drawing on other well known global reporting
directives, including the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), Business in the Community (Bitc),
FTSE4GOOD, the Dow Jones Sustainability Indexes and the EU and its Green Paper, thefollowing set of criteria was established:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Training and career development, including life-long learning emphasis and spending per
employee
Diversity, including organisational demographics, anti-discrimination, equal opportunity
promotion, minority and disability group inclusion, women in management programs, ageneutral policies and cultural inclusion
Supportive working environment, including work-life balance, part-time and flexible working
options, employee participation and involvement, two-way communication channels andfamily support including childcare facilities and maternity and paternity leave policies.
Health and Safety, including employee well-being, education, counselling and workplacepolicies and practises
Remuneration and benefits, including share plans, employee appraisals, performancestandards and bonus schemes
Employee engagement and satisfaction, including surveys and employee empowerment
Employment Relations (ER), including union relationships, collective bargaining andfreedom of association
Organisational values, including codes of ethics, mission statements, value and businessprinciples
Employment policy, including layoffs, restructuring policies, turnover, retirement,
recruitment and selection policies and job creation initiatives

The assessment of the banks was based on their latest full CSR report at the time of the review,normally those of 2006 (except in the case of the Co-op Bank, whose latest report is that of2005), as well as information found on their websites. Depending on the degree of congruency
between recommended practice and actual reporting focus, conclusions were drawn about theextent of employee-focused initiatives within each bank, as presented in Table 4 below. In
addition, auditor and verifier information was assessed, along with international standard
affiliations for each bank. A comparison of which can be found in Table 5 below.
The following ranking system was established in order to more consistently compare banking
practice to the identified criteria, as listed above. These are outlined in the table below:

95

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):91-104

Table 3: Symbols and their meanings related to Table 4
SymbolMeaning
X
*
**
***

%

Missing: NO reference or acknowledgement of issue
Present: Criteria is acknowledged but no elaboration or additional information isprovided
Addressed: Criteria is acknowledged and details elaborated (sound
implementation)
Comprehensive: Criteria is acknowledged; comprehensive information isprovided surrounding the key policy components and supporting data isprovided (thorough assessment)
Data: No qualitative discussion, only quantitative data presented

Table 4: Comparing banks’ employee-focused reporting practices to internationally
recommended areas of focus

Table 5: Banks’ assurance and affiliations
Banks
ANZ

Auditor/Verifier
KPMG (Australia)

ASB/
Commonwealth
BNZ/ NAB/URS Australia Pty Ltd

Westpac

Banarra Sustainability
Assurance and Advice

Co-op Bank

Just Assurance

Assurances
Affiliations• FTSE4GOOD• UNEP-FI• GRI Org. Stakeholder• WBCSDGRI• G3: A+
• GRI Checked• GRI Registered

/
•
•
•
•
•
•

FTSE4GOOD
UNEP-FIGRI Org. Stakeholder
FTSE4GOOD
UNEP-FIGRI Org. Stakeholder

/
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

•

UNEP-FI••

G3: A+GRI Checked
GRI Registered
G3: A+GRI Checked
GRI Registered
Global Compact
Index
2002 CIGRI Register96

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):91-104
HSBC

Det Norske Veritas
Certification BV

Deutsche Bank/

Barclays

The Corporate Citizen
Company

Danske Bank

/

•
•
•
•
•
•

FTSE4GOOD
UNEP-FIFTSE4GOOD
UNEP-FIGRI Org. Stakeholder
WBCSD

•
•
•
•
•
•

•
•
•
•

Priority Reporter
FTSE4GOOD
UNEP-FIUNEP-FI••

2002 CIGRI Register
G3: A
GRI Checked
GRI Registered
Global Compact
Index
2002 CIGRI Register/

Review of Secondary Data
Table 4 above draws a comparison between the banks’ reporting of employee-focused criteria
and those proposed by academics and global standards. All banks can be seen to recognise theimportance of their employees, although there was a large disjointedness between the focus of thevarious CSR reports (with the vast majority devoting considerable information to theenvironmental, the community and supply chain issues).
In line with international trends, employee-focused CSR reporting is developing. While anincreased focus on the non-financial impact of businesses began to be acknowledged during the1990’s, these efforts were mainly environmentally focused (as illustrated by some of the banks’
first CSR-related reports). Environmental issues, including internal resource consumption andexternal environmental impacts still remain a dominant priority. CSR reporting has developed toalso include a social element. Initially, this focused on community initiatives, outreach programs,
donation sponsorship schemes and educational programs.
With increasing academic and industry findings acknowledging employees as an organisation’s
most valuable resource, it appears that employees are finally becoming more closely aligned totheir organisations’ core strategies. This is particularly true for the large service orientated sector.
As the labour market has tightened, less loyal and more transient employees have dominated theworkforce. Like the changes business have made to meet changing customers’ needs, so too arethey having to realign and refocus on meeting the changing needs of these employees, in order toattract and retain them (Hunt and Rasmussen, 2007). As a result, employee policies and HRM aregaining more focus within CSR reports.
All banks published a 2006 CSR report, except for the ASB/ Commonwealth Bank. For most, theinclusion of CSR initiatives were first reported upon in their annual reports, slowly progressing totheir own stand alone reports, as issues and projects developed. While Danske Bank’s 2006 CSR
report was its first, others (like The Co-op Bank) have been publishing “partnerships reports”
since 1997. For the majority, however, CSR reports began to be published in the first years of themillennium.

97New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):91-104

All the banks’ reports focus on addressing economic, environmental and social aspects of CSR.
The social aspect can be further broken down into three sections: customers, the community andemployees, with some, including Westpac, BNZ/NAB and The Co-op Bank, covering suppliers
as well. Other than HSBC’s latest CSR report, each bank provides a dedicated section to its
employees. These sections vary in length from two pages for the Co-op Bank to 10 pages for
BNZ/NAB, 12 pages for Westpac and 13 pages for Deutsche Bank. Generally, the more space
devoted to the criteria, the more detailed the discussed content tends to be and this reflects thevarious levels of employee-focused CSR by these banks.
When analysing each banks’ CSR report for criteria, diversity, closely followed by a supportive
working environment were most comprehensively reported upon (See Table 6). In comparison,
employment relations (including union relations and freedom of association) and, employment
policy (including turnover, recruitment and selection and restructuring policies) where mostpoorly reported upon, with three of the banks presenting their employment policy throughquantitative discussion only.
Table 6: Ranked Performance Indicators (criteria)
Ranking

Performance Indicator (Criteria)

1
1
2
3
4
5
6.
7
8

Diversity
Supportive working environment
Organisational values
Engagement & satisfaction
Training & development
Remuneration (pay) and benefits
Health & safety
Employment relations (ER)
Employment policy

Number of (***)
Comprehensive scores
8
7
5
5
4
3
5
2
3

While the same criteria are discussed, this order does not match the order presented by
Vuontisjärvi (2006). He found training and development and pay and benefits to be the top two
acknowledged criteria, with engagement and satisfaction (Participation and staff satisfaction)
third, and diversity (equal opportunity) only ninth. It is unclear why there is this difference. It
could highlight either a change in focus and development of prioritised initiatives, or, thepotential for variations between countries and industries with regard to employee-focusedpriorities. Alternatively, the differences in the details and variations between the two qualitative
assessments could be responsible.
Based on this report’s comparison, the nine analysed banks can further be ranked in order frombest (most employee-focused, demonstrated by the most comprehensive reporting) to worst (least
focused, based on fragmented and poorly elaborated employee-focused CSR reporting) as
follows:

98New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):91-104

Table 7: Ranking of Banks
Ranking BankCountry of Origin

1
2
3
3
4
5
6
7
8

NZ/AUS
NZ/AUS
NZ/AUS
European
European
European
European
European
NZ/AUSANZ
Westpac
BNZ/NAB
Deutsche Bank
Barclays
Co-operative Bank
Danske BankHSBC
ASB / Commonwealth

Number of (***)
Comprehensive scores
9
7
6
5
4
3
4
3
1

Surprisingly, and in complete contrast to what the analysis of academic literature lead us tobelieve, the top three places are all NZ/AUS banks. (The third place is shared between BNZ/NAB
and Deutsche Bank). This is despite the fact that these banks only began their CSR reporting after
the majority of the European/international banks. However, the fourth of the NZ/AUS banks is
ranked last due to its total lack of CSR reporting. As a result, instead of looking to theinternational banks for policy guidance and direction, the NZ/AUS banks appear to be taking thelead and may help, therefore, in setting and improving criteria for reporting.
Conducting this comparative analysis and making this comparison was difficult, as although theareas of focus were the same, the format and how and what each bank included in their reportvaried significantly. As outlined by Kolk (2004), the subjective use of wording in the reports’
qualitative discussion made it difficult to differentiate CSR commitment based on reports alone.
With the banks’ affiliation to a number of the international standard organisations, including the
GRI, FTSE4GOOD and Dow Jones Sustainability Index (as outlined by Table 5 above), thereports’ content is becoming more standardised. By associating themselves with theseorganisations and basing their reporting on recommended standards, it is encouraging to see thebanks’ general focus surrounding employee-focused CSR reporting are also ‘improving’. This
unification of employee-focused criteria is particularly important, although the degree of
implementation and success may vary.
While employee-focused CSR reporting is growing, as highlighted by the above comparison,environmental protection, and community initiative reporting still dominate the large majority ofbusinesses’ (including banks’) CSR reports. This is in part due to their target audience, initiallyshareholders and investors, who focused only on how a company specifically affects them andtheir investments. Increasingly, however, CSR reports are refocusing on addressing the needs of
all its shareholders, as outlined by GRI standards. These include customers, the community andemployees, with whom the banks are working to build reciprocal relationships. The increased
emphasis on employee-importance by large international bodies, including the GRI and EU, isparticularly important in fostering this focus.
Employees, due to their increasing importance to customer service and therefore businessperformance success, are finally receiving the deserved recognition and professional development
they need and increasingly demand. While some banks are only starting to better balance their99

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):91-104

CSR reporting with increased employee-focus initiatives (as is the case of ASB/ CommonwealthBank), others like Westpac and ANZ are already devoting a lot of time and resources tomaintaining this focus.

Limitations and further research
Due to the nature of this exploratory comparative review, only a limited number of banks wereanalysed. The selected areas of focus, including academic research, international reporting
standards and the selected banks’ CSR reports and websites are all assumed to provide anadequate representation for a comparison and assessment of employee-focused policies in thebanking sector.
The size of this research review, the constraints of time (six months) and of financial resources all
contributed to the limitations of this research. In addition, the depth of the information is
influenced by only analysing banks’ publically available information, as opposed to conducting
comprehensive internal assessments. Thus, further research regarding employee-focused CSR
initiatives and reporting is required. In particular, an assessment should be done to track thechanging focus and development of employee-focused reporting over time. In addition, more
research should be dedicated to assessing employee-focused initiatives within CSR. Too little
information is currently available surrounding employees, and less still on specific areas ofrequired focus (for example, flexible work programs, ethnic minority training and employee wellbeing).
Therefore, research should focus on drawing HRM and CSR issues together to establish
conclusive evidence regarding the promotion of employee-focused initiatives in the workplace, as
well as developing means of enabling implementation. In addition, finding links between the twoconcepts and how HRM can take a lead in the promotion of CSR in the workplace should be
examined, as well as exploring other popular organisational concepts, including employer
branding.

Conclusion
With the increased focus on employees as the ‘key’ to customer service, the strategic function
and management of international service organisations, like banks, are working on improving
relations with their employees. This, as illustrated by their employee-focused CSR reporting,includes providing: inclusive diversity-accepting cultures, supportive and flexible working
environments, training and career development, health and well-being programs and increased
employee engagement.
This analysis of secondary sources has provided a comparison of current employee-focused CSR
reporting to academic literature and Global Reporting Standard, using banks from Europe and
NZ/AUS as the basis for the analysis. In contrast to initial assumptions, the NZ/AUS banks
proved to be more advanced in their employee-focused CSR reporting than theEuropean/International banks.

100

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):91-104

References
ANZ Banking Group Ltd, (2006). ANZ corporate responsibility report 2006. Retrieved July 20, 2007
from the World Wide Web: http://www.bsdglobal.com/issues/eu_green_paper.asp
ANZ Banking Group Ltd (2007). Retrieved July 4, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www.anz.com
Arvinen-Muondo, R. & Perkins, S. (2008). The Voice and Value Conference: Commitment, engagement
and employer branding. Event Report March 2008. Retrieved October 14, 2008 from the World Wide
Web: http://www.cipd.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4E9A0E9B-FD07-4335-964342E9D09F804F/0/committmentengagementemployerbranding.pdf
ASB Bank Ltd (2007). Retrieved July 4, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www.asb.co.nz
Bamber, G., Lansbury, R., & Wailes, N. (2004). International and comparative employment relations:Globalisation and the developed market economies (4th ed). Australia: Allen & Urwin.
Barclays Bank. (2006). Corporate responsibility report 2006: Responsible banking. Retrieved July 8,
2007 from the World Wide Web:http://www.corporateregister.com/search/profile.cgi?num=3851&com=14056-1289061704-b
Barclays Bank. (2007). Retrieved July 8, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www.barclays.co.uk
Barrow, S. & Mosley, R. (2005). The employer brand: Bringing the best of brand management to people
at work. Chichester: Wiley.
Bevan, S., Isles, N., Emery, P., & Hoskins, T. (2004). Achieving high performance: CSR at the heart ofbusiness. London: The Working Foundation.
Boone, L., & Kurtz, L. (2004). Contemporary marketing (11th ed). America: South Western, Thomson
Learning.
Business in the Community. (2000). Retrieved July 12, 2007 from the World Wide Web: www.bitc.org.uk
Business in the Community. (2007). Retrieved July 12, 2007 from the World Wide Web: www.bitc.org.uk
CEC European Managers. (2001). Retrieved July 12, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www.cecmanagers.org/
CIPD. (2003). Corporate social responsibility and HR’s role: a guide. Retrieved October 14, 2008 fromthe World Wide Web: http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/corpstrtgy/corpsocres/csrandhr.htm
Commonwealth Bank of Australia. (2007). Retrieved July 4, 2007 from the World Wide Web:http://commbank.com.au
CSR Europe. (2001). Retrieved July 12, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www.csreurope.org/
Danske bank. (2006). Corporate social responsibility. Retrieved July 12, 2007 from the World Wide Web:http://www.corporateregister.com/search/profile.cgi?num=4261&com=14056-1289061704-b

101

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):91-104
Danske Bank. (2007). Retrieved July 12, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www.danskebank.com
Decker, O. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and structural change in financial services. Managerial
Auditing Journal, 19 (6): 712-728.
Deutsche Bank. (1999). Sustainability, economics, ecology and social responsibility. Retrieved July 3,
2007 from the World Wide Web:http://www.corporateregister.com/search/profile.cgi?num=4193&com=14056-1289061704-b
Deutsche Bank. (2003). Corporate social responsibility report 2003. Retrieved July 3, 2007 from theWorld Wide Web: www.deutsche-bank.de/csr/en/social_responsibility.html
Deutsche Bank. (2005). Corporate social Responsibility Report 2005. Retrieved July 3, 2007 from theWorld Wide Web: www.deutsche-bank.de/csr/en/social_responsibility.html
Deutsche Bank. (2006). Corporate social responsibility report 2006. Retrieved July 3, 2007 from theWorld Wide Web: www.deutsche-bank.de/csr/en/social_responsibility.html
Deutsche Bank. (2007). Retrieved July 6, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www.db.com
European Commission. (2001). Promoting a European framework for corporate social responsibility:
Green Paper. Retrieved July 12, 2007 from the World Wide Web:http://www.bsdglobal.com/issues/eu_green_paper.asp
European Commission: (EC), (2002). Corporate social responsibility: A business contribution tosustainable development. Luxemburg: Office of Official Publications of the European Commission.
FTSE. (2007). FTSE4GOOD. Retrieved July 12, 2007 from the World Wide Web:http://www.ftse.com/Indices/FTSE4Good_Index_Series/index.jsp
Garriga, E., & Melé, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal ofBusiness Ethics, 53: 51-71.
Global Reporting Initiative. (2007). Retrieved September 6, 2007 from the World Wide Web:www.globalreporting.org
Global Reporting Initiative. (2002). Financial services supplement: Social performance. Retrieved
September 6, 2007 from the World Wide Web: www.globalreporting.org.
Holme, R. and P. Watts: 2000, Corporate Social Responsibility: Making Good Business Sense: World
Business Council for Sustainable Development, Geneva.
HSBC Holdings. (2002). HSBC in the community: Sharing our success. Retrieved July 3, 2007 from theWorld Wide Web: http://www.corporateregister.com/search/profile.cgi?num=4040&com=140561289061704-b
HSBC Holdings (2003). HSBC in society: Corporate social responsibility report. Retrieved July 3, 2007
from the World Wide Web:http://www.corporateregister.com/search/profile.cgi?num=4040&com=14056-1289061704-b

102

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):91-104
HSBC Holdings. (2005). HSBC corporate social responsibility report. Retrieved July 3, 2007 from theWorld Wide Web: http://www.corporateregister.com/search/profile.cgi?num=4040&com=140561289061704-b
HSBC Holdings. (2006). Corporate Responsibility Report 2006. Retrieved July 3, 2007 from the World
Wide Web: www.hsbc.com/1/2/corporate-social-reponsibility/csr-at-hsbc.html
HSBC Holdings. (2007). Retrieved July 6, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www.hsbc.com
Humpage, S. (2008). Employer branding: The latest fad or the future for HR? Retrieved October 14,
2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/corpstrtgy/empbrand/_embrltsfd.htm
Hunt, V. & Rasmussen, E. (2007). Turnover and retention in a tight labour market: reflecting on New
Zealand research. New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 32(1): 45-58.
Lehman, G. (2007). A common pitch and the management of corporate relations: Interpretation, Ethics
and Managerialism. Journal of Business Ethics, 71: 161-178.
Martin, G., & Hetrick, S. (2006). Corporate reputations, branding and people management: A strategic
approach to HR. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Michaels, E., Hadfield-Jones, H. & Axelrod, B. (2001). The War for Talent. Harvard Business School
Press, Boston.
Moir, L. (2001). What do we mean by corporate social responsibility? Corporate Governance, 1(2): 1622.
National Australia Bank Ltd (NAB). (2004). Corporate social responsibility report 2004: Developing ourpeople and culture. Retrieved April 11, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www.nabgroup.com, p.2433.
NAB Ltd. (2005). Corporate social responsibility report 2005. Retrieved July 4, 2007 from the World
Wide Web: http://www.corporateregister.com/search/profile.cgi?num=4898&com=14056-1289061704-b
NAB Ltd. (2006). Corporate social responsibility report 2006. Retrieved July 4, 2007 from the World
Wide Web: http://www.corporateregister.com/search/profile.cgi?num=4898&com=14056-1289061704-b
NAB Ltd. (2007). Retrieved July 6, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www,nab.co.au
Nixon, S. (2001). Banking on a career: Changes in employment relationships and careers in New Zealandbanks. Masters Thesis. Auckland: University of Auckland.
Pirsch, J., Gupta, S., & Grau, S. (2007). A framework for understanding corporate social responsibility
programs as a continuum: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Ethics, 70: 125-140.
SAM Indexes GmbH (2006). Dow Jones Sustainability Indexes. Retrieved September 6, 2007 from theWorld Wide Web: www.sustainability-indexes.com
The Cooperative Bank. (2005). Sustainability Report 2005. Retrieved July 3, 2007 from the World Wide
Web: www.co-op.co.uk

103

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):91-104
The Co-operative Bank (2007). Retrieved July 6, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www.cooperativebank.co.uk
Vuontisjärvi, T., (2006). Corporate Social Reporting in the European context and human resource
disclosure: An analysis of Finnish companies, Journal of Business Ethics, 69: 331-354.
Walker, P., & Platt Higgins, A. (2007). Employer branding: A no-nonsense approach. Retrieved October
14, 2008 from the World Wide Web:http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/corpstrtgy/empbrand/_empbrndapp.htm?IsSrchRes=1
Westpac Banking Corporation. (2001). Social accountability report: We believe in… Retrieved July 5,
2007 from the World Wide Web:http://www.corporateregister.com/search/profile.cgi?num=4900&com=14056-1289061704-b
Westpac Banking Corporation. (2002). Our first social impact report: A fresh perspective. Retrieved July
5, 2007 from the World Wide Web:http://www.corporateregister.com/search/profile.cgi?num=4900&com=14056-1289061704-b
Westpac Banking Corporation. (2004). 2004 stakeholder impact report. Retrieved July 5, 2007 from theWorld Wide Web: http://www.corporateregister.com/search/profile.cgi?num=4900&com=140561289061704-b
Westpac Banking Corporation. (2005). 2005 stakeholder impact report: Sustainable value… Retrieved
July 5, 2007 from the World Wide Web:http://www.corporateregister.com/search/profile.cgi?num=4900&com=14056-1289061704-b
Westpac Banking Corporation. (2006). 2006 stakeholder impact report. Retrieved July 5, 2007 from theWorld Wide Web: http://www.corporateregister.com/search/profile.cgi?num=4900&com=140561289061704-b
Westpac Banking Corporation. (2007). Retrieved July 6, 2007 from the World Wide Web:http://www.westpac.com.au
Whitehouse, L. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: Views from the frontline. Journal of Business
Ethics, 63: 279-296.

104

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):105-113

Chronicle: June, 2008 – September, 2008
June 2008
The Sunday Star Times featured an article which claimed that thousands of casual workers
will get a better deal, including improved access to benefits such as sick and bereavement
leave, under proposed changes to the Employment Relations Act. The changes proposed by
the Minister of Labour Minister Trevor Mallard included a new code of practice designed tomake it easier for casual workers and their employers to know their rights and obligations. It
will also identify employers who are labelling employees as casual when the nature of theiremployment means they are really permanent or part- time workers. National Distribution
Union’s Retail Secretary Maxine Gay was quoted as saying that “…it's really good news toeven begin to clean up this area”, and that it would help a growing number of vulnerable
workers in industries such as hospitality, cleaning, retail and tourism who have irregular
hours.
The article cited Department of Labour research, which confirmed that many casual workers
were unaware of their rights. These same workers had limited access to holiday, sick leave,training and skill development. The irregular hours also played havoc with family life, andmade it difficult to plan ahead or budget. Under the proposed changes, Department of Labour
inspectors would be given the power to decide if a worker was employed on a temporary or
permanent basis. A Dominion Post article published soon after the announcement suggested
that Business NZ had argued that although the proposal was well-intentioned, the changes
were out of step with the commercial world and would blow the budgets of events like the
Rugby World Cup.
Proposed strike action by 750 Department of Labour employees was lifted at the last minuteas progress was made in negotiations between the Department and the Public Service
Association (PSA). The workers were seeking a pay increase of 4% and the abolition of theircurrent pay setting system, which they claimed was confusing, inconsistent and unfair.
However, notices remained in place for two two- hour strikes, scheduled for the 12th and16thof June. Negotiations over the collective agreement began in August 2007.
It was found that Wellington’s hospital actually ran more smoothly when junior doctors wereon strike. Findings published in a British journal Clinical Medicine, suggested that a seniordoctor could cover the workload of at least two junior colleagues. Patient waiting times andtheir length of stay in the Emergency Department were halved during a five-day strike byjunior doctors in June 2006, when senior doctors carried out extra tasks on top of their normal
work. For the first time, the Emergency Department met its recommended target times fortreating emergency patients.
The Press reported that SkyCity Entertainment Group faced a series of ‘popcorn strikes’ by
film attendants. The strikers waved banners saying ‘Un-sexy Pay in the City’ and asked film
patrons to boycott drinks and confectionery. The Unite Union, which represents about 400
cinema workers around the country, was seeking at SkyCity to increase the pay for cinema
attendants from $12 an hour to $12.20 an hour, rising to $13.10 after two years of service.
The Dominion Post reported on the troubles at a publicly funded Wellington community radio
station, which was being investigated for workplace bullying after high staff turnover. The
Labour Department began the investigation into Access Radio after the Public Service
105New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):105-113

Association (PSA) raised ‘serious’ concerns. Most of the station’s core staff had either left or
taken extended periods of leave, and five council members had resigned. Another article
reported that the Department of Labour inspector had found that the staff may be unhappy but
they were not being bullied. There was no find specific evidence of repeated and systematicbullying and nor were staff exhibiting ‘mental harm’.
The Southland Times reported on a decision of the Employment Relations Authority thatlooked at a situation where an employee had resigned and then withdrew that resignation. The
case demonstrated that in certain circumstances a resignation made in haste can be withdrawn
and, if the withdrawal was not accepted, then the employer could get into trouble. A woman,
who was employed as a manager of a clothing store, was counselled over the phone by her
manager about a number of complaints made by customers about her. She became upset andtold her manager that she could ‘stick the job’ and that she wasn't ‘putting up with this any
more, she wasn't paid enough for this crap’. The manager took these comments as a
resignation and the employee was told to hand over her keys and leave the store. The
employee later tried to retract her resignation. The authority found that the resignation wasmade in the heat of the moment. Although the language used was inappropriate andunacceptable she had then attempted to retract her resignation, which a fair and reasonable
employer would have permitted her to do. The ERA also found that it was wrong to have had
discussions regarding serious allegations over the telephone.
Progressive Meats lost a three-year legal battle to provide a smoking room for its workers. A
judgment released by the Court of Appeal found that a smoking room built by the Hastingscompany was part of the workplace as defined by the Smokefree Environments Act. In a
Dominion Post article, Progressive Meats’ Managing Director Craig Hickson said the rulingdefied common sense, but did not surprise him. Progressive Meats had built the smoking
room as part of a $1 million upgrade in 2003. Strict food safety regulations had come into
force the year before, prohibiting workers from leaving the building when they were wearing
their work cloth.
An Independent article illustrated that sometimes, despite an employer’s failings, the acts ofthe employee can cause the scales to be tipped back in favour of the employer. It cited arecent case where a home insulation contractor employed a worker through his local Workand Income office. The worker, despite being told not to attend particular jobs, took it upon
himself to install insulation material into a customer’s house. As a result of his actions, a fire
broke out in the ceiling of the house and this caused significant costs to the employer as under
his licence agreement he could not have untrained staff installing the product. The employer
called the employee into a meeting the next day and handed him a dismissal letter which
prompted the employee to take a personal grievance case. In the Employment Relations
Authority, the employer was found to have failed to abide by the requirements of procedural
fairness. But the Authority also found that the employee’s actions in undertaking work, which
he had been told not to do, jeopardised property and life. The Authority determined that thefair and reasonable outcome was to deny the employee any award of compensation but
required that the employer contributed to his legal costs.

106

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):105-113

July 2008
The long awaited amendment to the Employment Relations Act finally became law on 1 July
meaning that employees with caring responsibilities would have the right to ask theiremployers for flexible working arrangements (see May Chronicle). A NZ Herald article
compared the experience of Great Britain where similar legislation had been in place forseveral years. In Britain, a popular choice was condensed hours, where people worked four
10-hour days and had the fifth day off. Two years ago, a survey found that 80% of requests
for flexible work arrangements had been granted, 10% were modified and 10% had been
rejected. The emphasis was that it was ‘early days’ in New Zealand. Phil O'Reilly, Chief
Executive of Business New Zealand was quoted as saying that “it was always a good idea tohave as flexible a workplace as possible” and that “companies that do this well make it part ofthe company culture”. He concluded that there would not be an overnight transformation as
management first had to get over some long-entrenched ideas.
There was further discussion in the Dominion Post on the proposed changes to the
Employment Relations Act announced in June, which would give some contractors more
rights. The IT industry was likely to be affected as the proposed changes would mean that
contractors belonging to a union would be entitled to at least the same pay and conditions as
unionised staff who were employed by clients to which the contractors were seconded. As
Indian outsourcing companies started to win major contracts from large New Zealandcompanies, the proposals could make hiring contractors less attractive. Campbell Hepburn, amanager at recruitment firm Hudson, said the plans would probably not cut demand forcontractors, but would increase awareness about their rights. He said that another proposed
amendment to the Act, which would allow contractors and their primary employer to pursue
grievances against a secondary employer, could lead to some interesting legal questions, suchas who was responsible for the conditions of an employee’s dismissal.
Minister of Labour Trevor Mallard announced that the KiwiSaver legislation would be altered
to ensure there was no conflict with employment law when employees and their employers
negotiate remuneration packages. The Minister moved to make it unlawful for employers to
pay different amounts to KiwiSaver members and non-members amid concerns that aminority of employers were deducting employees’ wages but retaining the tax credits. To stop
this, the Government would change the Employment Relations Act to make it unlawful tooffer lesser terms to a KiwiSaver employee on the basis of membership. The KiwiSaver Act
will also be amended.
The National Party’s plan to allow small businesses the right to dismiss workers within a 90day probationary period re-emerged as a policy platform for this year’s election. The policy,
which would apply to businesses with fewer than 20 workers, would allow employers to
dismiss staff in the first three months without risking a personal grievance claim forunjustified dismissal. The National Party stated that the policy would give small businesses
some insurance so they could take a risk on workers they might otherwise be reluctant toemploy, such as former prisoners or people with little work experience. An article in the Daily
Post argued that small businesses should have greater flexibility to hire and fire within aprobationary period but there also needed to be some independent oversight to protect
workers, in order to prevent abuse of individual employment rights.

107New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):105-113

In another significant revelation of the National Party’s employment relations policy, leader
John Key said that if it was elected to power it would largely retain the Employment Relations
Act. Good-faith provisions would still apply, as well as rights to sick leave, holidays, andhealth and safety provisions. Additionally, workers would be allowed to bargain collectively
without having to belong to a union. Mr Key said that a National Government would also
keep four weeks annual leave, but would allow employees to trade the fourth week for cash.
The proposal to allow workers to cash up the fourth week of pay was labelled an effective
abolition of the across-the-board four weeks’ annual holidays, according to Council of Trade
Unions’ President Helen Kelly. She went on to say in the Dominion Post that, “people value
their leave. I think employees who are pressured will end up selling their leave and three
weeks leave will once again become the norm”. Ms Kelly also envisaged situations where
employees would be forced to trade their leave for less than its monetary value. Mr Key said
that a National Party would appoint a working party to review the Holidays Act, withparticular emphasis on the issue of ‘relevant daily pay’.
A NZ Herald editorial supported the 90-day probationary period proposed by the National
Party suggesting the proposal should be welcomed not only by employers but the many
people who stand to have a better chance of gaining a job, such as the likes of new immigrants
without good English, former prisoners, those wishing to change careers, young people
without qualifications, and those with no recent work experience. The editorial argued that the
National Party’s proposal would allow employers to take a chance knowing there will not be
the prospect of complex and costly personal grievance procedures. This freedom has long
been sought by small businesses. The Small Business Advisory Group, set up by theGovernment in 2003, pinpointed it as the single most important change needed in
employment law.
However, another NZ Herald article suggested that the 90-day probationary period proposal
should concern everyone who supported the building of a high value, high productivity
economy. High standards in the labour market were synonymous with high performance.
Equally, low standards promoted the opposite such as high labour use, longer working hours,
poor investment in training, lower capital intensity, lower wages and, eventually, reduced
competitiveness. Removing employment protection from new employees was a fundamental
weakening of those incentives to pursue high labour standards and thus, would erode animportant building block of a high- performing economy.
The spectre of yet more strikes by junior doctor looked increasingly likely after, what theunion labelled, a ‘provocative’ pay offer was tabled for new employees and non-unionised
doctors. The beginning of July marked the one-year anniversary of the expiry of the national
collective agreement covering more than 2,000 junior doctors. The DHBs said they would
offer non-union and new employees pay rises of just over 8.5% for one year. Deborah Powell,
the National Secretary of the junior doctors’ union said that “[t]hey are inviting [juniordoctors] to resign to get the pay rise and abandon the MECA [multi-employer collective
agreement]. It's a very provocative action on their part”.
The Government came under pressure from the Health and Disability Commissioner to ensurethat patients were better looked after during health worker strikes, following a ‘near miss’ atDunedin Hospital. The health board at the centre of two investigations warned that healthstrikes would inevitably lead to patient deaths.

108

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):105-113

A three-day strike planned by Air Nelson pilots ahead of the start of collective bargaining waslabelled in the Nelson Mail as being “rigid, adversarial and litigious” by the company's
General Manager John Hambleton. Mr Hambleton further claimed that the action was purely
an “attempt to target the company and the customers”. New Zealand Airline Pilots'
Association’s Executive Director Rick Mirkin said the pilots’ strike had been timed tounderline their concerns about not getting enough time off with their families. Air Nelson
pilots had not had a pay rise in two years and were seeking a wage rise of up to 4.5% over the
next three years, but their main obstacle in reaching a settlement was the company’s refusal toconsider changes to the pilots’ roster that would allow them to have more family time andattend activities at home more often. The NZ Herald reported that the stand-off was ‘growing
increasingly bitter’ as the strike got underway.
Another public sector industrial dispute flared up as the Ministry of Fisheries staff said they
were prepared to strike if the negotiation process to renew a collective agreement. Staff
threatened two-weeks of rolling strikes if two days of negotiations for a new employment
agreement failed. The unions and the Ministry had been negotiating since September 2007,
but had reached an impasse over issues surrounding pay, travel allowances, annual leave andfitness testing.
The National Distribution Union launched a campaign to sign up staff at The Warehouse,claiming that workers were coming under increasing pressure as the retailer reduced staff byattrition. The Warehouse’s General Manager Human Resources Paul Walsh confirmed thatsome staff were not being replaced at some stores when they left or, were being replaced byworkers on fewer hours.
The Press reported on a Christchurch company who was ordered by the Employment
Relations Authority to implement a robust policy against sexual harassment after an‘outrageous’ case involving a 14-year-old girl. The company was ordered to pay $12,750 incompensation for the ‘…hurt, humiliation and injury to her feelings’ suffered by the girl after
her employer failed to deal with her complaint of sexual harassment. Her lawyer said thatwhile he had never seen a similar case, young workers were susceptible to sexual harassmentin the workplace. The girl had worked at the company full-time for about six months when
she made the complaint against a middle-aged male co-worker. After making the accusation,
the girl was questioned by senior management staff for two hours, during which she had nosupport person. She claimed that the man had engaged her in a string of inappropriate
conversations and had offered to drive her home several times. The employer decided there
had been no harassment and warned the man and the girl about their conduct.
Under the headline ‘Fired thief gets compo for her suffering’, a Southland Times article
described the case of ‘a convicted thief’ who was awarded compensation for ‘hurt,
humiliation and injury to feelings’ after she was dismissed for failing to disclose her‘extensive criminal history’. The woman pleaded guilty to three charges while employed by
the Alliance meat processing company but the offences were committed before she started
with the company. Because the offences were committed before her employment with
Alliance, it was found that the woman had acted ‘unethically, rather than illegally’ when she
failed to tell management about her situation. The Employment Relations Authority foundthat although she was charged with and convicted of dishonesty offences, they would not have
impacted on her duties.

109

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):105-113

The Court of Appeal told a senior Air New Zealand pilot who was demoted when he reached
60 that it was not age discrimination that had led to his loss of seniority. The Court said thatthe pilot, who had added responsibilities for flight instruction, was demoted to first officer
because being less than 60 years of age was a qualification to do his job. His case was sent
back to the Employment Court to decide if he was disadvantaged because of the way Air New
Zealand dealt with his grievance. The Court of Appeal ordered the man to pay $8,000 costs to
Air New Zealand for the lost appeal.

August 2008
A Sunday Star Times article claimed that nearly two-thirds of the country’s restaurants had
stated that they would close on public holidays because the cost of opening was too high. Thiswas cited as one of the reasons for the National Party’s proposal to review the Holidays Act,
which was blamed for restaurants’ rocketing labour costs. A survey by the Restaurant
Association of about 400 members nationwide showed the number of restaurants opting toclose on public holidays had increased from 36% in 2007 to 64% this year. But the National
Party’s Labour and Industrial Relations Spokeswoman Kate Wilkinson says that although she
sympathised with restaurant owners, changes to penal rates were not high on National’s list ofpriorities if elected. The party was committed to setting up a working party to look at theHolidays Act, which it believed was too complex, but had given no undertakings beyond that.
The Press reported that Westpac had removed sales targets linked to staff pay and given staff
a 5% pay rise. Banking union Finsec had been waging a campaign against banks who were
putting debt sales ahead of customer service. ANZ National Bank employees were reported to
be preparing to strike for two hours after the bank refused to accept staff demands of changing
debt sales targets and a 4% increase in pay. Mediation talks failed to make any headway andthe strike went ahead with workers at a picket line claiming that they wanted more staff toease work pressures and significant changes to sales targets.
Later in the month, the Southland Times reported that ANZ National Bank workers accepted a
4% pay increase after a narrow voting result. Bank union Finsec’s Campaign Director
Andrew Campbell said the offer was accepted reluctantly, as members considered it too
difficult to continue the campaign. Sales targets for credit had been a second stumbling block
during the negotiations.
The Press reported on the potential impact on disabled people as protracted pay talks between
NZ Care and staff culminated in nationwide industrial action. About 1,200 staff banned nonessential paperwork and van driving. Warwick Jones, Assistant National Secretary of the
Public Service Association (PSA), which represented the workers, said staff sought a pay riseof between 20% and 30%. Escalating industrial action was planned over the next three weeks
if mediation, scheduled with NZ Care in Wellington, was unsuccessful.
SkyCity Entertainment Group faced a 24-hour strike from 1,000 of its Auckland staff afternegotiations broke down with the two unions, Unite union and the Service and Food Workers
Union, who represented SkyCity workers. The unions claimed that SkyCity’s Chief Executive
Nigel Morrison had been tasked with making a $110 million annual profit, which was theequivalent of $44,000 for each employee. However, the unions claimed that SkyCity had
offered a ‘derisory’ 4% wage rise to staff this year and 3.5% in 2009, the equivalent of lessthan $20 in-the-hand to most workers. The unions were asking for a 5% increase andrecognition of service for longer serving staff.

110

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):105-113

District nurses from Canterbury and Otago went on strike for two days after pay talks with
their employer broke down. The nurses wanted a pay rise of between 3% and 4%, which the
New Zealand Nurses’ Organisation (NZNO) said would put them on par with other district
nurses around the country. The NZNO rejected Healthcare New Zealand’s offer of a 2.1%
increase each year over two years and filed strike notice for 14 and 15 August. In the nextstage of their industrial action, nurses threatened that, although they would turn up for workon 21 and 22 August, they would not supply their own vehicles.
Sailings of the Interislander ferries were at risk as negotiations between Toll New Zealandand the Merchant Service Guild (representing ferry captains and deck officers) broke down.
The union withdrew further strike notices for sailings after two Cook Strait sailings werecancelled when officers refused to work. Both were predominantly freight sailings, with only
minor disruptions to passengers. The union was seeking an 11% wage rise, which was lodged
before the Government announced it would purchase Toll New Zealand’s rail and ferry assets.
The union claimed that the wage claim was ‘modest and pragmatic’.
The tenth ranked ACT party list candidate Shawn Tan said in a Dominion Post article that hewas told to tender his resignation by the Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union on
the same day he informed them that he wanted to stand as an ACT list candidate. Mr Tan said
he was advised to tender his resignation if he intended to stand for ACT. He remained in his
position, as an organiser in the union’s call centre, before being suspended on full pay after
formally announcing his candidacy. The parties to the dispute were due to meet to begin thedisciplinary procedure process, with Mr Tan adamant he wanted to retain his job and not giveup his candidacy. A NZ Herald editorial described the case as curious saying the action saidmuch about the EPMU, not least its unwillingness to brook dissension.
The NZ Herald reported that an Auckland publishing company employee who was teased
about his sexuality was awarded more than $7000 for hurt and humiliation following his
unjustifiable dismissal. The worker had worked at Ponsonby based Action Media for only amonth before resigning. He planned to work out his notice of four weeks but was suspended
four days later. An investigation found that his manager had taunted him about being gay. On
one occasion his partner left a voice message at the office, which was passed by his manager
in a voice mimicking the caller. The employee’s partner took exception to the manager’s
behaviour and phoned and threatened him. The incident sparked a decision by the manager tosuspend the employee. The authority ordered Action Media to pay wage arrears of $3,461
with interest of 9% from 10th of October 2007 (until paid in full), plus $3,800 for hurt andhumiliation.
A report on a workplace study in the NZ Herald noted that public servants do just as muchwork as employees in the private sector but had greater job satisfaction and much bigger pay
packets. The survey, published by Professor John Gibson of Waikato University in the New
Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, showed the gap in pay between the public andprivate sector was between 17% and 21%. The study also found that many public sector
workers, who were likely to be female, highly-educated and living in Wellington, had a‘warm glow’ feeling of contributing to society. Professor Gibson said the higher pay levels ingovernment jobs had little to do with needing to compensate but more to do with needing to
attract highly skilled workers.

111

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):105-113

September 2008
The Dominion Post reported on the tabling in Parliament of the Employment Relations
Amendment Bill (No3). The Bill would give labour inspectors increased powers to determine
whether workers are fixed-term or permanent employees and to test whether an employee has
progressed from casual to permanent employment. The Council of Trade Unions’ Economist
Peter Conway stated that far too many New Zealand workers were in casual and temporary
work and had to deal with the resulting work and income insecurity and the impact on family
life and that “protection for casual workers [was] long overdue”. The Bill would allow
employees to make personal grievance claims and would ensure that terms of employment
were comparable to collective agreements for other staff.
A Families Commission study found that many working parents were too scared to ask forflexible working arrangements, with many fearing that changing their normal hours would be
bad for their careers. The study, reported in the Dominion Post, found that a quarter of thepeople surveyed said they would be concerned about their employer’s reaction if they asked
for a flexible working arrangement. Of those who dared to ask, 11% reported receiving anegative reaction. The report concluded by saying that, in encouraging flexible work
schedules, organisations needed to make staff feel valued and appreciated. The increased
loyalty of valued staff was seen as one of the key benefits for employers of offering flexible
work arrangements.
An employment relations specialist claimed that a surge in workplace strikes would hit New
Zealand because of impending tough economic conditions. In the NZ Herald, the consultant
Fred Adelhelm, a director of Auckland-based Adelhelm & Associates, said the trade unions
would be under pressure to seek 5% plus pay rises for members struggling with rising foodand fuel costs. He said that high-profile unions such as the PSA and the EPMU had few
options but to attend to the needs of their members whose expectations may be unrealistic in
the current climate. This would ensure that the pressure on collective bargaining would
continue and may even increase in the short and medium term.
A cross-Tasman industrial dispute between journalists and their employer Fairfax Media
continued with the firm’s Chief Executive, David Kirk, remaining unapologetic about the
publisher’s cost-cutting strategy and his handling of the high-profile industrial dispute.
Journalists on the NZ Herald and Melbourne paper The Age returned to work after a four-day
strike over a pay dispute and concern about the plans to cut 550 jobs in both Australia and
New Zealand.
Wellington Tramways Union members rejected a new collective agreement offered by bus
operator Go Wellington and issued a notice of strike. The strike notice followed three monthsof negotiations, which crumbled when the drivers turned down the firm’s latest offer. The
Dominion Post said that money was at the heart of the dispute; with drivers rejecting a 7%
pay increase in the first year and a $250 cash incentive. The dispute turned bitter as thedrivers held their promise to strike, which caused commuter chaos. The drivers returned towork but the threat of further action remained.
A widely publicised employment dispute in Hamilton came to an end when the Waikato
Times reporting that ‘the protracted two-year legal stoush’ between Parentline and its former
chief executive Maxine Hodgson was finally over. All matters were resolved at a Judicial
Settlement Conference, conducted by the chief employment judge Graeme Colgan. Both

112

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 2008, 33(3):105-113

parties were restricted in what they could say about the settlement. In February, theEmployment Relations Authority had rejected Ms Hodgson’s claim for constructive dismissal
saying that the dismissal was largely due to her own actions (see February Chronicle).
The Press reported on a teenage McDonald’s worker who received what it headlined as a‘super sized payout’ after she was forced to resign her job when she joined a union. The
Employment Relations Authority found that Chantelle Coup, aged 19, was constructively
dismissed, and ordered McDonald’s to pay her $15,000. The Authority found the actions of
McDonald's Kaiapoi were a “very serious interference of Ms Coup’s freedom of choice about
union membership”, breaching the Employment Relations Act and its employer duties. Coupsaid that after joining the Unite union, she was pressured to resign from it and after refusing,
had her hours cut while being bullied in other ways.
The case of political scientist Paul Buchanan dismissed by the University of Auckland forsending an abusive email to a student received further publicity (see April Chronicle). The NZ
Herald and the Dominion Post revealed that he had been quietly reinstated to his old position.
The university confirmed that Dr Buchanan had been reinstated after an agreement wasreached between the parties.
A Business New Zealand survey found that even with an economic slowdown and a softening
labour market, skill shortages remain the number one concern of businesses going into theelection. According to the NZ Herald, Business New Zealand’s Chief Executive Phil
O’Reilly told the organisation’s election conference that 71% of those who responded said theeducation system was not meeting their needs. Earlier Prime Minister Helen Clark had told
the conference that “near full employment disguised the unpleasant truth that nearly half theexisting workforce does not have the skills to function adequately in the knowledge
economy”.
It was revealed in the Dominion Post that MPs have been investigated three times overallegations that they bullied parliamentary staff. Claims of bullying by MPs were also raisedby staff during a confidential in-house survey by Parliamentary Services. The Public Service
Association’s National Secretary Brenda Pilott confirmed in the article that she was aware of
the allegations and her staff had had ‘a quiet word’ with the relevant political party whips. She
said workplace problems at Parliament were “no better or no worse” than other workplaces
her association dealt with. Ms Wilson also said 11 MPs had invoked ‘special breakdown inrelationship’ contract clauses in the past three years to get rid of 12 employees.
A Dominion Post article said that, according to proposed Labour Department guidelines,
employers with transgender staff should assist them as they changed sex. Such assistancewould include helping them to decide which toilets to use and ensuring the person's new namewas used. The draft plan said that employers should meet an employee intending to change
sex and establish a ‘written action plan’ to ensure their workplace transition was smooth.
Employees needed to feel welcome and should be encouraged to use facilities applicable totheir new identity. The article gave the example of Sarah Lurajud, a Christchurch police
officer who made the transition as an example of how attitudes with organisations could
quickly change. Lurajud said that “[t]he police were incredibly supportive. In the past theywould have made it impossible . . . It really changed the culture of the police. They used to bevery blokey”.
Erling Rasmussen & Colin Ross, Auckland University of Technology

113