Contents Page: NZJER Special Issue, 2018, 43(3)Name

Annick Masselot
Dawn Duncan

John Goodard

Title

Special Issue Editorial Note
A Battle for Hearts and Minds: New
Zealand’s Legal Response to WorkStress-Related
Depression
andCardiovascular Disease
Adopting a Health and Safety
Framework for the Assessment andRemediation of Earthquake Prone
Buildings

Page
Numbers
1-2
3-17

18-32

David G Beck

Resolving Workplace “Bullying”

33-45

Susan Robson

What if Voters Wanted a Less Flexible
Labour Market?

46-54

Jonathan Sale

Labour Law and the Labour Market: A
Case Study of Malaysia

55-74

György Kiss

Transition of a Contract of Employment:from the Locatio Conductio to theRelational Contract75-

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 1-2

Editorial note
ANNICK MASSELOT
Professor of Law, University of Canterbury
This is the second instalment of the special issue of the New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations
which showcases some of the best papers presented at the Fourth Biennial Labour Law Conference of
the New Zealand Labour Law Society held on 17-18 November 2017 in Christchurch. The conference
focussed on labour law in transition in a global and technological world, with the theme intended toencompass new developments and emerging areas in labour law. The presentations covered a wide
range of topics including de-regulation of the workplace and competitive attitudes towards
employment issues; aspects and implications of the recent amendments to health and safety laws;
workplace stress, bullying and harassment; restructuring, redundancy and redeployment; modern
workplace environments and cyber-work; and equality, human rights and precarious work. The
conference attracted a large number of participants from within New Zealand, including academics,
practitioners, judges from the Employment Court and members of the Employment Relations
Authority as well as government and parliamentary officials and union members. A good range ofAustralian speakers attended the conference, as the New Zealand Labour Law Society has built good
relations with the Australian Labour Law Association. Participants from Europe and Asia were alsopresent.
A large number of excellent papers were presented at the conference and submitted for publication toa special issue of the New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations. As a result, two special issues
have been published. The first special issue 43(2), published in September 2018, focussed specificallyon the impact of technology on labour law and the relationship between human rights and employment
law. This second special issue includes papers broadly concerned with health and safety and mattersrelated to employment agreements.
It is important to acknowledge the financial support of the New Zealand Law Foundation, The
Canterbury Law Review Trust and the School of Law at the University of Canterbury, without which,neither the Fourth Biennial Labour Law Conference of the New Zealand Labour Law Society nor thepresent publication would be possible.
There are six articles in this second special issue and a summary of this content is provided hereunder.
Dawn Duncan – “A Battle for Hearts and Minds: New Zealand’s Legal Response to Work-StressRelated Depression and Cardiovascular Disease”
As patterns of work change, so do the resulting patterns of work-related ill health. While medical
thinking on stress-related illnesses has shifted enormously in the past decades, the law has not. This
paper will explore New Zealand’s legal response to work-stress-related illnesses, especially depression
and cardiovascular disease. It will outline the current interaction of the Health and Safety at Work Act
2015, the Accident Compensation Act 2001 and the personal grievances regime in cases of workrelated depression and cardiovascular disease, and highlight key areas of reform needed. The law, as
it stands, is failing to provide either adequate protection from, or compensation for work-stress-related
illness. With heart disease as New Zealand’s leading cause of death, and rates of mental illness on therise, addressing the more complex relationships between work and health becomes an urgent task forthe future of New Zealand labour law.

1

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 1-2
John Goddard – “Adopting a Health and Safety Framework for the Assessment and Remediation ofEarthquake Prone Buildings”
The key question for this paper is whether the revised and recent updated changes to the regulatory
regime for managing earthquake prone buildings will prevent loss of life which occurred as a result of
the CTV and PGC building failures during the Christchurch Earthquake and whether this would have
happened to Statistics House (in Wellingont) but for the fortuitous timing of the Kaikōura earthquake.
David Beck – “Resolving Workplace ‘Bullying’”
This Article provides a brief definitional overview of the current law on what is popularly known as
the problem of workplace bullying and comments on how to avoid and/or resolve matters from theperspective of a practising employment lawyer, perspective confronted with finding an adversarial
legal solution to what is often a breakdown in workplace communication.
Susan Robson – “What if Voters Wanted a Less Flexible Labour Market?”In the event of a public recognition of the connection between flexible labour markets, wage stagnationand high social inequality ratios, an option for redress in government policy is the re-collectivisationof employers and employees.
The implications for labour law traditions that emerged following the enactment of the Employment
Contracts Act (ECA) 1991 (and that were reinforced by the operation of the Employment Relations
Act 2000) include dispute resolution mechanisms, currently (in New Zealand) fundamental toflexibility. Analysis of the factors that influenced the transition from collectivist to individualist labour
relations suggests a means by which this transition might be reverse engineered. Returning personal
grievance resolution, the foundation of the ECA transition, to collectives will be crucial to the successof any reverse transition.
Jonathan Sale – “Labour Law and the Labour Market: A Case Study of Malaysia”
This paper aims to provide some plausible answers to these questions through systems analysis andcase study of labour law and regulation in Malaysia and their links to the economy, including thevariety or varieties of capitalism, labour market formation and outcomes.
György Kiss - Transition of a Contract of Employment: From the Locatio Conductio to the Relational
Contract
This article displays the correlation between economic background of a given era and legal regulationof labour. It aspires to answer the question: what legal construction suits global economy the most at
the moment. The author shows the effect of locatio conductio on the employment contract of today
and sketches out three possible scenarios regarding future labour law. One such scenario is themaintenance of the current, traditional concept that strives to secure a balance between security of theemployee and flexibility of employment. The second scenario entails possibilities provided by the socalled gig economy. It deconstructs almost all limitations provided by labour law and, at the sametime, annuls the structure of labour law as it is today. The third scenario proposes an adaptation of a
specific interpretation of long-term contract – relational contract – to labour law.
It is perhaps opportune to note here that the Fifth Biennial Labour Law Conference of the New Zealand
Labour Law Society will held on 15th and 16th November 2019 at Rutherford House, Victoria
University of Wellington. The official call for papers and registration information will soon beavailable at http://www.newzealandlabourlawsociety.nz/.
2

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17

A Battle for Hearts and Minds: New Zealand’s Legal Response to
Work-Stress-Related Depression and Cardiovascular Disease
DAWN DUNCAN*
Abstract
As patterns of work change, so do the resulting patterns of work-related ill health. While medical
thinking on stress-related illnesses has shifted enormously in the past decades, the law has not.
This paper will explore New Zealand’s legal response to work-stress-related illnesses, especiallydepression and cardiovascular disease. It will outline the current interaction of the Health and
Safety at Work Act 2015, the Accident Compensation Act 2001 and the personal grievances
regime in cases of work-related depression and cardiovascular disease, and highlight key areas ofreform needed. The law, as it stands, is failing to provide either adequate protection from, orcompensation for work-stress-related illness. With heart disease as New Zealand’s leading causeof death, and rates of mental illness on the rise, addressing the more complex relationships between
work and health becomes an urgent task for the future of New Zealand labour law.

I.

Introduction

Depression and cardiovascular disease are two of the most significant health issues affecting
working people in New Zealand and globally. Cardiovascular disease is ranked by the New
Zealand Ministry of Health as the leading cause of death in New Zealand1 and by the World HealthOrganization (WHO) as the leading cause of death worldwide.2 Depression is also a growing cause
of incapacity and death in New Zealand, with suicide being the second leading cause of death for
non-Māori males and the third leading cause of death for Māori males.3 Internationally, depression
is expected to become the second leading cause of worldwide disability by 2030.4
While reliable statistics on work-related cardiovascular disease and depression are not available in
New Zealand for reasons explained further below, local and international research indicates thatwork-stress is a significant factor in the development of, and rates of death from, these diseases,
warranting intervention. This paper argues that labour law has a crucial role to play in addressing*

Lecturer in Commercial Law, Faculty of Business, University of Auckland. Email: d.duncan@auckland.ac.nz
Ischemic heart disease is the leading cause of death for Maori and non-Maori males and non-Maori females, andsecond leading cause of death for Maori females, but top overall in the New Zealand population. Statistics available
on the New Zealand Ministry of Health website at: http://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/populations/maorihealth/tatau-kahukura-maori-health-statistics/nga-mana-hauora-tutohu-health-status-indicators/major-causes-death2
World Health Organisation Cardiovascular Diseases Factsheet (May 2017) available at:
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs317/en/
3
Statistics available on the New Zealand Ministry of Health website at: http://www.health.govt.nz/ourwork/populations/maori-health/tatau-kahukura-maori-health-statistics/nga-mana-hauora-tutohu-health-statusindicators/major-causes-death
4
C Mathers and D Loncar “Projections of global mortality and burden of disease from 2002 to 2030” (2006) PLoS
Medicine 3 11, e442.
13New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17
the problems of work-stress-related depression and cardiovascular disease. This paper explores thegap between current medical thinking on these conditions and the law. New Zealand’s legal
response to work-stress-related depression and cardiovascular disease is contained in the Accident
Compensation Act 2001(ACA), the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (HSWA), the sick leave
provisions of the Holidays Act 2003 (HA) and the wider regulation of work in the Employment
Relations Act 2000 (ERA), particularly the personal grievances regime. This paper outlines key
areas of reform needed to better address work-related depression and cardiovascular disease.

II.

The Science, the Law, and the Gaps in Between

The increasing prevalence and economic impact of cardiovascular disease and depression has
resulted in a substantial body of research on the causal connection between stressful environments(both work and non-work) and the development of disease. With the mapping of the humangenome, the invention of fMRI machines, epigenetic research (allowing for a better understanding
the interaction of genes and environment) and the rise of big data, medical thinking has shifted
enormously since the mid-20th century. The law, however, has not.
The New Zealand ACC Scheme, for example, was based on the 1967 Report of the Royal
Commission of Inquiry in to Compensation for Personal Injury in New Zealand, chaired by thethen Justice Woodhouse (Woodhouse Report).5 The scheme was introduced in 1972, adopting thework-related disease coverage provisions from the previous Workers’ Compensation Act 1956,
which were much the same as in the previous 1934 Act. Despite reforms to restrict the costs of thescheme in the 1990s, and again in 2010, the work-related health cover provisions have not been
substantially updated,6 lagging behind other jurisdictions and medical thinking. Likewise, despite
recent reforms to New Zealand’s health and safety laws, the HSWA remains very much Robens
model legislation, meaning its structure and enforcement machinery are based on the Report of the
British Parliamentary Committee on Safety and Health and Work, in 1972.7 The HSWA continues
to reflect many of the assumptions and biases of the Robens model and remains primarily designed
for work as it was performed in the factories and mines of the mid-20th century.8

5

Royal Commission of Inquiry into Compensation for Personal Injury in New Zealand Compensation for Personal
Injury in New Zealand: Report of the Royal Commission of Inquiry (Government Printer, Wellington, 1967).
6
Compare reformulation in Accident Compensation Act 1982, s 28 “disease due to nature of employment.” The
Accident Compensation, Rehabilitation and Insurance Act 1992 further amended and reformulated the test for“personal injury caused by gradual process, disease or infection arising out of or in the course of employment” in s 7.
Section 30 was most recently amended by the Accident Compensation Amendment Act 2010.
7
Alfred Robens (Chair) Report of the Committee on Safety and Health at Work (HMSO, London, 1972).
8
See the critique of the Robens model and its assumptions in Theo Nichols The Sociology of Industrial Injury (Mansell
Publishing, London, 1997) at 2-3; Philip Bohle “Work Psychology and the Management of Occupational Health and
Safety: An Overview” in Michael Quinlan (ed) Work and Health: The Origins, Management and Regulation of
Occupational Illness (Macmillan, Melbourne, 1993); William Breen Creighton, William Ford and Richard Mitchell
Labour Law: Text and Materials (2nd ed, Law Book Co, Sydney, 1993) at 1340; Harry Glasbeek “Occupational Healthand Safety Law: Criminal Law as a Political Tool” (1998) 11 AJLL 95 at 99.

4

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17
a. Changes in medical thinking on stress-related conditions
While this paper does not aim to provide a proper review of the relevant medical literature, it isuseful to start with a brief overview of current thinking on ‘stress’ and its causal connection todisease. Stress is not itself a disease, but an adaptive response of the body to a demand. In contrast
to how it is frequently described in human resources literature, “stress is not a subjective feeling.
It is a measurable set of physiological events in the body.”9 The stress response begins in the brain,with the amygdala, the area of the brain that contributes to emotional processing, interpreting aperson’s experiences. When someone experiences a stressful event the amygdala sends a distresssignal to the hypothalamus, communicating with the rest of the body through the autonomic
nervous system.10 The nervous system controls involuntary body functions such as breathing,blood pressure, heartbeat, and the dilation or constriction of key blood vessels and the small
airways in the lungs. It is divided into two parts, the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous
system. The sympathetic nervous system operates in response to (or what our body perceives tobe) an emergency, activating the commonly called ‘fight or flight response,’ releasing adrenaline
and the related hormone noradrenaline.11 As Sapolsky explains: 12
The autonomic system works in opposition: sympathetic and parasympathetic
projections from the brain course there way out to a particular organ where, when
activated, they bring about opposite results. The sympathetic system speeds up theheart, the parasympathetic system slows it down. The sympathetic system diverts
blood flow to your muscles; the parasympathetic does the opposite.
Put simply, this can be understood as: 13[T]he sympathetic nervous system functions like a gas pedal in a car. It triggers thefight-or-flight response, providing the body with a burst of energy so that it can
respond to perceived dangers. The parasympathetic nervous system acts like abrake. It promotes the “rest and digest” response that calms the body down after
the danger has passed.
As adrenaline circulates through the body, it brings on the physiological changes which wetypically experience when stressed. The heart beats faster, pushing blood to the muscles, heart,and other vital organs. Pulse rate and blood pressure go up. The person undergoing these changes
also starts to breathe more rapidly and small airways in the lungs open wide so lungs can take inas much oxygen as possible. Extra oxygen is sent to the brain, increasing alertness. Sight, hearing,and other senses become sharper. Meanwhile, adrenaline triggers the release of blood sugar andfats from temporary storage sites in the body. These nutrients flood into the bloodstream, supplying
energy to all parts of the body.14
Nicole Baumann and Jean-Claude Turpin “Neurochemistry of Stress. An Overview” (2010) 35 Neurochem Res
1875, at 1876.
10
Harvard Medical School “Understanding the stress response: chronic activation of this survival mechanism impairs
health” (18 March 2016) Harvard Health Publishing available at: https://www.health.harvard.edu/stayinghealthy/understanding-the-stress-response.
11
Robert Sapolsky Why zebras don’t get ulcers (3rd ed) (St Martin’s Press, New York, 2004) at 22 [Sapolsky].
12
Sapolsky, above, at 11.
13
Harvard Medical School, above n 10.
14
Harvard Medical School, above n 10.
95New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17

In the healthy individual, the physiological response systems are rapidly turned on and off, limiting
the exposure to the potentially harmful effects of the stress response. 15 However, when the stressresponse is activated too often or for too long, it starts to have negative consequences. This can“exacerbate existing disease processes, or predispose the individual to acquire new diseases”
described as becoming “maladaptive”.16 Long-term effects of an organism’s accommodation tocertain types of stress is referred to as allostatic load,17 meaning the “wear and tear” resulting from“chronic overactivity or underactivity of physiological stress response systems.”18
Stress is not unique to humans, and the human stress response is very like that in other primates.19
Many papers suggest that there is simply a mismatch between how our bodies evolved to respondto stressors and the present realities of working life filled with performance reviews, KPIs andincreasing workloads facilitated by new technologies. Put better by Robert Sapolsky, for otherspecies “the most upsetting things in life are acute physical crises”, such as being chased by alion.20 These events require “immediate physiological adaptations” if you are going to survive andthe body’s responses are brilliantly adapted to handling such emergencies.21 Sapolsky further
explains that: 22…we humans live well enough and long enough, and are smart enough, to generate
all sorts of stressful events purely in our heads…. Viewed from the perspective of
the evolution of the animal kingdom, sustained psychological stress is a recent
invention, mostly limited to humans and other social primates. We can experiencewildly strong emotions (provoking our bodies into an accompanying uproar) linked
to mere thoughts.
b. Stress and cardiovascular disease
Cardiovascular diseases are complex and multifactorial, and a full discussion of the medical
evidence is beyond the scope of this paper. There is, however, an increasing body of research into
the links between stress and the development of cardiovascular diseases and heart attack risk,
which are important to be aware of when evaluating the law in this area.23 As explained well by
the Harvard Medical School’s public health guidance: 24
Chronic low-level stress keeps the HPA [hypothalamic pituitary adrenal]axis
activated…Persistent epinephrine [the term used for adrenaline in some countries]
surges can damage blood vessels and arteries, increasing blood pressure and raising
15

Sterling P, Eyer J, Fisher S, et al., eds (1988) Handbook of life stress, cognition and health. (John Wiley, NewYork), pp 629–649.
16
E A Mayer “The neurobiology of stress and gastrointestinal disease” (2000) Gut 46 6, 861.
17
B McEwen “Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators” (1998) N Engl J Med 338 171.
18
Mayer, above n 18.
19
Sapolsky, above n 11.
20
At 4.
21
At 4.
22
At 5.
23
See discussion of evidence in Mika Kivimaki and Ichiro Kawachi “Work stress as a risk factor for cardiovasculardisease” (2015) Curr Cardiol Rep 17, 74.
24
Harvard Medical School, above n 10.

6

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17
risk of heart attacks or strokes. Elevated cortisol levels create physiological changes
that help to replenish the body’s energy stores that are depleted during the stressresponse. But they inadvertently contribute to the build-up of fat tissue and toweight gain. For example, cortisol increases appetite, so that people will want to
eat more to obtain extra energy. It also increases storage of unused nutrients as fat.
Repeated activation of the autonomic nervous system is “characterised by lowered heart ratevariability, which has been associated with work stress among men in cross-sectional studies.”25
Low job control has been found to predict coronary disease incidence. 26 Accumulation of workstress is associated with higher risks of the metabolic syndrome, and incident obesity, both linked
to cardiovascular disease.27 Research has shown “[g]reater reports of work stress were associatedwith a higher risk of cardiovascular disease” and among younger workers “there was a clear doseresponse association between greater reports of work stress and higher risks of incident[cardiovascular] events.”28 Greater reports of work stress were also associated with poorer healthbehaviours in terms of eating less fruit and vegetables and less physical activity. 29 To summarise
briefly, the research suggests prolonged stress impacts on the functioning of the heart can trigger
heart attacks where there is underlying heart disease, and is also linked to a range of other healthbehaviors known to exacerbate the risk.
c. Work stress and depression
As with cardiovascular disease, increasing rates of depression globally have triggered anincreasing volume of international research into the connections between stress and depression.30
There is also important New Zealand research in this area, including a recent study out of the
University of Auckland,31 and a significant paper resulting from the Dunedin study. 32 This study
found work stress was linked to the development of depression (and also generalised anxiety
disorder) in young working men and women and the combination of multiple work stressors
conferred even higher risks.33 Holding for those with pre-existing mental health problems they25

Tarani Chandola, Annie Britton, Eric Brunner, Harry Hemingway, Marek Malik, Meena Kumari, Ellena Badrick,Mika Kivimaki, and Michael Marmot “Work stress and coronary heart disease: what are the mechanisms?” European
Heart Journal (2008) 29, 640–648, at 640. T Vrijkotte, L van Doornen, E de Geus “Effects of work stress on
ambulatory blood pressure, heart rate, and heart rate variability” (2000) Hypertension 35 880 and H Hemingway, M
Shipley, E Brunner, A Britton, M Malik and M Marmot “Does autonomic function link social position to coronary
risk? The Whitehall II study” (2005) Circulation 111 3071.
26
H Bosma, M Marmot, H Hemingway, A Nicholson, E Brunner, S Stansfeld “Low job control and risk of coronary
heart disease in the Whitehall II (prospective cohort) study” (1997) BMJ 314 558.
27
Tarani Chandola, above n 25.
28
S Kunz-Ebrecht, C Kirschbaum, A Steptoe “Work stress, socioeconomic status and neuroendocrine activation over
the working day” (2004). Soc Sci Med 2004; 58:1523–1530, at 642.
29
Tarani Chandola and others, above n 25.
30
See for example, Matias Brødsgaard Grynderup, Ole Mors, Åse Marie Hansen, Johan Hviid Andersen, Jens Peter
Bonde, Anette Kærgaard, Linda Kærlev, Sigurd Mikkelsen, Reiner Rugulies, Jane Frølund Thomsen and Henrik
Albert Kolstad “A two-year follow-up study of risk of depression according to work-unit measures of psychologicaldemands and decision latitude” (2012) Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health 38, 6, 527.
31
Markus Rantala, Severi Luoto, Indrikis Krams and Hasse Karlsson “Depression subtyping based on evolutionary
psychiatry: Proximate mechanisms and ultimate functions” (2017) Brain Behav. Immun (in press).
32
Maria Melchior, Avshalom Caspi, Barry Milne, Andrea Danese, Richie Poulton and Terriee Moffitt “Work stressprecipitates depression and anxiety in young, working men and women” (2007) Psych Med 37, 1119.
33
Ibid.

7

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17
found “work stress precipitates the occurrence of psychiatric disorder in previously healthy
individuals.”34 The precise causal mechanisms involved are complex and not completely
understood, but the prevailing thinking is some combination of the direct neurotoxic effects ofcortisol on the brain, down-regulation of the glucocorticoid receptor, which impairs affectregulation, an increase in pro-inflammatory cytokine levels and the leaking of non-pathogenic
commensal bacteria from the gut in to peripheral circulation.35 To summarise, prolonged stressresults in biological changes to the functioning of the brain that can cause or trigger depression,and make it more difficult to recover from it. The research also highlights that cardiovasculardisease and depression frequently co-occur and depression is a strong predictor of cardiovasculardisease onset, cardiac events, and death from cardiovascular disease.36
d. Complexity in causal connection
Despite the significant evidence of the causal connection between work stress and illnesses, suchas depression and cardiovascular disease, the causality is far from simple or direct. The physicaland psychological interaction of the worker’s body with their working environment is likely to be
a complex combination, influenced by genetics, early development and prior stress exposure,outside work stressors, other health conditions and support available.37 There are also differencesin “stress reactivity.”38 “[T]here is wide acknowledgment that both the genome and earlyexperiences account for some share of the variance in phenotypic stress responses.”39 Those people
whose genes predispose them to greater biological effects of stress are referred to as people withhighly reactive phenotypes. A significant piece of research into highly reactive phenotypes by

34

Above, at 1126.
See Markus Rantala, above n 31.
36
Diana Chirinos and Neil Schneiderma “Depression and Cardiovascular Disease in Women: Behavioral andBiological Mechanisms Involved in this Association” in Kristina Orth-Gomer, Neil Schneiderman, Viola Vaccarinoand Hans-Christian Deter (eds) Psychosocial stress and cardiovascular disease in women (Springer International,
Switzerland, 2015).
37
See, for example, T Eley, R Plomin “Genetic analysis of emotionality” (1997) Curr Opin Neurobiol 7:279. E Mayer,
C Saper, C Ladd, R Huot, K Thrivikraman “Long-term behavioural and neuroendocrine adaptations to adverse earlyexperience” in The biological basis for mind body interactions, vol. 7, 122 (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2000).
38
Reactivity has been defined in the scientific literature as “the deviation of a physiological response parameterfrom a comparator or control value that results from an individual’s response to a discrete, environmental stimulus.”
See K Matthews “Summary, conclusions and implications” in K Mathews, S Weiss and T Detre (eds) Handbook ofstress, reactivity and cardiovascular disease, (New York, Wiley Interscience,1986). J Cacioppo, G Berntson, W
Malarkey, J Kiecolt-Glaser, J Sheridan, K Poehlmann, M Burleson, J Ernst, L Hawley and R Glaser “Autonomic,
neuroendocrine, and immune responses to psychological stress: The reactivity hypothesis” (1998) 840 Annals of the
New York Academy of Sciences 664; A Alkon, L Goldstien, N Smider, M Essex, D Kupfer and W Boyce“Developmental and contextual influences on autonomic reactivity in young children” (2003) 42 Developmental
Psychobiology 64; M Allen and K Matthews “Hemodynamic responses to laboratory stressors in children andadolescents: The influence of ages, race and gender” (1997) 34 Psychophysiology 730; M Meaney “Maternal care,gene expression and the transmission of individual differences in stress reactivity across generations.”(2001) 24
Annual Review of Neuroscience 1162; See also S Suomi “Individual differences in rhesus monkey behavioural andadrenocortical responses to social challenge: Correlations with measures of heart rate variability” (1987) referred toin Thomas Boyce and Bruce Ellis “Biological sensitivity to context: I An evolutionary-developmental theory of theorigins and functions of stress reactivity” (2005) 17 Development and Psychology 271.
39
Thomas Boyce and Bruce Ellis, above, at 275.
35

8

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17
Boyce and Ellis, in 2005, is changing the way the interaction of genetic susceptibility and thecausal contribution of the workplace is viewed.40 Boyce and Ellis suggest:41
Rather than acting as a unidirectional risk factor for poor health outcomes…highstress reactivity has been shown repeatedly to operate in a bivalent manner, mostoften escalating the risk of maladaptive outcomes in high-stress contexts, butdiminishing such risk and acting protectively under supportive, low-stressconditions.
What this potentially means is that for those people genetically more susceptible, it may be more
likely that their exposure to the current stressful environment is responsible for their particular
health problems. This paper does not aim to present the evidence for the relationship of causation,
but rather only highlight that there is a significant gap between medical thinking and the draftingof the law.

III.

New Zealand’s Current Legal Response

New Zealand’s legal response to work-stress-related depression and cardiovascular disease iscontained in the operation and interaction of the ACA, the HSWA, the sick leave provisions underthe HA and the wider employment relations regime, particularly personal grievances. Each of theseareas is discussed below with current gaps highlighted.
e. Current ACC cover for “cardiovascular episodes”
In other countries, work-stress-related depression and cardiovascular diseases receive
compensation under their relevant workers’ compensation regimes. The New Zealand ACC
scheme provides no, or very little cover to either condition, even where shown to be caused bywork. Stress-related health conditions fall outside the definition of “accident” in section 25, thecover of “gradual process, disease or infections” under section 30, and the Schedule ofOccupational Diseases. Section 30(5)(a) expressly excludes any work-related health conditions
caused by “non-physical stress.” The exclusion of stress-related cardiovascular conditions from
ACC has been recently confirmed in MacFarlane v ACC42 in 2014 and further in 2016 in Carterv ACC.43
ACC cover for cardiovascular disease is limited to the circumstances described in section 28(3) ofthe ACA. Cover is only available “if the [cardiovascular] episode is caused by physical effort orphysical strain in performing … employment that is abnormal in application or excessive in
intensity for the person.”44 Essentially, cover is only available where the heart attack is “causedby” some unusual physical exertion on the part of a worker in performing an unusually physicaltask in their ordinarily sedentary work. For example, in Estate of Wei v ACC45, Wei died of a fatal
40

Ibid.
At 283.
42
MacFarlane v ACC [2014] NZACC 141.
43
Carter v ACC [2016] NZHC 1140.
44
ACA, s28 (3).
45
Estate of Wei v ACC [2004] NZACC 338.
41

9

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17
heart attack after being assaulted by a group of youths while working in his electronics shop.
Although the judge considered the “physical effort in the struggle during the assault” may meetthe requirements, this could not be said to have “caused” the cardiovascular episode, meaning
Wei’s estate could not obtain compensation.46 The medical evidence revealed underlying
asymptomatic heart disease. The court recognised that the additional physiological stress may havetriggered the heart attack but this did not amount to cause. It also acknowledged that had the assault
not occurred the heart attack may have been prevented with medical intervention. Although stress
was a factor here, the judge held that “physiological stress” did not meet the definition of “physicalstress.”47
What this case highlights is the change in medical thinking that has occurred since the originalinclusion of the cover provisions. Heart attacks were, in the early part of the 20th century,
considered by policy makers to be caused by physical exertion, essentially, the heart gave out
through overwork.48 Just like a muscle could tear from too much force being exerted, so too, aheart was thought to be injured by excessive force, and so it was thought of as an “accident”.
Nowadays, heart attacks are viewed as acute events caused by a blockage in blood vessels to theheart in cases of cardiovascular disease.49 It would be extremely unlikely for a worker to have aheart attack in the circumstances set out in section 28(3) without pre-existing heart disease or apre-existing structural defect, meaning the section, as drafted, offers little assistance to workers in
the contemporary workplace. As in the case of Wei, the physical exertion would, at best, beconsidered to operate as a trigger to an inevitable event, and would not likely, on review of the
medical evidence, be considered “the cause.”
f. Current ACC cover for depression
Work-stress-related depression is usually also excluded from ACC cover under section 30(5)(a).
In 2008, section 21B was added to the ACA to provide cover to mental health problems arising ina narrow range of circumstances that involve exposure to traumatic incidents. Section 21B
provides cover where “mental injury is caused by a single event” in particular circumstances.50 A
person is required to experience the event directly and the event is required to be “an event that
could reasonably be expected to cause mental injury to people generally.”51 A person “experiences,sees, or hears an event directly” if they are involved in or witnesses the event, and are “in close
physical proximity to the event at the time it occurs.”52 This section was inserted following
lobbying by transport unions that had members affected by transport accidents involving
pedestrians or suicidal people.

46

At [13].
At [13].
48
See discussion on changing thinking in the time in Mel Bartley “Coronary Heart Disease – A Disease of Affluenceor A Disease of Industry?” in Paul Weindling (ed) The Social History of Occupational Health (Croom Helm, Kent,
1985). See also the discussion in Commonwealth of Australia Work-Related Cardiovascular Disease Australia (April2006).
49
Ibid.
50
Accident Compensation Act 2001, s21B(1)(b) [ACA].
51
Section 21B(2)(b).
52
Section 21B(5)(a) and (b).
47

10New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17
Section 21B excludes all but a very narrow range of cases. For example, in KB v ACC53, the caseinvolved a claim made by a police officer attending a particularly distressing suicide, and having
to counsel the family which she alleged caused her condition. The court found that “the appellant
has experienced a significant number of events in the course of her work”54 and an event meeting
the requirements of section 21B “must be one that is in effect a one-off event, and which results inthe more or less immediate onset of the factors involved in the medical condition of Post-TraumaticStress Disorder.”55 In OCS Ltd v TW,56 a claim was made for a mental health problem resulting
from a pattern of bullying and harassment which culminated in an incident of minor assault. The
court decided that “minor incidents” were outside the mischief that section 21B was introduced to
remedy, and the incident complained of had to be sudden.57 However, in the 2016 case of MC v
ACC,58 the claimant suffered a series of traumatic events in the course of employment as a police
officer, and in active combat in Afghanistan. The judge in this case took a wider view of the single
incident requirements and it remains to be seen what, if any, impact this case may have on theinterpretation of the section. Even if the decision in MC v ACC does widen the approach taken to
section 21B, it is still a very narrow category of cover, leaving the vast majority of work-stressrelated mental illnesses outside the scope of ACC.
g. The consequences of exclusion from ACC cover
Where employees suffering these conditions are excluded from cover under ACC, they may haveentitlements to sick leave under contract and could pursue legal action, most typically through thepersonal grievance for unjustifiable disadvantage, discussed further below. If, as will be the casefor most workers, they do not have additional sick leave, or a successful legal claim, they have
only private insurance, or the benefit system to fall back on. In 2013, research was conducted into
the socioeconomic impact of the difference in financial support between ACC and Work andIncome New Zealand (WINZ) on a group of people of a similar age and level of functional
impairment.59 The study concluded that those in the illness group (not covered by ACC) had“considerably poorer socio-economic outcomes,” did not return to work as early, and were the“most vulnerable for decline into poverty and ill health.”60
Another important consequence of exclusion is a lack of statistical information on work-stressrelated depression and cardiovascular disease. In New Zealand, work-related injury and illnesses
statistics come primarily from ACC administrative data, meaning that, because there is no coverfor these conditions, there is also no resulting data on these conditions. This makes it very difficult
to evaluate the size of the problem, the costs of the problem or how best to respond to it. The lackof data has a flow on effect on health and safety, making it difficult to isolate industries in greatest
need of intervention, the types of hazards most commonly associated with the development ofthese conditions and other factors that impact on the prevalence of work-stress-related illness.

53

KB v ACC [2013] NZACC 41.
At [24].
55
At [25].
56
OCS Ltd v TW [2013] NZACC 177.
57
At [83].
58
MC v ACC [2016] NZACC 264.
59
Sue McAllister and others “Do different types of financial support after illness or injury affect socio-economic
outcomes? A natural experiment in New Zealand” (2013) 85 SSAM.
60
At 100.
54

11

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17
h. Other avenues for compensation: personal grievances
If excluded from ACC cover, employees can take a personal grievance where their work-related
depression or cardiovascular disease results from some unjustifiable disadvantage. There may also
be negligence, breach of statutory duty or breach of implied term claims that can be made. Perhaps
most well-known of these cases is the Court of Appeal decision in AG v Gilbert.61 Mr Gilbertsuffered work-stress-related depression and a heart condition as a result of stressful employment
as a parole officer at the Department of Corrections. The court found his health conditions werecaused by work overload and management failure, “not just from stress necessarily inherent in his
work, but from avoidable additional pressure of workload, office dysfunction, and inadequate
resources.”62 The Court of Appeal concluded that the employer owed Mr Gilbert a contractual
duty to comply with the health and safety legislation as well as the terms of the contract providing
him with a safe working environment. It also concluded that this amounted to a personal grievance.
This case has been relied on in a number of other cases relating to workplace stress, such as
Crutchley v MSD,63 Clear v Waikato District Health Board64 and Rosenberg v Air New ZealandLtd.65
There are significant hurdles for workers in taking these cases, and, even where successful,outcomes are generally less favourable when compared to ACC cover. A personal grievancerequires an employee to sue their employer and prove fault, which the Court of Appeal has
described as posing “formidable obstacles.”66 It can be difficult and expensive to prove therequired causal connection, given the timeframes and complexity of factors leading to thedevelopment of chronic diseases. There are also the additional financial and emotional burdens ofbringing a legal case, which may be a particular deterrent for a person suffering a work-stressrelated heart condition or depression. The employee’s personal grievance remedies are usuallylimited to the remedies of reimbursement of lost wages, or a wrongly denied sick leave entitlement,
and compensation for “humiliation, loss of dignity, and injury to the feelings” under section
123(1)(c)(i) of the ERA. Most of these cases are likely resolved through the Employment Relations
Mediation Service, with sums recorded in confidential settlements, making it difficult to fully
evaluate the impact of this option on worker outcomes. Generally, however, the sums agreed to insuch cases are relatively small and unlikely to be equivalent to the ongoing weekly compensationand treatment costs, rehabilitation and return to work support available under the ACC scheme.
i. Other avenues for compensation: sick leave
Employees with stress-related illnesses may be able to access sick leave under section 63 of the
HA, or a contractual entitlement with their employer. It is unclear whether or, to what extent,
stress-related depression and cardiovascular disease impacts on sick leave use or associated cost,
given the lack of data. It seems likely, however, there is some effect, especially where there isadditional contractual provision for accrual and use. The 2017 Wellness in the Workplace Report,
which is a survey of New Zealand businesses and their employees, conducted by Business New
61

A-G v Gilbert [2002] 2 NZLR 342.
At [8].
63
Crutchley v MSD [2008] NZERA 196.
64
Clear v Waikato District Health Board [2007] NZERA 33.
65
and Rosenberg v Air New Zealand Ltd [2009] NZERA 556.
66
A-G v Gilbert [2002] 2 NZLR 342, at para [87].
6212New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17
Zealand and Southern Cross Health Insurance, provides the most recent information on sickleave.67 It found that “stress was up 22.9% across businesses” over the past two surveys, and “46%of kiwis still turn up to work when sick.”68 There is little explanation as to why almost half of New
Zealand employees turn up to work despite having a paid entitlement to leave, although it seems
likely to involve a number of factors, such as staffing levels, workload, deadlines or targets, thestructure of responsibility for particular projects, fear of retaliation or being seen as disloyal. It
also raises questions about the suitability of New Zealand’s sick leave laws for the present realityof work.
The HA provides that “an employee is entitled to 5 days’ sick leave for each of the 12-month
periods specified in section 66(2)” and “an employee may carry over up to 15 days’ sick leave toa maximum of 20 days current entitlement in any year.” The current rules for sick leave relate to
the circumstances in which employees may take sick leave and sufficient evidence of sickness, on
the presumption that employees will, whenever possible want to use their sick leave entitlement,even when not genuinely sick.69 There is no explicit legal requirement to ensure that employees
can actually use their accrued sick days (although this could fit within broader duties of good faithor reasonableness) and no obligation to ensure work can be covered, or to ensure staffing levels
are appropriate, although there may be such provisions in workplace policies and collective
employment agreements.
In addition to the lack of minimum regulation, there is almost no regulator guidance on the role ofsick leave in achieving worker health goals, or management of workers with depression or
cardiovascular disease. The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) guidanceis limited to a description of the minimum accrual and evidence requirements. WorkSafe NZ offers
no advice on sick leave and worker health either, despite its issue of Healthy Work: WorkSafe’s
Strategic Plan for Work-Related Health 2016 to 202670, prioritising the importance of occupational
health. There is no guidance on practices or policies that might be appropriate or evaluation tools
provided to employers. There is also no guidance on the potential role of health and safety
representatives and committees in relation to stress-related illnesses, or on the monitoring of sickleave use as an early indicator of poor workplace health.
As mentioned above, employment agreements, particularly collective agreements can and do
provide for additional wellness policies and sick leave entitlements, including for long-term use.
Where these additional provisions do occur, they are often tested in situations of stress-related
illness, such as where an employee suffers from depression or some incapacity due tocardiovascular disease. Policies typically tend to be discretionary and exercises of discretion may
become the subject of a personal grievance as illustrated in the cases of X v Bay of Plenty DHB,71
Lankes v CDHB,72 and Leota v CE of MSD.73

67

Business New Zealand and Southern Cross Health Insurance Wellness in the Workplace Report 2017, available at:https://www.businessnz.org.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/128547/Wellness-in-the-Workplace-Survey-2017.pdf
68
At 6.
69
Holidays Act 2003, ss65 and 68. [HA].
70
WorkSafe New Zealand Healthy Work: WorkSafe’s Strategic Plan for Work-Related Health 2016 to 2026
(Wellington, WorkSafeNZ, 2016).
71
X v Bay of Plenty DHB [2009] NZERA 501 (Auckland).
72
Lankes v CDHB [2016] NZERA 162 (Christchurch).
73
Leota v CE of MSD [2016] NZEmpC 142.

13

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17
j. The HSWA and work-stress-related depression and cardiovascular disease
The HSWA was introduced in response to New Zealand’s health and safety failings, highlighted
in the Report of the Royal Commission on the Pike River Mine Tragedy74 and the Report of the
Independent Taskforce on Workplace Health and Safety.75 The HSWA states that it is based on“the principle that workers and other persons should be given the highest level of protection against
harm to their health, safety, and welfare from hazards and risks arising from work.”76 Section 36
establishes the primary legal duty that a PCBU77 “must ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable,
the health and safety of workers who work for the PCBU, while the workers are at work in thebusiness or undertaking.”
The objects of the HSWA and the drafting of section 36 are clearly wide enough to encompass
work-related stress, however, the machinery sitting beneath those primary duties fails to provide
much practical assistance. The problems are not in the general duties, (although section 36(3) could
do with an additional subparagraph, as discussed in other papers78) but rather in the lack ofenforcement machinery and regulations sitting beneath those duties. Australian research highlights
that, even when psychosocial hazards are expressly included within the primary duties of thelegislation, they remain “a marginal area of inspectorate activity.”79 Psychosocial hazards “arecommonly invisible to traditional methods of workplace inspections,”80 they are also more
complex, time-consuming and resource intensive to investigate.81
k. No suitable inspection or enforcement tools
The assumption in the HSWA, as in the previous legislation, is that the inspection and enforcement
tools designed for the physical hazards of 20th century mines, factories and workshops are perfectly
suitable for the types of hazards that give rise to stress-related health problems. Despite recent
reforms, Worksafe NZ still does not have the legislative tools (or the regulatory standards) needed
to be able to properly address the problem of stress-related illnesses.82 There has been a marked
absence of prosecution or public enforcement action since the express inclusion of work-stresswithin the definition of hazard in 2003.83 The position of WorkSafe NZ seems to be encouraging
workers to address these issues through personal grievances.84 Just as personal grievances are not
74

Royal Commission on the Pike River Coal Mine Tragedy Report of the Royal Commission on the Pike River Coal
Mine Tragedy (October 2012).
75
Independent Taskforce on Workplace Health and Safety The Report of the Independent Taskforce on Workplace
Health and Safety: He Korowai Whakaruruhau (April 2013).
76
Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, s 3 [HSWA].
77
PCBU is a person conducting a business or undertaking, defined in s 17, and is wider than employer.
78
See Dawn Duncan “Addressing the chronic health effects of work: A model for regulatory standards andenforcement,” delivered to the 2016 Australian Labour Law Association conference and in preparation for publication.
79
Richard Johnstone, Michael Quinlan and Maria McNamara “OHS inspectors and psychosocial risk factors:
Evidence from Australia (2011) 49 Safety Science 547.
80
At 548.
81
At 550-551.
82
See Dawn Duncan “Addressing the chronic health effects of work: A model for regulatory standards andenforcement,” delivered to the 2016 Australian Labour Law Association conference and in preparation for publication.
83
Department of Labour v Nalder & Biddle (Nelson) Ltd. [2005] NZHSE 20.
84
See the most recent statement in WorkSafe New Zealand Bullying at Work: Advice for Workers (WorkSafe NZ,2017) available at: http://www.worksafe.govt.nz/the-toolshed/tools/bullying-prevention-toolbox/#page=15 (accessed
14 November 2017). Additionally, Worksafe’s prosecution priorities can be found here:

14

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17
the optimal way to ensure workers harmed at work have fair and accessible compensation, so too,they are not the optimal way to enforce the country’s health and safety laws.
Resolving cases of work-stress-related depression or cardiovascular disease through confidential
mediated settlement offers little prospect of achieving meaningful change to working conditions
that cause stress-related illnesses. There is little incentive for employers to take action, as there islittle prospect of penalties for employers failing to meet their obligations under the HSWA, and afree mediation process to quietly resolve any issues that do arise at an individual level. As
WorkSafe NZ is eager to point out,85 there are business reasons for wanting to ensure the healthand productivity of the workforce, however, for a number of employers, it is simply cheaper toexit package any affected workers than address excessive workloads or unhealthy (albeit
profitable) business practices.

IV.

Reforms Needed to Address Work-Stress-Related Depression andCardiovascular Disease

The work being performed in New Zealand, and the medical thinking on the health effects of thatwork has changed a great deal since Woodhouse and Robens were writing their reports in the late1960s. While the science is complex and not yet perfectly understood, the development of workrelated depression or cardiovascular disease will likely have a genetic, early life and outside ofwork component. That poses a challenge for laws designed for accidental injuries that typicallyhave simple and direct causal connections, e.g. getting crushed in a mine collapse or being degloved by unguarded machinery. New Zealand law-makers have tended to respond to thechallenges of complex causation with a mix of nervous ad hoc tinkering, obfuscation, avoidance,
fear of floodgates arguments and cost-saving claims. If the law in these areas is to serve theworking people of New Zealand, it needs to be designed to respond to complexity and, as argued
further below, the best way to do that is to start with clear policy principles. New Zealand’s lawsneed to be designed, first and foremost, for the promotion of worker health.
a. ACC reform: The legacy of the past and the complexity of the future
The area in most urgent need of reform is the cover provisions of the ACC scheme. Although thelack of data makes it difficult to know how many workers are affected, looking at trends
internationally, there are potentially significant numbers of people without access to compensation,
treatment or support for their work-related conditions and the costs for those workers, business
and wider society is considerable. Reform to the ACC scheme faces two key challenges,
overcoming the legacy of the past, and responding to increasingly complexity in the relationships
between workers and their working environments in future.
One of the key problems in the current ACA is the lack of definable policy principle as to where
the boundary lines of cover ought to be drawn. As set out in other papers, confining the ACC
scheme to cover ‘accidents’ was a political compromise needed to ensure the success of thehttps://worksafe.govt.nz/laws-and-regulations/operational-policy-framework/operational-policies/prosecutionpolicy/
85
WorkSafeNew
Zealand
Work-Related
Stress
(17
March
2017)
http://www.worksafe.govt.nz/worksafe/hswa/health-safety/topics/stress

at:

15

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17
proposal at the time. 86 This, however, created an inherent rationing problem with a particularly
detrimental effect on the cover of chronic health problems in the years that followed. 87 The ACC
scheme covers some, but not all, work-related health problems, with no clear basis in principle forwhy particular conditions are excluded. In countries with workers’ compensation regimes, the tests
for cover revolve around two questions, first, whether the claimant is a ‘worker’ as defined, andsecond, whether their condition sufficiently related to work. These schemes do not break down
cover by diagnostic category and, as a result, these schemes are generally better able to respond tochanges, both in work and medical thinking, than ACC. These schemes have generally also been
better able to provide for workers with work-stress-related depression and cardiovascular disease.
Responding to future complexity is the second challenge, but this, too, could be assisted with theinclusion of a clear set of policy principles for the boundary lines of cover. The tests of cover need
to be reformulated to ask not ‘what is the causal relationship between work and this given
diagnosis?’ but the more nuanced, ‘what, given, the explicit policy goals of this section, ought tobe treated as sufficient causal connection between this person’s work and their health condition?’
The causal tests for the cover of work-related health problems need to be paired with a clear
legislative statement of policy purpose and a process for decision-making and review that allows
for those purposes to be foremost in decisions of cover.
The cover provisions of the ACC scheme need to be directed towards the goals of fair and equitablecompensation, recognising the legal rights of workers to compensation, improving worker healthand also improving the health and safety in New Zealand’s workplaces. Redrafting the ACA
provisions relating to worker health with a clearer statement of purpose and principle may offer asolution to an increasingly complex and rapidly moving scientific understanding of the relationshipbetween human beings and their working environments.
b. Reforms to the HSWA: More suitable regulations and enforcement tools needed
The HSWA also needs to be able to better respond to complexity in the causal relationships
between workers’ health and their working environments. WorkSafe NZ needs a set of
enforcement tools designed for inspection and enforcement in situations of stress-related
depression and cardiovascular disease. As mentioned in other papers,88 one response to thisproblem may be a much simpler review process, paired with an evaluation tool (ideally included
in healthy work focused regulations). This, coupled with a more explicit set of employee rights,
and a role for the regulator in evaluating the reasonableness of the employer’s actions could
provide a simple and practical solution to the current problem of attempting to apply traditional‘inspection’ techniques to complex jobs.

See Dawn Duncan “ACC and workers’ health: Compensation, compromises and consequences” in Gordon
Anderson, Alan Geare, Erling Rasmussen and Margaret Wilson (eds) Transforming Workplace Relations in new
Zealand 1976-2016 (Wellington, VUP, 2017).
87
Ibid.
88
See Dawn Duncan “Addressing the chronic health effects of work: A model for regulatory standards andenforcement” presented to the Australian Labour Law Association conference in 2016 and in preparation for
publication.
86

16

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 3-17
c. Coordinated laws directed toward the goals of improved employee healthAs set out above, the ACA and HSWA are currently supplemented by the sick leave provisions in
the HA and the personal grievances regime. Reforms to the ACA and HSWA need to be viewed
in a wider employment relations context. For example, it may be time to draft rules or issue
guidance on the management of sick leave beyond simply accruals, the calculation of pay, or therequirements for medical certificates. Sick leave may need to be considered as part of workplace
health and safety, with specific roles for health and safety representatives and committees inmonitoring employee health and in workplace health advocacy.
The new Labour-led Government campaigned on a policy of introducing Fair Pay Agreements. It
is unclear yet what these will look like, but the Party’s website defines these as follows.89
Fair Pay Agreements (FPAs) will be agreed by businesses within an industry and theunions representing workers within that industry. FPAs will set basic standards for pay
and other employment conditions within an industry, according to factors including job
type and experience.
These agreements have the potential to create more tailored worker health standards or specificprocess requirements. It is essential that worker health, and in particular, work-stress-related
depression and cardiovascular disease form part of the discussion about the reforms needed to New
Zealand’s labour laws.

V.

Conclusion: The Role of Labour Law in Addressing the Problems

Work-stress-related depression and cardiovascular disease are significant problems for New
Zealand workers, businesses and wider society. This paper has looked at New Zealand’s current
legal response to work-stress-related depression and cardiovascular disease, primarily in the ACA
and HSWA. Obviously, stress is not confined to the hazards of the workplace and labour law has
a wider role to play in ensuring the health of working people. Labour law has a significant impact
on employment security, the manner by which people are engaged to perform work, the bargaining
power of workers in setting terms and conditions, wage rates, and, consequently, the access ofworkers to secure housing and healthcare. These factors impact not only on the stress levels ofworkers but their ability to respond to them. Fully addressing the problems of worker depression
and cardiovascular disease requires a wider response, tackling precarious and insecure work, low
wages and the social consequences of economic deprivation. While this wider role isacknowledged, this paper argues that significant improvements that could be made in this areawith simple reforms to the coverage of the ACC scheme (including better data collection), and abetter suited set of enforcement tools and regulatory standards under the HSWA. These reforms
would offer immediate and practical benefit to workers, while also equipping law makers with thedata needed to formulate longer-term strategy.

89

New Zealand Labour Party, Workplace Relations Policies (2017) available at:
http://www.labour.org.nz/workplacerelations

17

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32

Adopting a Health and Safety Framework for the Assessment andRemediation of Earthquake Prone Buildings
JOHN GODDARD*
Introduction
He Whakatauki: He Korowai Whakaruruhau“He korowai āta raranga
He korowai whakaruruhau
Mō tātou katoa”
This whakatauki (proverb) features prominently in the Independent Taskforce’s Report on
Workplace Health and Safety.1 The korowai (cloak) was woven by Robin Hill who explained
that:2This korowai is made of pheasant feathers, both male and female birds, which speaks
to me of the inclusion of all people. The taniko (woven border) is designed with afamily in mind. The marriage of two people and their respective families join to makeone pattern. Although people belong together in society we are all individuals so
there are individual bundles of feathers throughout the korowai body.
The image, symbolism and cultural significance of the korowai embodies and embraces therequirements for best practice regarding workplace health and safety. The Independent
Taskforce considered that “urgent sustainable step-change in harm prevention activity and adramatic improvement in outcomes” are required to improve New Zealand’s poor health andsafety performance.3
It considered that all of its identified pre-requisites need to be in place for a high-functioning
workplace health and safety regulatory system, including: good workable law; (b) an effective
primary regulatory agency; (c) strong visible leadership; (d) a robust level of capacity andcapability; (e) genuine and effective worker participation; (f) incentives that are effective levers
for good practice; (g) high quality data; and (h) a national culture that is more risk aware.4
Much has been written about the lessons to be learned from the Canterbury earthquakes. Morethan eight years after the first earthquake of 4 September 2010, it is timely, if not overdue, toreflect on whether the fatalities which resulted from the catastrophic collapse of the CTV and
PGC buildings and other multiple building failures would be avoided or mitigated under the
new workplace health and safety regime.

*

A litigation associate for WCM Legal. Email: john.w.g@wcmlegal.co.nz
Independent Taskforce The Report of the Independent Taskforce on Workplace Health and Safety: He Korowai
Whakaruruhau (Executive Report) (Independent Task Force reporting to the Minister of Labour, April 2013).
2
Ibid.
3
At 3.
4
Ibid.
1

18

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32
To appreciate the context behind the recent changes to health and safety in New Zealand, it isnecessary, as a minimum, to have regard to the following materials: the Royal Commission on
the Pike River Coal Mine Tragedy5, the Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission6, theReport of the Independent Taskforce7, WorkSafe New Zealand’s Position Statement on
Dealing with Earthquake Related Hazards8, Ministry of Business, Innovation and
Employment’s (MBIE) Investigation into the Performance of Statistics House in the
14 November 2016 Kaikōura Earthquake,9 the sentencing decision of WorkSafe New Zealandv Rangiora Carpets Limited10 and recent changes to the regulatory regime for managing
earthquake prone buildings (the EPB Regime).
The key question for this paper is whether the revised and updated EPB Regime will prevent
loss of life as occurred as a result of the CTV and PGC building failures and would haveoccurred in Statistics House but for the fortuitous timing of the Kaikōura earthquake.
First, the failures that led to the Pike River Coal Mining tragedy and the collapse of the CTV
building will be compared to identify whether there have been any common features.
Secondly, the Report of the Independent Taskforce will be reviewed. Thirdly, the recently
updated EPB Regime will be reviewed. Finally, an assessment will be made as to theeffectiveness of the EPB Regime as it currently operates and some suggestions will be madefor addressing EPB issues from a health and safety perspective.

The Pike River Coal Mine Tragedy
The Pike River coal mine tragedy has come to symbolise the systemic failure of health andsafety in New Zealand. On Friday, 19 November 2010, at 3.45pm, there was an explosion in
the mine. Twenty-nine men died underground immediately after the explosion or shortly
afterwards, either from the impact of the explosion or from the toxic atmosphere. Two workers,
who were located in a stone drift, and removed from the workings of the mine, managed toescape.11 Over the next nine days, the mine exploded three more times before it was sealed.
No workers were rescued, and no bodies have been recovered.12
According to the Royal Commission on the Pike River Coal Mine tragedy, the cause of the 19
November explosion was the ignition of a substantial volume of methane gas.13 While it
5

Royal Commission on the Pike River Coal Mine Tragedy Royal Commission on the Pike River Coal Mine
Tragedy: Te Komihana a te Karauna mo te Parekura Ana Waro o te Awa o Pike (Royal Commission on the
Pike River Coal Mine Tragedy, October 2012).
6
Canterbury Earthquake Royal Commission Final Report: Te Komihana Ruwhenua o Waitaha (Canterbury
Earthquake Royal Commission, November 2012).
7
Above n 1.
8
WorkSafe New Zealand “Position Statement on Dealing with Earthquake Related Hazards: Information for
employers and owners of workplace buildings - Position Statement” (November 2016) WorkSafe New Zealand< www.WorkSafe.govt.nz>.
9
Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment “Investigation into the Performance of Statistics House in
the 14 November 2016 Kaikōura Earthquake” (MBIE, March 2017).
10
WorkSafe New Zealand v Rangiora Carpets Limited [2017] NZDC 22587.
11
Royal Commission on the Pike River Coal Mine Tragedy, above n 4, at 12.
12
Ibid.
13
Royal Commission on the Pike River Coal Mine Tragedy, above n 4, at 23.

19

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32
remains unclear exactly how such large quantities of methane gas accumulated and the identityof the ignition source, it seems highly likely that the accident and subsequent loss of life would
have been prevented if proper health and safety processes had been followed.
According to the Royal Commission, the underlying causes of the tragedy included that: 14 (1)it could fairly be described as a process safety accident, comprising an escape of methane gas,followed by an explosion. It occurred at a time when production was prioritised at the expenseof health and safety; (2) at the time of the tragedy, the legal framework for health and safety inunderground mining was deficient; (3) in the years leading up to the time of the accident, theoversight provided by the health and safety regulator was inadequate; (4) the search and rescue
operations were compromised due to a lack of advance planning; and (5) the families of theminers would have benefitted from improved communication during the search, rescue andrecovery phases.
There were multiple process failures, as outlined below:
A management culture which saw management of methane gas as “more a nuisance and daily
operational consideration than a significant problem or barrier to operations”.15
The investigation of incident reports was haphazard. For example, in October 2010, a backlog
of outstanding investigations was simply written off.16
A key health and safety requirement for underground mining is to effectively manage methanegas levels. One component of effective methane management is proper implementation of aventilation management system. For Pike River, the ventilation management plan was
deficient. For example, no one had dedicated responsibility for ventilation management.17
The ventilation shaft was relied on by Pike River as a second means of escape. In April 2010,
a Department of Labour (DoL) inspector advised the company that the ventilation shaft was
not a suitable means of egress. However, the DoL took no further action before the explosion
occurred. This was because the DoL assumed that Pike River was a ‘best practice’ employer
when this was not the case. These failures, and others, occurred due to DoL’s failure toresource and support the dwindling mining inspectorate.18
Placing the main fan underground was a ‘major error’ because the decision was not subject toan adequate assessment of risk, the main fan was not ‘explosion protected’ and it was notoperational after the explosion.19
The backup fan, which was located at the top of the ventilation shaft, failed to start, as planned,
after the explosion.20

14

At 15.
At 18.
16
At 19.
17
Ibid.
18
At 23.
19
Ibid.
20
Ibid.
15

20

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32
Monitoring methane levels is an essential part of effective methane management. The Royal
Commission found that the sensors were either not operational or were unreliable.21
Under mining regulations, electrical equipment must be located in a restricted zone to preventthe possibility of equipment igniting an explosion. The Pike River restricted zone was fixed
without any risk assessment and only after equipment had already been installed.22
The premature commencement of hydro mining resulted in high methane gas readings. As aresult of these readings, hydro mining should have ceased.23
Overall the Royal Commission stated that:24
New Zealand has a poor overall health and safety record compared with otheradvanced countries. In relation to underground coal mining, New Zealand has
had a tragedy every generation or so, after the lessons of previous tragedies havebeen forgotten. This time the lessons must be remembered. Legislative,
structural and attitudinal change is needed if future tragedies are to be avoided.
Government, industry and workers need to work together. That would be thebest way to show respect for the 29 men who never returned home on
19 November 2010, and for their loved ones who continue to suffer.
The recommendations of the Royal Commission included: (1) to improve New Zealand’s poor
record in health and safety, a new Crown agent focussing solely on health and safety should beestablished;25 (2) an effective regulatory framework for underground coal mining should beestablished urgently;26 (3) regulators need to collaborate to ensure that health and safety is
considered as early as possible and before permits are issued;27 (4) the statutory responsibilities
of directors for health and safety in the workplace should be reviewed to better reflect theirgovernance responsibilities;28 (5) directors should rigorously review and monitor theorganisation’s compliance with health and safety law and best practice29; (6) the health andsafety regulator should issue an approved code of practice to guide managers on health andsafety risks, drawing on both their legal responsibilities and best practice. In the meantime,
managers should consult the best practice guidance available;30 and (7) worker participation in
health and safety in underground coal mines should be improved through legislative andadministrative changes.31
In other words, the Royal Commission advocated strongly for a significant mind shift regarding
workplace health and safety. The elements required to deliver such a change include (1) a clear
and coherent regulatory framework, (2) leadership provided by central government, (3)21

At 20.
Ibid.
23
Ibid.
24
At 35.
25
At 36.
26
Ibid.
27
At 37.
28
Ibid.
29
Ibid.
30
At 38.
31
Ibid.
22

21

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32
identification of health and safety risks at an early stage, (4) ongoing monitoring of those risks,(5) effective management of health and safety risks by mine management, (6) effective reviewof the management of health and safety risks by governance entities and (7) active worker
participation regarding health and safety risks.
In other words, the korowai whakaruruhau requires a cloak which is carefully woven if workers
and others are to be protected at work. The Pike River coal mine tragedy was a process failure.
If proper processes had been followed, then the accident and the explosion and the loss of life
could have been avoided.
The Royal Commission referred to 17 previous coal mining accidents, most of which resulted
in loss of life.32 In total, since 1879, more than 200 miners have lost their lives in New Zealandcoal mine tragedies. The recurrence of such tragedies was evidence of recurring themes
including:33 (a) an insufficient regulatory framework; (b) the health and safety regulator notproperly conducting inspections or ensuring legislative compliance; (c) operators not
identifying and managing hazards, including inadequate ventilation and gas management
systems; (d) operators not providing miners with the proper training, equipment and oversight;and (e) miners not following safe practices.
In other words, a common theme of the previous 17 coal mining accidents is that there was nocarefully woven cloak which would have protected coal miners at work in New Zealand. This
context provides a useful framework for assessing the consequences of the collapse and total
failure of the CTV building on 22 February 2011 from a health and safety perspective.

The CTV Building
On 22 February 2011, just three months after the Pike River coal mine tragedy, a 6.3 magnitude
earthquake, with an epicentre less than 10 kilometres from the Christchurch CBD, struck at
12.51pm. It followed an earthquake of magnitude 7.1 which occurred on 4 September 2010
and a large number of powerful aftershocks. The shaking was particularly destructive due tothe shallowness of the fault line and its proximity to the CBD.34
Ground motions caused by the February earthquake were extremely high. For example,
vertical accelerations were measured at 2.2g and horizontal accelerations near the epicentre
were measured at 1.7g. These accelerations meant that the earthquake is seen as a one in 2,500year event.35 Buildings in New Zealand are not built to withstand shaking of this intensity
although they are meant to preserve life.
One hundred and fifteen people were killed when the CTV building collapsed in the February
earthquake. Profiles of these people are featured in the Royal Commission’s report. 36 The

32

At 258 to 261.
At 261.
34
Ministry for Culture and Heritage “Christchurch earthquake kills 185” (April 2017)<https://nzhistory.govt.nz/>
35
Canterbury Earthquake Royal Commission (Vol 1), above n 5, at 34.
36
Ibid (Vol 6), at 5-37.
33

22

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32
victims’ places of work included Kings Education Language School, The Clinic medical
centre, the Toyama College of Foreign Languages, CTV and Relationship Services.
The Royal Commission found that the collapse of the CTV building would have occurred
within 10-20 seconds of the commencement of the February earthquake.37 The collapse wassudden and catastrophic. After a period of twisting and shaking, all of the floors dropped
vertically due to major weaknesses in the beam column joints and columns. This was describedby eye witnesses as a ‘pancake’ effect. The north wall complex was left standing, the floors
had become separated from it. The south sheer wall collapsed inwards on top of the floors
which was probably the last part of the collapse sequence. Both the north and the south walls
failed to perform their intended role.38
The two key failures of the designer were: (1) to properly consider low tracking through thebeam column joint zones. This failure led to joint zones which “were easy to construct butlacked ductility and were brittle in character”; and (2) failing to ensure that there wereadequate connections between the floors and the north wall complex.39 Retrofit works also
failed due to their lack of ductility.
The Royal Commission found that these design defects were compounded by construction
defects in that the builder failed to roughen the interface between the ends of the precast beams
and the concrete in the columns.40
The Royal Commission made a number of critical findings including that:
Mr Harding, who carried out the structural design of the building, was acting beyond hiscompetence and did not seek assistance from his employer, Alan M Reay Consulting Engineer(ARCE). Specifically, Mr Harding was inexperienced in the use of the ETABS computer
programme and that he had never designed a multi-storey building.41
Dr Reay failed to properly supervise Mr Harding’s work and failed to implement a system forreviewing the design either by himself or by someone else who was qualified to carry out areview.42
In the process of applying for a building permit around July and August 1986, a building
consent officer, Mr Tapper, identified that there were design flaws in the structural drawings.
These included the connections of the floors to the north wall complex. However, in September
1986, Dr Reay became involved in the process for issuing consent and it seems likely the
Christchurch City Council (CCC) accepted that Mr Tapper’s concerns lacked foundation. As
a result, the CCC issued a building permit when it ought not to have done so.43

37

Ibid (Vol 6) at 307.
Ibid.
39
Ibid.
40
Ibid.
41
Ibid at 302.
42
Ibid.
43
Ibid at 303.
38

23

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32
The defects in design were compounded by construction defects. The two main defects inconstruction works were that (1) there was no or insufficient roughening of construction joints
between precast and in situ concrete and (2) a number of reinforcing bars in the precast beams
were bent backwards instead of being embedded into the north wall complex as the design had
intended.
These construction defects may not have been identified or addressed as a result of inadequate
construction monitoring by both ARCE and the CCC.44
In 1990, retrofitting works were carried out. This involved the insertion of drag bars between
levels four to six in the north wall complex. When the drag bars were inserted, no building
permit was obtained. Although the installation of the drag bars met relevant standards, overall,the connections between the floors and the north wall complex remained non-compliant forseismic actions in the east-west direction.45
On 7 September 2010, when three CCC building officers carried out an inspection, there wasno engineer present. Notwithstanding this omission, the officers decided that an existing green
placard signalling that the building was safe to occupy was confirmed.46
There were many opportunities to identify and address the defective design issues. If this had
occurred, it is possible that at least some of the lives lost on 22 February 2011 could have beensaved. From a health and safety perspective, the risk of catastrophic collapse in a major
earthquake was not identified. The failure to identify the risks of use and occupancy of theCTV building meant that those risks could not be eliminated or minimised.
Once again, the protective cloak was not woven with sufficient care to protect people who had
the misfortune to be in the CTV during the February earthquake. The process flaws between
the design of the building and the earthquake in February 2011 echo the failings in the Pike
River coal mine tragedy. The catastrophic collapse of the CTV building could also be described
as a process safety accident.

The Report of the Independent Taskforce
The Taskforce identified that New Zealand’s performance in workplace health and safety ispoor by international standards. Although there were issues with the quality of the data, theTaskforce was extremely concerned at health and safety in this country. Each year, around
200,000 claims are made to ACC. While the majority of these claims are for medical fee
expenses, in 2010, ACC accepted about 26,000 substantive entitlement claims for work-related
harm.47
The Taskforce concluded that there was no single factor responsible for the poor performance.
Instead, the Taskforce identified:48
44

Ibid.
Ibid at 304.
46
Ibid at 305.
47
Independent Task Force, above n1 at 12.
48
Independent Task Force, above n1 (Executive Report) at 10.
45

24

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32

Significant weaknesses across the full range of workplace health and safetysystem components, coupled with the absence of a single strong element or setof elements to drive major improvements or to raise expectations. The
fundamental issue is systemic.
While the Taskforce identified problems with (1) confusing regulation, (2) a weak regulator,(3) poor worker engagement and (4) inadequate leadership, the Taskforce carefully considered
New Zealand’s risk-tolerant culture and stated:49
Our national culture includes a high level of tolerance for risk, and negative
perceptions of health and safety. Kiwi stoicism, deference to authority, laidback complacency and suspicion of red tape all affect behaviour from the board
room to the shop floor. If recognition and support for health and safety are low
or intermittent, workplaces are liable to develop, accept and defend low
standards, dangerous practices and inadequate systems.
These comments certainly ring true if we reflect on the mining activities documented by thePike River Royal Commission or the processes involved in the design and construction of theCTV building.
The Chair of the Taskforce considered that to address these cultural challenges would:50…require strong top-down and bottom-up leadership. It will also require afundamental change to the prevailing ‘she’ll be right’ culture in New Zealand.
She most clearly is not all right. Businesses, workers, unions, industry
organisations and the Government all have vital and shared roles to play inachieving this vision.
Wally Noble became a paraplegic in a workplace accident on a construction site when he fell
6.5 metres through a hole in the roof and landed on the penthouse below. He suffered serious
injuries, including breaking his spine which resulted in him becoming a paraplegic and being
confined to a wheelchair. He reflected that his accident could have been avoided and stated:51“we have a responsibility to change the safety culture in the workplace. We need to inspire
everyone at work to have the courage to speak up when things don’t seem right.”
Other submitters echoed these concerns around culture, leading the Taskforce to conclude
that:52
New Zealand’s national culture includes a high level of tolerance for risk, andnegative perceptions of health and safety. There appear to be a number ofprevailing values and norms that are at odds with a safety-conscious, harmpreventive and compliance-based workplace health and safety system. ‘It’s only
minor’, ‘it won’t happen to me’ and ‘it’s all part of the work we do’ are somephrases that aptly capture this.
49

At 12.
Ibid (Full Report) at 5.
51
At 14-16.
52
At 31.
50

25

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32

The Taskforce records the views of a company director regarding the connection between
cultural change and strong leadership:53
How do you create the right culture? “A commitment has to come from the top.
It needs to be led primarily by the chief executive but the board directors must
support and challenge the CEO too. “There needs to be greater awareness – andthe Pike River tragedy has raised people’s awareness – and an acceptance of theimportance of health and safety.
The Taskforce agreed and emphasised the critical nature of effective leadership:54
One of the most important components of the workplace health and safetysystem is leadership – from the Government, government agencies, industry
bodies, pan-industry bodies, professional associations, employers, managers,
people in governance roles, unions, community based organisations, the medical
profession, other professions, health and safety representatives and, of course,
workers.
First and foremost, leadership needs to be strongly demonstrated from the top.
The Government should provide strong leadership and act as an exemplar of
good workplace health and safety practice.
These statements about creating and maintaining a safety culture in the workplace go to theheart of recent reforms in this area. To achieve a cultural shift requires a number of features
to be present, including clear and effective regulation, a visible and strong regulator, effective
management and governance structures, strong leadership (both top-down and bottom-up), a
common vision for workplace safety, shared ownership of safety issues and effective processes
to ensure worker participation.
To achieve real change, all key elements must be present along with a “broad-based stepchange in approach and a seismic shift in attitude.”55
The Taskforce made a number of recommendations and many of these have already been
implemented. We now have much stronger health and safety legislation in the form of the
Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (HSWA). The HSWA contains specific provisions relating
to: the primary duty of care of a Person Carrying out a Business or Undertaking (PCBU);56 thedue diligence duties of directors;57 worker participation, including the roles of health and safety
representatives and health and safety committees;58 and overlapping duties where there is morethan one PCBU present in a workplace.59 Additionally, there is now a suite of at least 10 healthand safety regulations which have been promulgated under the HSWA since 2015. There is a53

At 76.
At 77.
55
At 4.
56
Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, sections 17 and 36.
57
Section 44.
58
Sections 58-67.
59
Sections 32-34.
54

26

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32
dedicated regulator (WorkSafe New Zealand) with strengthened powers of enforcement.
Prosecutions under the HSWA are currently making their way through the courts. WorkSafe
is providing leadership by making available to businesses guidance documents, fact sheets,
position statements and other relevant information.60
Central government deserves credit for implementing these initiatives. WorkSafe has a visible
presence and continues to develop a large body of information and guidance to enable PCBUs,
directors, workers, HSRs and Health and Safety Committees to contribute more effectively toworkplace health and safety. In general terms, the korowai is increasingly becoming a korowai
whakaruruhau.
It is necessary to consider whether, from a health and safety perspective, the new regime for
EPBs provide adequate protection for PCBUs, managers, directors and workers against risks
associated with unsafe structures.

The New Regime for Earthquake Prone Buildings
The Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission (CERC) noted that, under the system that
operated at the time of the Canterbury earthquakes, it was left to each territorial authority to set
its own policy for identifying and managing earthquake prone buildings and for reviewing its
policy every five years.61 MBIE, as building regulator, produced guidance to assist local
authorities to determine how it would manage its existing building stock.
MBIE considered that local authorities would implement policies that struck a balance between
earthquake risks and other factors, taking into account economic and social considerations andthe community interest in preserving heritage buildings.62 MBIE suggested that policies
adopted by territorial authorities could adopt an active or passive approach.
Under an active approach for managing EPBs, territorial authorities identify all of the high riskbuildings within its district and serve notice on the owners, requiring them, at their cost andwithin a specific timeframe, to provide more detailed seismic assessments and/or improve theperformance of their buildings as appropriate.63
Under a passive approach, a territorial authority waits for a building owner to apply for building
consent where alterations to existing buildings are proposed. A territorial authority thenrequires seismic works to be completed as part of the alterations to the building.64
The CERC found that, while all 67 territorial authorities had policies for managing EPBs, 43
had active policies, 12 had passive policies and 12 had hybrid policies containing active andpassive elements.65 Unsurprisingly, the CERC recommended that, while territorial authorities
60<www.worksafe.govt.nz>.
Building Act 2004, ss 131-132.
62
Department of Building and Housing. (2005). Earthquake-Prone Building Provisions of the Building Act
2004: Policy Guidance for Territorial Authorities. Wellington, New Zealand.
63
Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission, above n 5 (Vol 4) at 200.
64
Ibid.
65
At 201.
61

27

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32
should be permitted to set discretionary EPB policies, MBIE should provide further guidanceon the factors to be considered, including the nature of a community’s building stock, theexpected economic impact, the numbers of passers-by for some buildings, levels of occupancy,and potential impact on key infrastructure in a time of disaster.66
The new regime came into force on 1 July 2017 and has five key features: (1) Building(Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016. This Act contains important provisions.
It requires territorial authorities to adopt an active approach to identifying and managing EPBs
and sets timeframes of between 2.5 and 15 years for building owners to improve theperformance of EPBs. It also requires seismic upgrades to be completed when building owners
carry out substantial alterations but does not define what constitutes a ‘substantial alteration’.
The Amendment Act commenced on 1 July 2017; (2) Building (Specified Systems, Change theUse, and Earthquake-prone Buildings) Regulations 2005; (3) an EPB methodology was
released by MBIE in July 2017. The EPB methodology provides guidance to territorial
authorities tasked with identifying EPBs; (4) Engineering Assessment Guidelines were
finalised in August 2017. They provide guidance for initial seismic assessments (ISAs) anddetailed seismic assessments (DSAs); and (5) a national EPB register.

Comment
There are some inherent weaknesses in the current regime for assessing EPBs. While there isa more consistent national approach, implementation of the policy is left to territorial
authorities who are all able to adopt different approaches, have differing levels of institutional
expertise, differing capabilities, and differing resources. These variations are compounded by
the fact that neither the building regulator nor the health and safety regulator provide any
independent oversight.
A further factor is that older buildings may comply with building standards at the time of
construction but may, nonetheless, be brittle and struggle to withstand the force of a powerfulearthquake.
For example, the PGC Building collapsed following the February earthquake, killing 18 people,
after both the east and west walls failed. The PGC building was built in 1966. It compliedwith the building standards of that time. However, a number of features of the design meantthat the PGC building could not lawfully be constructed under the current Building Code andassociated standards.67
Following seismic works carried out in the 1990s, an engineer estimated the building’s strength
to be approximately 50 per cent of seismic design loading in the relevant standard.68 The CTV
building was assessed at between 40-55 per cent NBS. Yet, both of these buildings contained
a number of design and construction flaws which rendered them susceptible to total building
failure in the event of a major earthquake. Because they were originally compliant with66

At 211.
Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission, above n 5, (Vol 2) at 41.
68
At 24.
67

28

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32
building regulation, and structural alterations did not trigger a reassessment of their criticalstructural weaknesses, the EPB regime under the 2004 Building Act was not engaged.
Following the Kaikōura earthquake, Statistics House, a six storey building located in theCentreport Harbour Quays business park, suffered a partial collapse of the first and second
storeys.69
The building was constructed in 2004 and 2005 when the Building Act 2004 was in force.
Following the 2013 Seddon earthquake, the building owners engaged engineers to undertake areview against the recommendations of the Canterbury Earthquake Royal Commission. These
seismic works had commenced but had not been concluded at the time of the Kaikōura
earthquake.
According to MBIE, the building was unable to withstand the effect of the Kaikōura earthquake
due to: (1) a highly flexible ductile frame which exacerbated the impact of the earthquake; (2)shortening of the pre-cast double-tee flooring units as a result of the spalling at the ends of theunits; (3) amplification of ground shaking due to basin-edge effects in the Thorndon basin area;and (4) the long duration of the earthquake (about 120 seconds).70
The concerning nature of this modern and presumably well designed and constructed building
failing is that if the high end of our building stock presents life safety issues in a major
earthquake, then where does it leave buildings constructed to a lower standard?
Another worrying consideration is that, while MBIE carried out a careful review of the building
after it had partially failed, there does not appear to be any machinery for an independent panelof building experts to assess buildings when concerns have been raised by employers, workers
and others, but before a building has failed to perform in a manner which would preserve life
safety.
WorkSafe has a position statement on earthquake damaged buildings. There are two key‘takeouts’ in the statement:71
In short, if you are doing what you’re supposed to be doing under the Building
Act, then we are not going to enforce to a higher standard in relation to yourbuilding’s earthquake resilience under HSWA. If you’re not doing what you
should be doing under the Building Act, we expect the relevant local council totake action – not us.
If you’re not doing what you’re supposed to be doing under the Building Act
and someone is seriously harmed following an earthquake you could face
enforcement action under the HSWA.
On 4 October 2017, WorkSafe New Zealand successfully prosecuted a company for having anunsafe structure. In this case, the defendant, Rangiora Carpets Limited operated a business of
supplying and installing floor coverings to domestic and retail markets, employing
69

Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, above n 8, at 14.
At 28.
71
WorkSafe New Zealand, above n 7.
70

29

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32
approximately 16 staff. It operates out of a two-storey commercial building which includes amezzanine area which is approximately 2.7 metres high and 74 metres wide.72
The mezzanine was constructed without any building consent and, at the time of the accident,
the mezzanine did not comply with the building code due to the lack of a balustrade. There
was a false ceiling adjacent to the mezzanine.73
The victim, in this case, while moving a box containing old paper work, pushed a box along
the carpeted edge of the mezzanine. As she stood up, her foot slipped off the side of themezzanine and she fell through the false ceiling to the floor approximately 2 ½ metres below.74
According to the victim impact statement, she suffered a broken arm, broken right shoulder,broken right collarbone, fractures to the left side of her pelvis, and a laceration to her head.
These injuries required her to spend eight days in hospital before being discharged and cared
for by her husband who had to take time off work to look after her.75
In its submissions for sentencing, WorkSafe noted that a proper hazard identificationassessment would have picked up the risk created by the lack of a balustrade on the mezzanine
floor and that addressing this risk would have been relatively easy and inexpensive.76
The District Court ordered the defendant to pay $20,000 in reparation to the victim, a total fineof $157,500 and prosecution costs.77
In media statement, WorkSafe General Manager Operations and Specialist Services, Brett
Murray stated:78
Falls from height always present a significant risk. Even a fall of less than three
metres can result in serious injuries or death. Identifying the need for a barrier
to protect workers on the mezzanine floor was imperative to avoiding thisincident.
Under the current regime, health and safety issues relating to defective structures are treated as
Building Act issues until something goes wrong. If something goes wrong, and harm occurs,
then the issues become HSWA issues, capable of investigation and prosecution by WorkSafe.
The effect of this approach is that WorkSafe is under no obligation to take any action until
harm has actually been suffered. In other words, WorkSafe has no role in providing any sortof safety net regarding the hazards contained in defectively constructed buildings.
In this case, the territorial authority could have issued the company with a Notice to Fix but
did not do so.79 The territorial authority was in a position of influence and control in that it
72

WorkSafe New Zealand v Rangiora Carpets Limited [2017] NZDC 22587 at [6].
Ibid.
74
At [9].
75
At [10]-[11].
76
At [25].
77
At [59].
78
WorkSafe “Risk Present in All Work Spaces” (5 October 2017) WorkSafe New Zealand: Mahi Hauora
Aotearoa <www.worksafe.govt.nz>.
79 Building Act 2004, ss 163-168.
73

30

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32
could have prevented the harm which occurred. Under s 17 of the Building Act 2004, allbuilding work must comply with the Building Code even if a building consent is not required.
But the experience from the Canterbury earthquakes suggests that there is no regime forbuilding inspections where consent is not required. Compliance is left in the hands of abuilding owner. Potentially, WorkSafe could also have prosecuted the territorial authority for
failing to prevent harm by requiring the mezzanine to comply with the Building Code.
While, generally, WorkSafe is showing strong leadership in relation to health and safety issues,
providing relevant information to employers and workers and becoming involved in initiatives
that are likely to have a positive impact on New Zealand’s poor health and safety record, in thearea of defective, non-compliant and unsafe structures, there appear to be gaps in WorkSafe’srole which means that the responsibility falls on employers and workers to identify andremediate hazards with insufficient support or involvement from territorial authorities, thebuilding regulator and the health and safety regulator.

Conclusion
There are a number of concerns with the new EPB regime from a health and safety perspective:
first, while the policy for managing EPBs is now contained in the Building Act, it appears that
territorial authorities have different approaches for managing EPBs. This is demonstrated
through the inconsistent use of the national EPB register; second, even if EPBs are identified,
the timeframes for addressing critical structural weaknesses mean that most of the health andsafety risks are borne by employers and workers; third, there appears to be no or ineffective
oversight of territorial authorities’ implementation of their EPB obligations under the Building
Act; fourth, buildings which have an NBS rating of more than 34 per cent may, nonetheless,pose significant life-safety risks. These buildings are not identified by territorial authorities
and there are no requirements for seismic works to be carried out; fifth, NBS assessments focus
on primary structural elements but secondary elements such as in-ceiling building services may
have no impact on NBS assessments; sixth, there appears to be no process designated for themoderation of conflicting assessments by engineers; seventh, there needs to be much greater
clarity regarding the roles of WorkSafe, the Department of Building and Housing within MBIE,
territorial authorities, employers and workers; eighth, there needs to be one agency who takes
the lead and co-ordinates the implementation nationally of the implementation of all EPB
programmes, including the national EPB register; and finally, there should be a database for
capturing the institutional knowledge and expertise contained in engineering reports so that
territorial authorities are not left to reinvent the wheel whenever a new catastrophe strikes.
In order to make the regime more responsive and coherent, I strongly recommend that an
independent panel of engineers should play a role in: peer reviewing, on a random basis, ISAs
and DSAs carried out for EPB purposes; carrying out ISAs in circumstances where an employer
or a health and safety committee raises concerns which are not addressed by a building owner;and carrying out random audits of EPB programmes being implemented by territorial
authorities.
Construction industry participants should be able to make protected disclosures on an
anonymous basis without suffering any adverse consequences so that authorities and agencies
can identify buildings which present real risks to life-safety. There should be increased31

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 18-32
recognition that territorial authorities and MBIE have overlapping duties with regard to healthand safety risks posed by unsafe structures. WorkSafe should play a much more active role inmonitoring health and safety risks posed by unsafe structures, especially where structures havenot been identified as being earthquake-prone.
The WorkSafe Position statement should be urgently reviewed in light of the conclusions of
the Pike River Royal Commission, the Canterbury Earthquake Royal Commission and theReport of the Independent Taskforce.
Currently, there is no korowai whakaruruhau for unsafe structures. A plethora of risks forpeople in their workplaces relating to unsafe structures have not even been identified, let alone
addressed. Our korowai must be woven with much greater care if we are to improve our poor
performance in workplace health and safety in this area. There is an acute lack of both topdown and bottom-up leadership. The current EPB regime seems set to fail to prevent loss oflife and serious harm to employers, employees and other occupiers of buildings.
The key elements for delivering a culture of workplace safety with regard to buildings andother structures are not present and an urgent change in approach is required. In the words ofthe Independent Taskforce, ’she most clearly is not alright’.

32New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 33-45

Resolving Workplace “Bullying”
DAVID G BECK*
Introduction
This paper provides a brief definitional overview of the current law on what is popularly known as the
problem of workplace bullying, and comments on how to avoid and/or resolve matters from apractising employment lawyer’s perspective confronted with finding an adversarial legal solution towhat is often a breakdown in workplace communication.
Bullying is a term that, I think, is particularly unhelpful (with its stark connotation of abuser andvictim). It is difficult to avoid the term, given its common usage and its evident descriptive force, but
the breadth of behaviours it describes often makes the term unnecessarily inflammatory. Although, DrJohn Clarke, author of Working with Monsters, archly, suggests that bullying is a more helpful
definition to calling someone a workplace psychopath: 1
Although it could be deemed spin, when responding to a claim of bullying, framing theissue in less negative terms may produce a better resolution. I recommend a focus on the
behaviors in dispute (which are often mutual) and the use of terms such as: you have madean allegation of “unprofessional behavior” or that you have raised an allegation of“negative interaction”. However, for this analysis I will adopt the in-vogue term bullying.

Definitional Issues
Unlike sexual or racial harassment, which are specifically prohibited under both employment andhuman rights legislation2 (and ironically often involve some form of bullying), there is no precise
legislative definition or specific statutory prohibition governing workplace bullying or a developed
Employment Court legal test.3
The Employment Relations Act (ERA) does not define bullying or distinguish it from personalharassment. It is highly contextual (fact based) and is often subtle and insidiously undertaken. This isso, despite both bullying and harassment involving behaviour that is unwelcome or offensive andwhich is often causative of distress or detriment. Whilst the two concepts are similar and often overlap,
it is vital to carefully distinguish between the two. Harassment may be a one-off incident, but adistinguishing feature of bullying is it manifests as a persistent behaviour pattern. Opportunities forwidespread bullying or digital harassment are now evident with the negative use of social media.
There is also a well-developed myth that workplace bullying has been recently discovered by the media
and workplace commentators. It would be safe to say that, in New Zealand at least, since thedevelopment of “constructive” dismissal as a concept to resolve an unwilling resignation,4 there have*Partner at SB Law, incorporating R A Fraser & Associates.
John Clarke, Working with Monsters February 2002, Random House, Australia.
2
See sections 108/109 Employment Relations Act 2000 and sections 62/63 Human Rights Act 1993.
3
Contrast this with Sweden for example where well-developed legislation governing bullying and workplace harassment
exists. For a brief global comparison see Diana Ayling, “Defining Workplace Harassment: Who Is the Bully” (2002) Vol.1
No 1 NZJABR. 1.
4
See New Zealand Court of Appeal’s classic formulation of three categories of employer culpable constructive dismissal
1

33

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 33-45
been cases involving bullying or harassment for a significant period, but arguably not on a scale seenin the last decade. However, no research of any great depth is available to support this view.5
Bradbury and Hutchinson6 suggest that Australian public-sector employers appear more prone toworkplace bullying, stemming from high levels of organisational change, political interference,
shifting performance expectations and vague goal settings. Recent studies, including by the New
Zealand Public Service Association (NZPSA) and the New Zealand State Services Commission, reporthigh levels of workplace bullying being at issue.7 A recent Victoria University student research project,however, notes that few complaints in the public service are upheld and are generally catagorised by
Human Resources practitioners as performance management, relationship or behavioural issues. The
latter study cites data from 12 public service departments, finding 72 per cent of formal bullying
complaints (111) received between 2010 and 2016 were found to be unsubstantiated.8
Regardless, there is constant frenetic media attention on the issue and emotive language surrounding
such. An example of this, seen in a newspaper piece of hyperbole describing potential bullies,
guaranteed to strike fear into the heart of any employer and have employment lawyers salivating, was:Bunny Boilers Heat up Workplace.9
In less colourful terms, Einerson and McCarthy have suggested that:10…all those repeated unreasonable and inappropriate actions and practices that are
directed to one or more workers, which are unwanted by the victim, which may be donedeliberately or unconsciously, but do cause humiliation, offence and distress, and that
may interfere with job performance, and/or cause an unpleasant working environment.
In Sweden, pioneers of workplace harassment legal solutions, the National Board of Occupational
Safety and Health neatly defines bullying as “…recurrent, reprehensible or distinctly negative actions
which are directed against individual employees in an offensive manner and can result in those
employees being placed outside the workplace community”11 or to translate et Sverige:återkommande, varvid förkastliga eller negativt präglade handlingar som riktas mot enskilda
arbetstagare på ett kränkande sätt och kan leda till att dessa placeras utanför arbetsgemenskapen.
In a New Zealand context and much cited 2005 case, Evans v Gen-I Limited, the Employment Relations
situations (resign or be dismissed, course of conduct with dominant purpose of coercing employee to resign or employer
breach of duty leading to a resignation) in Auckland Shop Employees IUOW v Woolworths (NZ) Ltd [1985] ACJ 963 andAuckland Electric Power Board v Auckland Local Authorities Officers Union [1994] 1 ERNZ 168.
5
A Department of Labour Report, “Personal Grievances conducted at the Department of Labour”, June 2007, surveying
31 mediators for disputes in on month (17 July-18 August 2006), detailed a category of 14.7 per cent of disputes in a
miscellaneous category which included bullying. However, 15.3 per cent of cases were described as constructive
dismissals which often include an element of harassment that has led to a dismissal.
6
Joanne Bradbury and Marie Hutchinson (2015), vol 2, no 1 “Workplace Bullying: Modelling Construct Validity in an
Australian Public-Sector Workforce”, Journal of Empirical Studies, 1-16,
7
NZ State Services Commission “Integrity and Conduct Survey 2013” (19 August 2014)<http://www.ssc.govt.nz/integrity-and-conduct-survey-2013-report>; G Plimmer, & CantalC (2016), “Bullying and Sexual
Harassment in New Zealand Workplaces”, Centre for Labour, Employment and Work, Wellington, New Zealand; Geoff
Plimmer, Jessie Wilson, J, Jane Bryson, Stephen Blumenfeld, Noelle Donnelly, and Bill Ryan, (2013) “Workplace
Dynamics in New Zealand Public Services”, A survey prepared for NZ Public Service Association, Wellington.
8
Hamish Crimp, “Effective Prevention of Public Sector Bullying: Are we there yet?” Victoria University Centre forLabour Employment and Work (New Zealand, 4 September 2017) at 1
9“Bunny Boilers Heat up Workplace” The Press, (Christchurch, November 19-20, 2005).
10
Evelyn M Field, “Bully Blocking”, < http://www.bullying.com.au/>
11
Diana Ayling“Defining Workplace Harassment: Who Is The Bully?” (2002) Vol.1 No 1 NZJABR. 1
34

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 33-45
Authority (Gen-I) adopted a very useful definition of bullying (see also Isaac v Chief Executive of the
Ministry of Social Development and Kneebone v Schizophrenia Fellowship Waikato Incorporated)as:12…something that someone repeatedly does or says to gain power and dominance overanother, including any action or implied action, such as threats, intended to cause fearand distress. The behaviour must be repeated on more than one occasion and there
must be evidence that those involved intended or felt fear.
Further in Gen-I the member cautioned that: 13
All behaviour needs to be looked at in the social context in which it occurs and the
motivation for the behaviour is also relevant. A vulnerable person may perceive
criticism of his or her work as bullying, regardless of how the criticism is couched.
On the latter point, one must add that bullying must include some element of unreasonable orunjustified behaviour with the purpose of upsetting another person, which can take many forms. It
does not include raising reasonable or justified concerns about work performance. As Thomas notes“[p]roblems arising from conflicting personalities or a poor management style, are different from aperson intentionally misusing power to intimidate another.”14
As suggested above, definition is problematic – for example: has bullying got to be proven as
intentional and confined to disputes between individuals, or can it also occur due to the perceived
negative culture of an organisation that may value or practise a confrontational or robust management
approach and, does the notion of “power imbalance” come into play?
The ERA member in Kneebone surmised on individual motivation that: 15 “The common theme arisingfrom the literature … suggests a bully has a desire to exert control over others, usually demonstrates acomplete lack of understanding for other people’s feelings and uses intimidating behavior.”
In addition to “vertical” or hierarchical bullying (which can occasionally work both ways withsubordinates bullying managers), bullying by peers or “horizontal” bullying is not uncommon and thelatter can prove significantly difficult to manage.

WorkSafe New Zealand/MBIE Guidelines-an Answer?’
In response to both emerging bullying claims and a focus upon health and safety, WorkSafe New
Zealand (WorkSafe) via the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) issued
guidelines, in 2014,16 drawing largely on similar material published by Safe Work Australia (SWA).17
12

Evans v Gen-I Limited, NZERA Auckland AA 333/05, 29 August 2005; This definition was drawn from Crime andJustice, Vol 17 Chicago: University of Chicago Press 1993 and later adopted in Isaac v Chief Executive of the Ministry ofSocial Development NZERA Auckland AA200/08, 5 June 2008 and Kneebone v Schizophrenia Fellowship Waikato Inc
NZERA Auckland AA31/07, 13 February 2007.
13
Evans v Gen-I Limited, NZERA Auckland AA 333/05, 29 August 2005.
14
Thomas, C, “Workplace Bullying” [ 2000] ELB 3, at 4.
15
Kneebone v Schizophrenia Fellowship Waikato Inc ERA Auckland AA31/07, 13 February 2007, at [7].
16
WorkSafe New Zealand and Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment: Bullying-Preventing and responding toworkplace bullying (9 February 2014) <www.worksafe.govt.nz>.
17Work Safe Australia, “Guide for Preventing and Responding to Workplace Bullying and Dealing with Workplace
Bullying – a worker’s guide” (May 2016) Work SafeAustralia <www.wsa.gov.au>.
35

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 33-45

These guidelines are the first comprehensive attempt by a key government agency to comprehensively
define the concept of what bullying entails (and what it is not). Although lengthy, they contain very
useful practical advice on how employers and employees should resolve disputed matters at both theinformal and formal level.
The question is, if this is a persuasive “Bullying Bible”, prepared in part by a key government
enforcement agency, how does it sit with established legal authorities, and will WorkSafe use it for
definitional purposes in any potential prosecution under the recently enacted Health and Safety at
Work Act 2015 (HSE Act). To date, no such investigations/prosecutions have occurred.
Some brief searches of 2015/16 ERA decisions reveal that the Authority is sometimes using the
WorkSafe guidelines as an aid, but not as a definitive legal test. Various approaches are used to assess
the nature and extent of bullying/harassment situations. These range from comments that “bullying isdifficult to define and prove” to use of a more prescriptive test or reference to “a useful definition in
the WorkSafe 2014 best practice guidelines”18 or “[t]he actions or omission complained of are, thefailure to provide a safe workplace and the adequacy of the investigation.”19 Further, one Authority
member suggested that the ordinary meaning of the term bullying be used from a High Court
defamation case20, including three elements: 21(1) It involves unreasonable and persistent conduct by one person against another.
(2) The conduct in question is unwarranted and harmful to the recipient.
(3) The recipient of the conduct lacks the ability to defend him or herself, possibly because of theirlower status or making in the workplace environment where the conduct takes place.
A problem is that legal practitioners already perceive a divergence between established case law and
the WorkSafe guidelines regarding whether the ‘intention’ of the perpetrator of bullying acts must be
established, and the lack of specificity of what degree of harm bullying causes. There is also theinclusion of an ill-defined category of ‘institutional bullying’.22
The WorkSafe guidelines, in making no explicit definitional reference to the motivation of theperpetrator, arguably, adopt a wider view than existing case law.
A different perspective is that the existing ’disadvantage’ claim, s103(1)(b) ERA, allows an action
where a single rather than repeated event causes the worker detriment, and the real inquiry is, then, an
objective test of whether the employer’s actions in resolving matters are reasonable in all thecircumstances.
Are conflicting views, however, overstating the matter? The WorkSafe guidelines framing of whatbullying could be is arguably just a threshold approach to determine when an employer should
potentially embark upon an investigation. WorkSafe usefully identify three elements: 23
Beckingsale v Canterbury District Health Board [2015] NZERA Christchurch 163, at [141] – [142].
Ngahooro v Southland YMCA Education Limited [2016] NZERA Christchurch 105, at [105].
20
Newton and Dunn v Leov and Leov [2017] NZHC 2083, at [6].
21
Lee v GR & S Dyson Limited [2017] NZERA, Auckland 273, at [80].
22Hornsby-Geluk and Webby, “Workplace Bullying – new guidelines”, NZLS CLE Ltd seminar booklet September 2014;
Geoff Davenport, “Bullying and WorkSafe’s Guidelines – valuable but only part of the puzzle” [2017] 1 ELB 4.
23
WorkSafe New Zealand and Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment “Bullying — Preventing and responding
to workplace bullying” (March 2017) < https://worksafe.govt.nz/>
18
19

36

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 33-45

 repeated and unreasonable behaviour; directed towards a worker or a group of workers;
 that can lead to physical or psychological harm.
One could, however, contend that using the phrase ‘directed towards’ implies a conscious andintentional act. Further, it is difficult to precisely define harm, as the degree of harm is highly
contextual and must be carefully assessed, as ultimately, should the Court be involved, it becomes anevidential issue, ideally requiring expert medical opinion.
The WorkSafe guidelines do give useful clarity – stating that:24
A “reasonable person” standard is to be applied to whether the behavior is “unreasonable”.



Repeated behaviour is behaviour that is persistent, even if it involves a range of actions over
time.



Institutional bullying (where a workplace practices, vision, culture, policies or procedures
allow offensive or stress-causing behaviours to occur without concern for the consequence) isa potentially actionable form of bullying.

Out of work behaviour (e.g. use of social media) can constitute bullying and, if so, will require
investigation by an employer.



Formal investigations into bullying claims should be undertaken by external, unbiased,
qualified and knowledgeable investigators, rather than handled internally.

Potential for a Collective Approach
Aside from unions being key players in the prevention and management of workplace bullying andbeing used as ‘intermediaries’ in such disputes, ‘institutional bullying’ (rarely exposed, apart from a
few case references to a “toxic” workplace),25 opens space for both a potential WorkSafe investigationand potential for a collective response that unions may embrace as both an organising tool and/or legal
strategy (given WorkSafe New Zealand has no exclusive jurisdiction on such prosecutions).
My observation is that New Zealand unions have, in the past, been curiously reluctant to link industrial
and legal strategies. The recent care-workers’ pay equity settlement is a shining example of how suchcan be successfully approached via litigation whilst being allied to a strong collective campaign
strategy.
An intriguing development will be whether company directors can be drawn into such disputes interms of liability under Part 2 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, if they are willfully blind or
actively condone bullying management cultures. Are directors of companies that hold strong anti24

Ibid
In Christopher Talbot v Coriglade Limited T/A Geeks on Wheels [2016] NZERA Wellington 142 Member M Loftus
opted for: “The plain dictionary meaning of the word hostile is antagonistic or unfriendly.”
25

37

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 33-45
union views capable of being deemed bullies?26
Further, could such claims extend to the setting of unreasonable productivity targets, intrusive
workplace surveillance practices or blurred boundaries between work and home life in an ever socalled ‘connected’ workplace.
In summary, innovative litigation possibilities may have been unwittingly created to include potential
class actions on bullying claims.

Legal Consequences
Organisations failing to provide an emotionally secure and safe working environment, or not properly
investigating bullying claims (under employment and health and safety legislation)27 are vulnerable tocostly legal action from disgruntled employees. The statutes that could be invoked include:









Employment Relations Act 2000
Health and Safety at Work Act 2015
Protected Disclosures Act 2000
Human Rights Act 1993
Harassment Act 1997
Education Act 1989
Privacy Act 1993 andHarmful Digital Communications Act 2015.

There is evidence that individual workers are using litigation to remedy employer inaction. The
writer’s brief review of New Zealand employment decisions certainly identified a correlation between
media interest in bullying, the publication of a popular expose book, the emergence of support
websites/phone helplines28 and the rise of litigation. Such litigation appears to have mushroomed fromaround 2002 when a well-publicised amendment to health and safety legislation broadened thedefinition of a workplace hazard to include “a situation where a person’s behavior may be an actualor potential cause or source of harm to the person or another person.”29
Unfortunately, litigation usually follows an employee’s resignation (typically in the form of aconstructive dismissal claim), and by this point matters are irretrievable. Prior to this, if left unattended,
workplace bullying creates negative morale, it breeds destructive factionalism and, ultimately, it canlead to a less productive or dysfunctional workplace where, amongst other things, recruitment andretention are problematic. At worst, one commentator has suggested that bullying victims: 30

26

For example, Sir Peter Talley, who made a 2014 Parliamentary committee submission to changes in Health and Safety
legislation claiming they had been overly influenced by unions and his group of companies, has aggressively resisted
collective bargaining and union entry to plants, see Hutching, G “Affco chief exits after short spell” The
Press(Christchurch, 24 October 2017).
27
Section 6(a) and (d) Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 defines broad duty that all employers must take allpractical steps to provide and maintain for employees a safe working environment, and to ensure employees are not exposed
to hazards whilst at work.
28
Andrea Needham, Workplace Bullying – The Costly Business Secret (Penguin Books, New Zealand, 2003); phonehelpline 0800 ZERO BULLY and www.beyondbullying.co.nz.
29
Ibid.
30
Sigrid Hempelmann, Workplace Bullying [2003] 7 ELB, at 96.
38

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 33-45…often are afflicted with enormous psychological and physical problems, such as highstress levels, anxiety and sleep disturbances. Ill health, especially gastro-intestinal
diseases, severe tiredness and panic attacks are other and more serious consequences.
One German study found that 75% of all recipients of workplace bullying have a posttraumatic stress disorder. Sometimes workplace bullying even leads tosuicide…Further it is said that the longer the recipient must endure bullying conduct
the worse the effects become.
Most studies focus upon the impact on individuals and definitional issues make exact quantificationof the extent of the problem difficult to assess as much is self-reported. Whilst some may yawn andthink bullying may be just the new black, it is also evident that, unlike issues such as recruitment andretention, skills assessment or absenteeism, the costs and extent of bullying are less measurable.
One commentator suggests that the dearth in human resource management research (outside
psychological based studies) has not alerted senior managers to consider the issue of broader concern
in terms of tangible productivity costs, and that there is a tendency not to research poor managerial
performance. Further, most popular literature concentrates on victims rather than strategies managers
can adopt to avoid bullying flourishing in their workplaces.31 It has usefully, perhaps, been suggested
that turning the focus of research onto “the characteristics of bullies and bullying behavior...mayprovide better insight for policy-makers.”32

Individual Employee Liability?
An employment relationship is defined in the ERA as principally between an employer and employee;
and an employer is generally or ultimately vicariously liable for an employee’s acts. However,
Schofield suggests an employee may be jointly and severally liable with the employer. 33 Potential
avenues for prosecuting individuals exist under health and safety legislation taking the approach thata bully is not engaging in all practical steps to keep co-workers safe or under s132(2) Employment
Relations Act as an aiding and abetting action.
Resolution Strategies
Like all employment problems, a prophylactic approach is highly recommended. Creating a holistic
climate where bullying cannot flourish is clearly best practice approach, which is generally linked topromotion of workplace ethics/values, such as respect, tolerance and empathy (and by implication not
rewarding or tolerating bullying behavior or confusing it with firm management).
A ‘values’ approach should arguably work well in, for example, the Public Service/Health or
Education sectors where promotion of such is already endemic. There are simple measures that theprivate sector can easily adopt. It may be as easy as ensuring that open communication or constructive
criticism is valued rather than discouraged. Other measures to improve workplace culture include:

Ongoing monitoring of a workplace climate; this is a key to identifying negative trends using
appropriate surveys, focus groups or carefully facilitated discussions to gain feedback andcrucially devise measures to get meaningful information on the performance of managers or

Dianna J Kelly, “Reviewing Workplace Bullying: Strengthening Approaches to Complex Phenomenon”, (2005) Journalof Occupational Health and Safety-Australia and New Zealand, 21 (6), 551-564.
32
Ibid.
33
Simon Schofield “The Workplace Bully” [2015] 2 ELB 18.
31

39

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 33-45
just to determine whether a healthy and open climate exists and what makes it so.
Placing a “training” premium on encouraging people to develop good interpersonal skills,
ensuring managers have well-developed dispute resolution skills that are gained from bothpractical experience and training opportunities. Sit in with managers and watch how they
resolve conflict, then debrief and deconstruct with them on what strategies worked and what
failed.



Do not neglect encouraging people to resolve interpersonal conflict and ensure training
opportunities address communication issues, such as constructive criticism, assertiveness,
negotiation skills and where appropriate, anger management.

Pro-active training of both managers and staff on their rights and responsibilities

Be aware that certain staff may be vulnerable and require additional assistance to cope withbullying – they may lack the skills to respond, due to previous negative workplace experiences
or life events (remember bullying, be it domestic or school bullying, is common in thecommunity).



Be sceptical and inquisitive; avoid simply blaming victims as being too sensitive or, on theother end of the spectrum, unquestionably accepting victim complaints.



Recognise that those subjected to complaints may also be vulnerable.

Promote awareness of recognising and dealing with bullies.34

Make bullying (emphasise that it is unprofessional behavior) a specific disciplinary or
misconduct issue in your employment agreement or code of conduct.35

Professionally, promote bullying as being a breach of ethical behavior or the expressedcompany values.



Crucially, spend time on devising robust performance assessment and performance
management systems that are collaborative as many alleged bullying cases stem fromdissatisfaction with the limitations of assessment processes or performance management
strategies.

Ensure that, in any process, the provision of regular, constructive feedback and support andguidance precedes firmer management. Do not just leave feedback to an annual appraisal.

For managers, place greater emphasis when recruiting or training on successful people
management skills and subject managers to regular and safely conducted employee feedback
measures (not just anonymous surveys).

See for example Len Leritz, “Taking the Bull Out of The Bully”, in Ira G Asherman, The Negotiation Source Book
Second Edition (2001) Human Resource Development Pr ,at 359-365.
35
In New Zealand, education unions are insisting on such clauses, see for example Barnardos New Zealand/NZEI Te Riu
Roa Collective Employment Agreement which at clause 10.0 specifies “Harassment or Bullying by a staff member…will
not be tolerated and appropriate action will be taken to remedy any complaint”.
34

40

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 33-45
Zero Tolerance
There are significant problems with employers simply claiming they have a Zero Tolerance policy
approach to bullying as such grandstanding is hard to define or contextualise, and it leads to all typesof litigation problems – ranging from claims of lack of flexibility in penalties to employers making
themselves a sitting target if they fail to apply zero tolerance in a consistent or “zealous” fashion. It isa lazy and thoughtless approach that ignores the need to tackle the behaviors that create bullying.

What Maketh The Bully?
Setting aside Dr John Clarke’s views on workplace psychopaths, little research has been done tounderstand why people engage in bullying behaviors.
Policy Suggestions
From a legal perspective, extreme caution needs to occur in devising an integrated policy on how
complaints are handled and/or investigated; such should ideally include:

A clear and precise definition of what bullying is – the WorkSafe NZ guideline is a great
starting point but look wider; Ayling36, adopting a European Union agency definition, suggests
it should:
o
o
o
o
o

focus on unacceptable behaviour;
apply to a wide range of employees;
acknowledge health and safety as an issue;
impose a test of ’reasonableness’; andexplain key terms.

Other measures should include:36

An identified respected/trusted and approachable contact person trained to assist and encourage
people to resolve initial concerns (usually not someone from Human Resources).

A referral or employee assistance service to give support and/or counselling options (ideally aservice that is not just victim focussed).

Emphasis upon early resolution by the provision of a neutral facilitator to, where appropriate,utilise conciliation strategies and to, in some cases, determine whether the root of a problem isproperly described as bullying and if it has reached a threshold where further investigation isnecessary.

Openness to utilising an independent and neutral investigator should such be required. The
investigator should ideally be practically experienced in the psychology of bullying issues andwhilst, being a fact-finder (not a decision-maker), they should not be afraid of making
suggested recommendations for resolution, including wider workplace culture observations.

Diana Ayling “Defining Workplace Harassment: Who Is The Bully?” (2002) Vol.1 No 1 NZJABR. 1.
41

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 33-45
The contractual facility to suspend a person, subject to serious accusations, and/or theflexibility to re-deploy either the accused or complainant (noting the latter should not generally
be forced to re-locate).



The opportunity for both accuser and accused to have input into an investigation report.



A range of sanctions short of dismissal to deal with culpable bullies and flexible measures toresolve the aftermath of an investigation, such as transfers, conciliation, team-building,coaching, training opportunities and ongoing monitoring.

Is Mediation a Magic Bullet?
A cautionary word about the use of mediation – is it an appropriate tool to resolve bullying, per se,given it usually involves an abusive misuse of power? In general, I would not pressure an individualcomplainant to attend mediation before some work has been done to categorise how serious the issue
is. Arguably, an employer can only encourage rather than mandate the use of mediation.
Mediation is often suggested as a tool to re-integrate someone back into a team after an allegation has
been investigated, but a caution has to be that there is the potential for bullies to garner support fromtheir acolytes and gang up or mob a bullying target during a ‘confidential’ mediation session, or todump on that person their own stored up grievances, which may lack relevance or deflect from theideal focus being on tackling the bully’s style of management or lack of communication skills or basic
empathy.
The author, however, has observed a suitably skilled mediator or facilitator deployed to resolve abullying issue, particularly where the victims are a collective group. In addition, as many bullies failto have insight into the impact of their behaviour, a skilled mediator can assist in bringing theperpetrator around to the idea that something is amiss, or impressing upon the complainant that early
resolution is possible. This process can be achieved in a confidential manner, preserving the dignityof all parties. Care is required if a perpetrator of abuse is unwilling to accept criticism (in denial) or
combatively insists upon specific examples being laid out in an open fashion, or the complainant isunwilling to resolve matters.
Mediation works well if utilised early in a dispute, as trying to resolve factual disputes or formal
investigation prior to mediation often hardens attitudes or encourages disputation over past events.
Mediation is also useful after an investigation, if a finding is that work must be done on repairing
workplace relationships. For a useful discussion on mediation as a problem resolution mechanism see
Morris.37
Problems can occur where a mediator or employer initially gathers information and perhaps conceals
the identity of complainants or proceeds on hearsay. Ultimately, an alleged bully may be facing
disciplinary proceedings, so it is essential that procedural fairness requirements are carefully adhered
to.
Mediation or facilitation should be used sparingly as a useful precursor to a formal investigation but
always get prior buy in from all parties, and ensure that the mediator is crystal clear about what
Grant Morris, “Eclecticism vs. Purity Mediation Styles used in New Zealand Employment Disputes”, (2015) 33(2)Conflict Resolution Quarterly 203-227.
37

42

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 33-45
resolution techniques they will utilise (preferably get all parties to sign a prior agreement, including
reporting provisions). Consider using practitioners of Transformative Mediation, as sometimes
mediation is aimed primarily at conflict settlement rather than conflict resolution. Sadly, given thecurrent adversarial nature of dispute resolution and the lack of skilled practitioners, other solutions
should be considered. MBIE mediators tend to be overwhelmed with dispute resolution work and,correspondently, wait time for mediation is a barrier to quick a resolution, and specialised private
mediation can be costly.
Conducting an Investigation
Should the prophylactic approach fail, and you are faced with a complaint, it is essential to consider
an initial investigation at the earliest opportunity to guide what intervention strategy is appropriate.
In a 2016 ERA case, Anngow v Bed Bath & Beyond NZ Limited that deemed the employer as having
failed to properly investigate a complaint (and finding an unjustified action causing disadvantage), theAuthority member, Peter van Keulen, outlines a very useful contextual and practical guidance on
essential steps for an investigation, noting first that the statutory good faith duty “…requires morefrom an employer when investigating a serious complaint regarding bullying and harassment.” 38
If a more formal investigation proceeds, and a complaint is not evidently frivolous or vexatious, I
recommend a mutually agreed and suitably qualified external party, and there being agreed terms ofreference on the scope of such an investigation. Often, it is a costly investment, but it will nearly
always be worth it, and it best avoids litigation.
Managers investigating their peers or even those they supervise face the risk of claims for perceived
and actual bias. From a complainant’s perspective, an unbiased investigation is a signal that thecomplaint is being treated seriously and, if the concern is found groundless or amenable to anothersolution, it is generally more palatable if such an outcome is directed by a neutral party.
There was ongoing litigation where a large employer tried to impose three internal investigators that
became the subject of separate and costly legal challenges and dragged out the complaint for over a
year. The cost of litigation far outweighed the cost of engaging an experienced investigator at theoutset and the subsequent damage to workplace relations was incalculable.
Findings
In terms of dealing with inconclusive outcomes or mixed findings, it never ceases to amaze how some
employers, fearful of litigation, rather than call “a spade a spade”, find instead that a person must
address their style of communication, needs coaching or upskilling, but falls short of being defined asa bully or a perpetrator of unprofessional conduct. It is not, in my experience, unusual to find thatbullying has occurred in cases where the perpetrator may be popular or has faithful acolytes and thecomplainant is not universally respected – caution is often required in such situations and a skilled
neutral investigator may spot such trends.
A delightful non-sequitur was when an employer investigation, finding that no bullying had occurred,
but the manager complained of, was directed to engage a professional coach to “…assist her withperceived non-emotive interactions with others.” Unsurprisingly, in anticipation of the complainant’s
reaction, the employer also directed that the complainant be “…provided with professional anger
management intervention.”38

Anngow v Bed Bath & Beyond NZ Limited [2016] NZERA Christchurch 76, at [63] – [66].
43New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 33-45

Complainant’s Obligations
In a commonsense approach, most legal authorities have generally found that a failure to adequately
inform an employer of the existence of a problem or an identifiable hazard is fatal to a successful
bullying or constructive dismissal claim, but this is not an absolute rule (see below), as ignoring
explicit bullying where an employer has constructive knowledge of such may lead to liability.
The Employment Court has directed that “the obligation on an employee [who has been subjected toworkplace bullying] is to bring the concerns to the attention of the employer.”39 It is also not generally
adequate to raise a bullying issue then resign before the employer has had time to investigate andattempt to resolve matters.40
It is also vital that the behavior complained of is adequately described and placed in context – it is notenough for an employee to just say that they felt bullied by X. One example highlights a novel GP
diagnosis that a patient was absent from work due to “workplace bullying”!
Most employees opt to pursue “constructive” dismissal and/or disadvantage claims alleging they had
to resign because of ongoing bullying and/or their employer’s failure to resolve matters or that they
were not provided with a safe work environment. It is, thus, crucial that once a complaint is brought
to an employer’s attention, a careful and timely response happens to avoid workplace disruption andlitigation.
Employer Obligations
Once aware of a potential bullying situation (and this includes cases where the employer oughtreasonably to have been aware of the situation),41 an employer under health and safety legislation has
a duty to take all reasonable and practical steps – akin to a tortuous duty of taking reasonable care toprevent bullying and harassment.
The current approach of WorkSafe New Zealand to bullying is somewhat tentative, with an educative
rather than prosecutorial attitude being adopted, but it has progressed somewhat from it being merely
catogorised as amongst Psychosocial Issues, including excessive hours and stress under the previous
enforcement agency. 42
Again, unlike sexual harassment and the currently topical profile of the #MeToo awareness campaign,
where active deterrent is encouraged or seen almost as a positive duty to prevent repetition, 43 case law
has commented little yet on the employer’s duty to adopt initial preventative measures or actively
39

See McGowan v Nutype Accessories Limited [2003] 1 ERNZ 120 and Harbord v Waste Management Limited NZERAWA 30/05, 23 February 2005.
40
See for example Nicholl-Jones v The Loaded Hog Auckland Ltd Bar and Brewer, NZERA AA 171/03, 9 June 2003.
41
Section 2A Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992.
42
Ibid, but note that the NZ Labour Department did not pursue any prosecutions for workplace bullying, but has done sofor an issue of workplace stress (Department of Labour v Naldor & Biddle (Nelson) Ltd DC, Nelson CRN 04042500, 13
April 2005, Judge McKegg). See “Occupational Health Tools “Psychosocial Issues” <www.osh.govt.nz> Interestingly
material prior to 2002, including “A Guide for Employers and Employees on Dealing with Violence at Work”,
Occupational Health and Safety and Health Service, Department of Labour Wellington, January 1995, reprinted December
1997 which primarily had as a focus on external factors such as harassment from clients or customers.
43
See section 117 of Employment Relations Act which details requirement to carry out an investigation and put in placesteps to prevent repetition and see negative connotation placed upon employer’s failure to develop policies after a complaint
was identified in Mohi v Parts and Services Ltd NZERA, AA175/05, 11 May 2005.
44

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 33-45
promote policies to discourage bullying.
By analogy, in the education sector (pre-school through to tertiary sector), awareness of bullying ofstudents is widespread so the holistic approach to devising preventive strategies and monitoring
effectiveness of such is not a foreign discipline with similar principles applying to protect students.
However, a significant contextual factor in educational settings is also the potential for students or
indeed parents/caregivers to bully educators.

Conclusion
Sadly, we are currently stuck with the term bullying and all its negative connotations. The challenge
for all parties is to try and actively reframe the issue and focus upon tackling negative behaviours. This
involves adopting sound preventative strategies and new ways of resolving complaints/conflict.
Creating a positive workplace culture and having clear dispute resolution processes is the obvious
place to start. An adversarial legal process is the least useful resolution tool.
Finally, perhaps our cousins across the ditch have it right with terminology. The most colourful policy
response is at Arup Australasia Engineering where they have a No Dickheads policy and the sageadvice of Dale Paulson, a dry Aussie Human Resources researcher: 44 “Jerks generally cannot berehabilitated…It is best not to hire them in the first place…The next best thing is not to promote them!”

44

Fiona Smith “Show respect or be shown the door” The Press (Christchurch, June 28, 2008).

45

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 46-54

What if Voters Wanted a Less Flexible Labour Market?
SUSAN ROBSON*
Abstract
In the event of a public recognition of the connection between flexible labour markets, wage
stagnation and high social inequality ratios, an option for redress in government policy is the
re-collectivisation of employers and employees.
The implications for labour law traditions that emerged following the enactment of the
Employment Contracts Act (ECA) 1991 (and that were reinforced by the operation of the
Employment Relations Act (ERA) 2000) include dispute resolution mechanisms, currently(in New Zealand), fundamental to flexibility.
Analysis of the factors that influenced the transition from collectivist to individualist labour
relations suggests a means by which this transition might be reverse engineered. Returning
personal grievance resolution, the foundation of the ECA transition, to collectives will be
crucial to the success of any reverse transition.

Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to describe the role of conflict resolution mechanisms in labour
market flexibility1 and to discuss how changes to those mechanisms could facilitate a morepluralist2 approach to labour relations. Key to the success of the flexibility goal sought by the*

PhD Otago University.
The terms labour market flexibility and freedom at work were adopted by lobbyists for dismissal-at-willpolicies, perhaps because these terms concealed what the term could not: see Penelope Brook, Freedom at
Work, The Case for Reforming Labour Law in New Zealand, (Oxford University Press, Auckland, 1990); For
them, flexibility required the abolition of the award system of wage fixing, the exchange of collective forindividual bargaining, and barriers of access to dispute resolution as the means of increasing labour
productivity. An alternative characterisation of flexibility focussed on its absolute freedom of action for
management and the ensuing loss of rights and protections for employees: see John Deeks, “New Tracks, Old
Maps: Continuity and Change in New Zealand Labour Relations 1984–1990” (1990) 1 NZJIR 15 at 99–116;
The freedoms for management changed approaches to work organisation, with increasing recourse to nonstandard employment arrangements, such as part-time, fixed-term, temporary and casual work that facilitatedboth numerical and contractual flexibility for employers, an enhanced capacity to dispense with staff, and adiminished role for work-task capacity in employees in favour of attitudinal tropes like loyalty and commitment
to the employer: Jane Bryson, Administering Workplace Relationships: From IR to HR in Gordon Anderson(ed) Transforming Workplace Relations in New Zealand 1976-2016, (Victoria University Press, Wellington,2017) at 63; Flexibility for employees has meant that average working hours for New Zealanders have increased
by 20 per cent since the 1970s, and recognition of overtime in penal rates has all but disappeared in the private
sector: Stephen Blumentheld and Noelle Donnelly, Collective Bargaining Across Four Decades: Lessons from
CLEW’s Collective Agreement Database, in Gordon Anderson (ed) Transforming Workplace Relations in New
Zealand 1976-2016, (Victoria University Press, Wellington, 2017).
2
The terms unitarism and pluralism describe ways of thinking about labour relations: unitarism relies on an
acceptance of managerial authority and prerogatives and sees conflict as pathological; pluralism accepts the factof difference between the sectoral groups that are stakeholders in the industrial system of a state, so conflict is
accepted as inevitable. The characterisation of the ECA as “abolishing the pre-existing pluralistic industrial
relations system that provided for a high degree of joint regulation of working conditions and replaced it with
1

46

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 46-54
newly elected National Government in 1990 was the structure of the dispute resolution
system introduced by the Employment Contracts Act 1991 (ECA) and the way that system
has operated since then.
The dispute resolution institutions established by the ECA, the Employment Tribunal and
Employment Court, replaced the stakeholder dominated system of resolving individual
claims (Grievance Committees) with the apparently neutral structure of the civil court
system, perceived then as either an appropriate barrier to access to grievance resolution or asa mechanism to ensure an orderly transition from collectivist (pluralist) to individualist(unitarist) approaches to labour relations.3 The Tribunal (to which much of the Labour
Court’s jurisdiction was transferred) offered entry-level adjudication and mediation asalternative modes of resolution of choice for all disputes and grievances. It was quickly
dominated by dismissal grievances, lawyers as representatives and arbitration as their choiceof mode of resolution. Delayed resolution became endemic.
The policy decision to modify, rather than replace this system during the formulation of the
Employment Relations Act 2000 (ERA), reinforced the ECA flexibility goal and undermined
the ERA’s (apparently different) aims. Left intact was the institutional structure, claim-type
and personnel of the ECA. This had two major effects. It underscored the dependence of theflexibility goal on this triumvirate and ensured flexibility’s domination of ERA policy,
research and legislative amendment, successfully diverting policy attention from outcomes toprocess.
Discussion of the role of conflict resolution mechanisms will focus on two elements:
workplace systems and the (state-funded) institutional system. A description of each will
form a basis for policy suggestions for change. This paper anticipates, but does not discuss,changes to the role of the state, in terms of the following prescription:
Today, the challenges [for labour relations] come from globalisation and the increasing use oftechnology and artificial intelligence in the workplace. The growth of dependent andindependent contractor arrangements to avoid the legal incidents attached to the employment
contract is also likely to prove a greater challenge to devising a regulatory framework thatreflects both the reality of the labour market and the rights of individual employees.
Reliance on the notion of flexibility or traditional collective bargaining techniques is unlikely
to provide an adequate response to either of these challenges. It may be that the time hascome for a fundamental rethinking of the values and principles that need to underlie a new
regulatory framework. A return to the idea of a public interest as opposed to a sector interest
to be incorporated into such a regulatory framework may be worth consideration.4

one of employer dominated, individualised, regulation of the employment relationship” illustrates the practicalapplication of these terms: Gordon Anderson, The Capability Approach and the Legal Regulation of
Employment: A Comment on Deakin (2009) 34(1): New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 27 at 31.
3
Employment-at-will lobbyists in 1990 opposed the maintenance of a special jurisdiction for labour claims, but
Cabinet moderates led by the Minister of Labour, Hon W B Birch, regarded the co-option of incentives tocollectivise – rights of grievance and informal claim processes – as key to undermining unions and shaping
acceptance by potential union members of individual employment contracts: Susan Robson, Policy, Operations
and Outcomes in the New Zealand Employment Jurisdiction 1990-2008 (PhD, University of Otago, 2016).
4
Margaret Wilson, The Politics of Workplace Reform: 40 Years of Change, in Gordon Anderson (ed)Transforming Workplace Relations in New Zealand 1976-2016, (Victoria University Press, Wellington, 2017) at
59.

47

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 46-54

Workplace Remedy Systems after 1991
Union involvement in conflict resolution in workplaces diminished alongside union
membership after 1991, disrupting a resolution culture that relied on an informed collective
membership with early access to partial advice and assistance to resolve issues as they arose
in regularised, accessible workplace remedy systems. When asked about workplace disputes
a decade later, significant differences between employer and employee samples (2000 ineach) in their reports of dispute incidence and outcomes5 suggested an absence of uniformity
about, or common understanding of, remedy systems in workplaces, and differences between
unionised and non-unionised employees.6 This was consistent with other data indicating thatwritten procedures were more likely to be available in more unionised sectors, and unionised
employees were more likely to be aware of them. 7 Further research found that employees haddifficulty visualising dispute resolution as a process, but larger employers maintained a
process driven approach influenced by the ECA; employers viewed these processes as fair toboth parties (with a few perceiving it as biased in favour of employees) whilst high levels offrustration were articulated by employees about the lack of clear resolution of disputes,
delaying tactics and the difficulty of remaining in employment after raising a dispute.8
Employees were dissatisfied, generally, with dispute outcomes and employers believed the
majority of disputes were settled amicably. 9
By the end of the ECA era, the most common source of information for employees aboutproblem resolution in the workplace was their employer (with significant reductions in
confidence about its veracity arising from involvement in a dispute).10 For those whose
source of information and support was their union, satisfaction rates with workplace remedy
systems were significantly higher.11 When ERA policy makers attempted to replicate thisconnection, by conferring on the Department of Labour (DoL) and the Mediation Service(MS) information provision roles, they failed to recognise the complexity of the relationshipbetween information and satisfaction. Stakeholders consistently reported, of the ERA, that
nothing had changed from the ECA regime.12 Partiality of source of advice and assistanceappears to explain the difference in satisfaction rates between collectivised and individualised
employees. This suggests that mere provision (of information) is insufficient to establish

5

For example, the employee survey reported 273 disputes per 1000 employees and 20 per cent remaining intheir jobs following resolution of a dispute, but the employers reported a dispute rate of 22 per 1000 and 44 percent remaining in the job: ACNielsen Ltd for Department of Labour, Survey of Employment Disputes and
Disputes Resolution, November 2000.
6
Ibid: 61 per cent of all employees and 79 per cent of union members who had experienced a problem were
aware of written guidelines in the workplace for their resolution.
7
Waldegrave, Anderson, Wong, Evaluation of the Short-Term Impacts of the Employment Relations Act 2000,
Department of Labour, November 2003.
8
UMR Research Ltd for Employment Relations Service, The Process of Dispute Resolution – A qualitative
study amongst employees and employers, January 2002.
9
Comparison of employee satisfaction rates between the UMR 2002 survey and the Waldegrave (ERS) 2003
survey: UMR 57% dissatisfied with process and 49 per cent dissatisfied with outcome; ERS 65 per centdissatisfied with actions taken by employer to resolve dispute.
10
UMR Research, above n 8.
11
Waldgrave, et al, above n 7.
12
Waldgrave, et al, above n 7; this was also the view of Andrew Caisley, The law moves in mysterious ways,
and Ian McAndrew, Julie Morton and Alan Geare, The Employment Institutions, both in Rasmussen (ed)Employment Relationships: New Zealand’s Employment Relations Act, (Auckland University Press, Auckland,2004) 60, 99.

48

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 46-54
confidence in remedy systems if it does not incorporate partiality. 13 Partiality, in turn,appears to be dependent on a relationship of trust and confidence between seeker andprovider.14

Policy for Workplace Systems
Policy about the workplace, a major challenge to unitarism, given its potential to confront thehegemony of human resources management, requires a commitment to raise rates ofcollectivisation or a willingness to impose regulatory requirements of information provision,
employee representation, and remedy systems, if the need for ready access to partial advice
and assistance for the resolution of workplace problems as they occur is to be met:
While union involvement may be the most effective mechanism of voice, alternative
mechanisms, such as mandatory elected workplace delegates and representative committees,also allow for the expression of worker voice and provide a possible catalyst for union
involvement. What must be enshrined into law, however, is that effective participative andrepresentational structures within employing entities are a matter of right, a condition of
employing labour, and not a matter of employer benevolence.15
The increased collectivisation option would require changes to the current rules of access forunion officials and clarification of employer obligations of neutrality towards collectivised
employees and their representatives. This option has the advantage of strengthening an
information and remedy system that already exists in some sectors (e.g teaching and nursing
in the public sector). Its major disadvantage lies in the likely opposition of employers withnegative views of unions: in the research about disputing in the workplace, employers ofunionised employees (large employers) had a more positive view of union involvement in
disputes than non-unionised business employers.16
The regulatory option would require employee protections and training provision for elected
workplace representatives, and their active enforcement, particularly during beginningphases. This option caters for those employers actively resistant to the idea of union
involvement in their workplaces whilst establishing a transition phase for potentially higher
rates of union density, but poses problems for small businesses that would more easily beovercome by reliance on the collectivisation option.
These options are not mutually exclusive. The regulatory option’s capacity to facilitate
increased collectivisation rates suggests its use as a transitional, or fortifying strategy.

13

The provision of professional, accurate and partial information to parties which reflects and advocates their
particular interests.
14
Phillip de Wattignar to Department of Labour: Response to Green Paper on the Improvements to the
Employment Relationship Problem Resolution System, (undated, c 2008).
15
Gordon Anderson, Competing Visions and the Transformation of NZ Labour Law in Gordon Anderson (ed)Transforming Workplace Relations in New Zealand 1976-2016, (Victoria University Press, Wellington, 2017) at
207.
16
UMR Research, above n 8.

49

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 46-54

Institutional Resolution System after 1991
The domination of the employment jurisdiction by employer association and union advocateschanged with the extension of grievance rights to all employees, when it began to host two
different advocacy cultures, individualist (lawyers and employment advocates) andcollectivist. Their differences are reflected in workplace resolution rates and institutional
functioning. Higher rates of disputing and resolving in-house by the collectivised results inless need for institutional dispute resolution. The opposite occurs for those reliant on
individual representatives: lower rates of in-house disputing and resolving, longer durationand more costly disputes and greater need for institutional intervention.17
The explicit intentions of both statutes for the institutions – low-level informal resolution –represented attempts to replicate the tropes of collective advocacy. However, the absence ofstatutory guidance on dismissal grievances18 and diminishing stakeholder involvement intheir consideration shifted the focus away from the workplace into the courtroom, so thatgrievance resolution became more obviously rooted in the common law than prior to the
ECA. The result was a judicial development of the principles of justification for dismissal
that morphed into a preference for issues of process over those of substance, and thedominance of compensation as remedy for breach. Because justification demanded an
exclusive focus on the circumstances of the individuals engaged by the grievance it invited
further (similar but apparently different) claims and more refinement. Employers with theresources to do so developed their own rules and practices to guarantee compliance withprocess requirements, only to find that no matter how carefully crafted the rules, they
nevertheless remained the subject of intense legal and judicial examination. The cost of acontested dismissal is in this examination. Mediated or private settlements are incentivised if
the compensation sought or accepted is lower than this cost. In turn, confidential (mediated or
private) resolution of contested dismissals have shielded from the public gaze theimplications of simple repetition over a long period, a problem for researchers 19 and thus for
those sectors of the population negatively affected by the status quo. This phenomenon,
attributed as an explanation for both the sexual abuse by clergy of children within the Roman
Catholic Church and the 2015 Baltimore riots,20 has had two effects: it strengthened

17

Susan Robson, Policy, Operations and Outcomes in the New Zealand Employment Jurisdiction 1990-2008(PhD, University of Otago, 2016).
18
The Employment Contracts Act 1991, Part III Personal Grievances (ss 26-42) defines unjustifiable dismissal
as one of 5 types of personal grievance in s 27(1)(a) but is thereafter silent about the basis for such a claim. By
contrast, grievances based on discrimination (s 28), sexual harassment (ss 29, 35, 36) and duress (s 30) attract
detailed statutory grounds for claims.
19
Caroline Morris, An Investigation into Gender Bias in the Employment Institutions (1996) 21(1) New Zealand
Journal of Industrial Relations, 67, noted the problem for her research in the confidentiality of mediatedsettlements meant that a considerable proportion of all matters brought before the employment institutions were
unavailable for research scrutiny; Bernard Walker and R T Hamilton, Grievance Processes: Research, Rhetoricand Directions for New Zealand, (2009) 34(3), New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43 note that‘private’ justice inhibits the task of evaluating issues of justice and equity in the New Zealand context.
20
Tom McCarthy (dir) Spotlight, Universal Studios, 2015, portrayed the repetitious confidential settlement ofabuse complaints within the Roman Catholic Church in Boston, United States of America as contributing to thefailure to address and stop the abuse; Matt Taibbi, Why Baltimore Blew Up, Rolling Stone, 26 May 2015: “A
bad thing happens, but somehow nobody is guilty of anything – money just changes hands. … The game is set
up so the only real end for the victim of police abuse to pursue is a check from the government… For all thehundreds of millions of dollars paid out by cities to abuse victims, very little is actually done to discipline rogue
police officers…. The problem – of police almost never facing consequences – was the obvious subtext of theBaltimore riots.”

50

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 46-54
perceptions that employee rights were appropriately addressed and upheld; and has been themeans by which practices that affected collective interests could be ignored.21
Separated resolution modes (adjudication and mediation) have been a feature of both eras.
Similarity of outcome from reliance on mediation, settlements involving money transfers,
suggests that separate modes function as negotiation-persuasive. The trend during the ECA
era, increased reliance on mediation followed by rising rates of private settlement, has beenreflected in the ERA period. Mediation appears to perform, in terms of establishingprecedent or guides to settlement, the same function as adjudicative modes are said to have,but by different means. Mediation models the behavioural tropes that facilitate resolution,whilst adjudication establishes precedent for legal issues. The ubiquity of grievance claims
meant there was less need for a focus on legal issues than behavioural modelling. By thismeans, collective advocacy’s preferred resolution mode and reliance on negotiation skills
came to influence the behaviour of individualised advocates, but not their expectations ofinstitutional resolution: separate modes also minimise the impact of risk assessment deferralthat affects individualised grievants, and was a cause of the delays that beset the Tribunal;
deferral preserves the (advocate’s) business opportunity of asserting or resisting a claim;
mediation reduces the business risk in the presence of incentives to settle to avoid further
advocacy costs and the absence (at lawyer insistence) of constraints like the power ofadjudication in mediation; reliance on the cost of representation is incentivised as the meansof achieving or denying mediated outcomes.22
The Employment Court (EC) judiciary was divided by status and attitudes to adversarialism
from mediators and members of the Tribunal and Authority, and this difference wasmaintained over both eras. Whilst the Tribunal membership generally welcomed the policychanges of the ERA (and were keen to ensure they were implemented), the judiciary was
more closely associated with the views of the legal profession who opposed them. The EC’s
approaches to process issues following the Authority’s establishment23 and the loss of its
powers of review over entry-level adjudication24 sent an unequivocal message that the (ECA)
status quo on process should be maintained for the ERA, notwithstanding clear statutory
provision to the contrary. This appears to have influenced lawyers associated with
undermining mediator and Authority member confidence and commitment to the then new
regime.25
The position was exacerbated by the DoL’s failure to recognise that the success of ERA
policy initiatives to transfer control of proceedings from advocate to mediator/member was
likely to depend on the experience and authority of initial appointments to those roles. The
DoL’s priority was a more compliant resolution workforce. Its decision to engage mediatorswith mixed or limited experience of the employment jurisdiction meant that the MS wasvariably equipped to withstand the demands of adversarial advocacy, and ill-equipped toadopt a consistent approach to decision-making in the face of mediation failure. Mediator21

Robson, above n 17.
Ibid.
23
David v A.E Tilley [2001] ERNZ, 93; David v Employment Relations Authority [2001] ERNZ, 354; Metargemv Employment Relations Authority [2003] 2 ERNZ 186; Munro v Village Care New Plymouth Ltd [2004] 2
ERNZ 40.
24
Keys v Flight Centre [2005] ERNZ 471; Oldco PTI (NZ) v Houston [2006] ERNZ 221; Employment Relations
Authority v Rawlings [2008] ERNZ 26.
25
Robson, above n 17.
22

51

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 46-54
use of powers to utilise the statutorily mandated range of mediation styles, therefore,
atrophied. Lawyer preferences for the shuttle style of the ECA prevailed.26
Lawyer reaction to the use of the s 150 arbitrative power in mediation formed the basis of
DoL’s fears that it would undermine the policy desire for informality and flexibility of
mediation style by incentivising resort to legalist or formalist demands for rules of process.
The DoL took the view that arbitrative modes of problem resolution attracted those demands.
It now appears that resolution mode is irrelevant. The demand for rules of process (or the useof a resolution model that can be defined in terms of rules of process) appears to be an
incident of the provision of institutional resolution to which lawyers have rights ofrepresentation. This means that resolution models, dependent on flexibility or informality ofprocess that do not meet lawyer requirements of process, are more likely to change to meetlawyer expectations, than lawyer expectations alter to accommodate informality.27
For these reasons, the connection between selection of dispute resolution system and successin meeting employment policy objectives appears to be dependent on choice of institutional
structure and the type of advocacy culture it attracts. The greater labour market flexibility
sought by the ECA was achieved in part as the result of its alignment with conflict resolution
mechanisms modelled on the civil court structure and the legal profession. The ERA’s failure
to associate advocacy cultures and the institutions to which they were aligned with
employment policy objectives, and its reliance on institutional neutrals as a substitute for a
return to collectivist and protectionist approaches to labour issues ensured its core policy
goal, a rise of mended over ended employment relationships, never occurred.28

Policy for an institutional resolution structure
From 1973 to 1991, Grievance Committees, consisting of stakeholder representatives,
determined individual disputes. Access to this form of institutional resolution was restricted
to union members. A policy choice for facilitating higher rates of union membership is,therefore, a return to restricted access to institutional resolution, but this is impracticable inthe current labour environment. However, it is possible to conceive a resolution system
based on collective resolution values and practices and managed by stakeholder
representatives (the state, employers, employees and dependent contractors). There would bea different role or focus for institutional mediation, a diminished or extinguished need forseparate institutional low-level adjudication, and retention of the Employment Court. Such asystem would likely retain the MS but tweak its current powers, practices, data collection
obligations and claim outcomes:
Mediation powers
Existing powers to mediate could be augmented by an institutional power to offer advocacy
or negotiation services from relevant unions and employer associations to individualised
employers, employees and dependent contractors, if negotiation of an outcome was sought by
26

Ibid, see also Employment Relations Act 2000, s148A(2): This amendment in 2016 was necessary to protect
employees from negotiating away during mediation statutory entitlements like holiday pay and the minimum
wage, thus underlining the problem of mediator failure to attend to substantive (as distinct from process) issues
during mediation. This problem was also highlighted in 8i Corporation v Marino [2017] NZEmpC 69.
27
Ibid.
28
Ibid.

52

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 46-54
the parties, or appeared to facilitate a faster or more efficient process than mediation.
Incorporation of collective representatives in service provision might furthermore augment
MS powers (currently vested in the Authority) to facilitate collective bargaining.
Mediation practices
Arbitration under s 150 ERA is rarely sought by parties to mediation, nor is it offered.
Changes to the power to arbitrate would result in parties understanding at the outset of
institutional resolution that a mediator could decide the matters at issue in the event of a
failure to settle. Dissatisfaction with an arbitrated outcome, regardless of the collective statusof the dissatisfied party, would be the subject of consideration by collective representatives
who would decide whether the outcome should be further negotiated or referred to the EC.
Mediation personnel
The current practice of recruiting mediators who are not required to have workplace
resolution qualifications and/or experience would cease, in favour of those who do. If the
MS is to be managed by workplace stakeholders, the resolution workforce would likely comefrom within those ranks, having the connections or relationships of trust (skin in the game)necessary for establishing the authority or status that resolving workplace problems require.
Data Collection
Current confidentiality practices have rendered the substance of mediation claims opaque tooutsiders. An anonymised data collection system that itemised the employment issues andpractices subject to mediation and the mediated outcome would establish a source of
information for collective bargaining purposes and for labour relations research. Information
about dispute triggers and its analysis would then inform collective bargaining strategies andadvocacy education/training, given the likelihood of workplace systems as a subject ofcollective agreements.
Claim outcomes
Claim type and numbers will reflect the efficacy of workplace systems. The policy hope will
be for a reduction of claims, increased variation of claim substance, group claims (wherepractices affecting more than one employee can be the subject of negotiation and mediation)and the probable formation of compensation tables for dismissal grievances.
Representation
Individualised representatives could have rights of appearance before the EC but not at theMS. Grievants could retain the right to seek advice and private resolution assistance fromtheir representatives of choice, but if they require MS assistance they will be dependent on
the services offered there.
Employment Court
The strategic interests of collectives in litigation outcomes could establish a basis for ceding
to them exclusive responsibility for deciding which issues require litigation and which can be
resolved by other means. This would result in individuals having conditional access to the53

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 46-54
EC, so it would likely become a source of litigation in itself. An alternative approach would
retain the current jurisdiction over individual and collective claims, conditional upon priormediation, but with automatic rights of joinder or audience in respect of individual claims forcollectives who regard their memberships as potentially affected by the matters at issue.

Conclusion
Notwithstanding the major focus in this paper on the institutions, it can be argued that thegreater changes demanded by pluralism will be required of the workplace. Workplace
remedy systems or their absence either diminish or facilitate the need for institutions in the
resolution of individual disputes, so the closer policy attention is paid to that aspect ofconflict management, the less the need for complex institutional provision.
Much of the description of institutional functioning centred on the demands andconsequences of legal method. It raises the issue whether entry-level resolution should hostcompeting advocacy cultures. A collectivist advocacy culture aligns more closely withpluralist values. It reduces the legal method’s need for the Authority and establishes the MS
as a more appropriate recipient of Authority funding.29
The relatively minor changes required of the MS and the EC, thus, reflect the fact thatstatutory recognition of the advantages of collective approaches to resolution already exists.
The suggested restriction of representative access to the MS to collectives may, therefore,
liberate it to function as envisaged in 2000, particularly if changes to workplace systems
reduce the number of individual disputes requiring institutional assistance.

29

Institutional separation of mediation (MS) and adjudication (Authority) results in differences of cost to thestate. Notwithstanding that there is no difference in the problems they resolve, or in their remedies(compensation and costs) they produce different outcomes. The Authority’s membership constitutes 40-50 per
cent of the number of mediators but it investigates between 9 and 15% of the annual number of problems
mediated by the MS. In 2007, the Authority made 182 compensation and 148 costs orders (from 847 grievancedeterminations) totalling $1.836m. The cost to the public purse of achieving these money transfers totalled$6.03m: Robson, above n 17.

54

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-74

Labour Law and the Labour Market: A Case Study of Malaysia
JONATHAN SALE*
Introduction
According to the International Labour Organization (ILO):1 “…global economic integration
has caused many countries and sectors to face major challenges of…continuing high levels of
unemployment and poverty…and the growth of both unprotected work and the informal
economy…”
But the level of unemployment and size of informal sectors vary across countries over time.
For instance, the unemployment rate is around three per cent2 and non-agricultural employment
in the informal sector is about 11 per cent3 in Malaysia. On the other hand, the unemployment
rate is close to six per cent4 while the “informal sector employs between 61% and 70% of thetotal labour force”5 in neighbouring Indonesia.
By and large, labour laws developed in “both the common and civilian law systems” in thetwentieth century.6 In the case of Malaysia, might the outcomes described in the preceding
paragraph, among others, be explained through the ways its labour law and regulation havebeen framed and/or revised over time? Generally, is there a close relationship between the
country’s labour law and economy or variety of capitalism? Specifically, does its labour law
contribute to labour market formation,7 including relatively low levels of unemployment
overall, and employment in the informal sector in particular? Owing to its pre-colonial,colonial and post-colonial histories, might the ways by which Malaysia’s labour law andregulation have been framed and/or revised show legal pluralism, exogenous (e.g., common
law and civil law) and endogenous (e.g., “ethnic distribution”8) origins?
*

PhD candidate and Lecturer, Faculty of Business and Law, University of Newcastle, Australia. Email:jonathan.sale@newcastle.edu.au. This paper draws on a chapter of the author’s PhD thesis at The University of
Newcastle.
1
International Labour Organization Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization General
Conference, 97th Sess (2008) 5 <www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/--cabinet/documents/genericdocument/wcms_371208.pdf>.
2
Yves Boquet The Philippine Archipelago (Springer International Publishing AG, Cham (Switzerland), 2017) at
204. See Table 8.3 Unemployment in Southeast Asian countries, 2005–2014.
3
Department of Statistics Malaysia, Official Portal “Informal Sector Work Force Survey Report, Malaysia,
2015” (29 July 2016)<www.dosm.gov.my/v1/index.php?r=column/cthemeByCat&cat=158&bul_id=UUFsUEJnNGFhcDE1TndNUl
g4OEZCQT09&menu_id=U3VPMldoYUxzVzFaYmNkWXZteGduZz09>.
4
Boquet, above n 2.
5
Alexander Rothenberg, Arya Gaduh, Nicholas Burger, Charina Chazali, Indrasari Tjandraningsih, Rini
Radikun, Cole Sutera and Sarah Weilant “Rethinking Indonesia’s Informal Sector” (2016) 80 World
Development 96 at 96 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.11.005>.
6
Thomas Kohler “Comparative Labor Law: Some Reflections on the Way Ahead” (2003) 25(1) Comparative
Labor Law & Policy Journal 87 at 90-91.
7
See Sean Cooney and Richard Mitchell “What is labour law doing in East Asia?” in Sean Cooney, Tim
Lindsey, Richard Mitchell and Ying Zhu (eds) Law and Labour Market Regulation in East Asia (Routledge,
London, 2002) 246 at 259.
8
Anil Verma, Thomas Kochan and Russel Lansbury “Lessons from the Asian experience: A summary” in Anil
Verma, Thomas Kochan and Russel Lansbury (eds) Employment Relations in the Growing Asian Economies(Routledge, London, 1995) 336 at 345.

55

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73

This paper aims to provide some plausible answers to these questions through systems analysis
and case study of labour law and regulation in Malaysia and their links to the economy,
including the variety or varieties of capitalism, labour market formation and outcomes.
The paper is divided into six parts. The first section reviews some relevant literature anddevelops a systems framework for the case study. In the second section, the history anddevelopment of Malaysian labour law is briefly traced and some key provisions of the
Employment Act are discussed. From this historical account, the third section teases out
aspects of the context and political economy of the country’s labour law. The fourth sectiondelves into varieties of capitalism. Outcomes in terms of employment and gross domestic
product are tackled in the fifth section. In the last section, the paper concludes with an
examination of the links among labour law and regulation, varieties of capitalism, labour
market formation, and work creation, as well as some implications and challenges.

1. Literature review and framework for case study
There is a body of literature that seems to view laws as dichotomous variables. It tends torecognise a bifurcation between the two Western legal traditions of civil law and common law
in terms of mode of legal thinking or reasoning (deductive or inductive), sources of law(legislature or judiciary) and main actors (professors or judges).9 It argues that laws aretransplanted via colonisation and, therefore, legal origins are key to understanding varieties ofcapitalism; such that civil law, which favours allocations desired by the state, is likely tocorrespond to coordinated market economies that involve strategic interaction among actors,
while common law, which supports private market outcomes, is apt to be compatible to liberalmarket economies that are driven by competitive markets.10 It points out that the distinctions
between coordinated market economies and liberal market economies more or less match thedistinctions between civil law and common law.11
On the other hand, another body of literature seems to view laws as continuous variables. For
instance, Kohler (1998) juxtaposes “state-help” and “self-help” aspects of labour law.12 “Statehelp” conditions pertain to individual labour laws (protecting individual workers, “the weaker
party in the employment relationship”) while “self-help” terms refer to collective labour laws
(involving organised workers and “collective bargaining”).13 Across the common law-civil
law continuum of labour law systems, he distinguishes between the American common lawlabour law model that has strong “self-help” features and the German civil law-labour law type9

Martin Vranken Western Legal Traditions: A Comparison of Civil Law & Common Law (The Federation
Press, Sydney, 2015) at 12-14, 27-28.
10
Rafael La Porta, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes and Andrei Shleifer “The Economic Consequences of Legal
Origins” (2007) <http://ccl.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/Shleifer_Economic_Consequences_nov.pdf>; andPeter Hall and David Soskice “An Introduction to Varieties of Capitalism” (2001)<http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~phall/VofCIntro.pdf>
11
Simon Deakin “The Evidence-Based Case for Labour Regulation” (paper presented to Regulating Decent
Work Conference, Geneva, 8 July 2009)<http://www.ilo.org/legacy/english/protection/travail/pdf/rdwpaper_pl1a.pdf>
12
Thomas Kohler “The disintegration of labor law: some notes for a comparative study of legal transformation”(1998) 73(5) Notre Dame Law Review 1311 at 1318-1319, 1324; and Jonathan Sale “Harmonisation of ASEAN
labour laws for employment growth: The Philippines and Malaysia as case studies” (PhD Thesis, The Universityof Newcastle, ongoing) at ch 4.
13
Ibid.

56

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73
with its robust “state-help” characteristics.14
Within common law-labour law systems, Whelan (1982) differentiates the United Kingdom’squite thorough regulations concerning individual labour law and essentially laissez-faire,voluntarist approach to collective labour law from the American style that is somewhat sparsein terms of federal individual labour laws but fairly detailed as to auxiliary rules in collective
labour law.15
Duve (2014) explains entanglements in legal history and frames the problem in this manner:
how to “stop projecting…categories and concepts on to realities different from the ones thesecategories and concepts have emerged from?”16 He bemoans the excessive focus on Westernmodels (Eurocentrism) and posits that “…entangled situations do not offer the luxury of asingle point of departure.”17 He defines “entangled legal histories” as “complex intertwined
networks, with no beginning and no end, and a difficulty to fix their own point of departure”.18
Palmer (2007) posits the significance of the “factual approach” to mixed legal systems whichmeans verifying their “existence factually.”19 A mixed legal system involves “two or morelegal traditions, or parts thereof, operating within a single system.”20 “Mixed systems and legal
pluralism are closely associated with… colonial rule.”21 Is this the “norm rather than
exception”?22 Is this the “general pattern of legal development rather than historical
accident”?23
In this sense, laws and their origins, as well as varieties of capitalism, are variables occupying
loci or points along a continuum. At one end of the continuum might be civil law systems thathave coordinated market economies while at the opposite end could be common law systems
that are liberal market economies. In between these types are likely to be a whole gamut ofsystems that are endogenous in their origins, hybrids (having both common law and civil law
roots)24, Asian market economies (entailing networks and personal relationships25 andinvolving identification and solidarity among actors26) and trichotomies having “indigenous
14

Ibid.
Christopher Whelan “On Uses and Misuses of Comparative Labour Law: A Case Study” (1982) 45(3) The
Modern Law Review 285 at 297-300; and Sale, above n 12.
16
Thomas Duve “Entanglements in Legal History. Introductory Remarks” in Thomas Duve (ed) Entanglements
in Legal History: Conceptual Approaches, Global Perspectives on Legal History (Max Planck Institute forEuropean Legal History Open Access Publication, Frankfurt am Main, http://dx.doi.org/10.12946/gplh1; Max
Planck Institute for European Legal History Research Paper Series No. 2014-08, 2014) 3 at 7
<https://ssrn.com/abstract=2532916>.
17
Ibid 6-7.
18
Ibid 3, 6, 8.
19
Vernon Valentine Palmer “Mixed Legal Systems... and the Myth of Pure Laws” (2007) 67(4) Louisiana Law
Review 1205 at 1206-1207.
20
Ibid 1206-1207.
21
Ibid 1216.
22
Ibid 1218.
23
Ibid.
24
See Pacifico Agabin Mestizo: The Story of the Philippine Legal System (University of the Philippines Collegeof Law, Quezon City (Philippines), 2011) at 1.
25
See Nick Wailes, Jim Kitay and Russell Lansbury “Varieties of Capitalism, Corporate Governance and
Employment Relations Under Globalisation” in Shelley Marshall, Richard Mitchell and Ian Ramsay (eds)
Varieties of Capitalism, Corporate Governance and Employees (Melbourne University Press, Carlton (VIC),
2008) 19 at 33.
26
See Nobuyuki Yasuda “Law and Development from the Southeast Asian Perspective: Methodology, History
and Paradigm Change” in Christoph Antons (ed) Law and Development in East and Southeast Asia
(RoutledgeCurzon, London, 2003) 19 at 22, 37.
1557

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73
law,” “imported law” and “development law” elements (including their “operational concepts”“community,” “market” and “command,” respectively).27 After all, the “legal” and “non-legal”
spheres are not “entirely discrete ontological” spaces.28 Their boundaries, if any, arepermeable.
In this case study, “documents and records” are examined and the “actual” “words andlanguage” used in them are expressed where possible for “adherence to evidence” and writers’“meanings”, which means themes/subthemes are developed “from the ‘bottom-up’” via“inductive data analysis”.29 Systems analysis is also used to arrive at an understanding of
inputs to, processes and outputs/outcomes of the system, as well as the relationship of
outputs/outcomes to inputs and that of the system to its larger environment/context (Figure 1).
Labour law “constitutes a system” with its “vocabulary”, “concepts”, “rules”, “categories”, and“techniques” that are “linked to a view of the social order”.30 Relatedly, labour law systems“…reproduce ‘their own elements, structures, processes and boundaries…” and “…constructtheir own environment, and define their own identity.’”31
INPUTS
Labour Laws
Indicators:
History, Context, Political economy
Legal origins
Boundaries

PROCESSES
Varieties of capitalism
Indicators of:Competition,
Coordination/Collaboration, or
Identification/Solidarity
among actors

OUTPUTS/OUTCOMES
Employment growth/decline
Indicators:
Employment rates,
Unemployment rates, orUnderemployment rates

LARGER ENVIRONMENT/CONTEXT
Figure 1: Systems Analysis32

This research explores the relationship between labour laws (as indicated by their history,
context and political economy [as laws are products of human interaction33], legal origins, andboundaries) and employment growth or decline (as indicated by employment, unemployment
or underemployment rates), through the case of Malaysia.34 Varieties of capitalism (asindicated by modes of competition, coordination/collaboration, or identification/solidarity

27

Ibid 19, 20, 22-4, 42.
Pierre Legrand “European Legal Systems are not converging” (1996) 45(1) The International andComparative Law Quarterly 52 at 58.
29
See John Creswell Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (SAGE
Publications, Inc., California, 2007) at 38, 39, 73-76, 121; and see also Robert Yin Qualitative Research fromStart to Finish (Guilford Press, New York, 2011) at 15, 16-17, 18, 20, 21.
30
See Vranken, above n 9, at 9. Vranken cites David, R and Brierley, J.
31
See Cooney and Mitchell, above n 7, at 249. Cooney and Mitchell cite Gunther Teubner.
32
Sale, above n 12, at ch 1.
33
See Curtis Milhaupt and Katharina Pistor Law and Capitalism (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago,2008) at 6-8.
34
Sale, above n 12, at ch 1.
28

58

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73
among actors in Malaysia) are intervening processes.35 There are likely to be supranational
elements in the larger environment or context which might be influencing, and/or be influenced
by, the labour law system.36 In Malaysia, what has or have been the approach or approaches
over time? What has or have been the impact or impacts on work creation?

2. History and Development of Labour Law: A Brief Discussion“From very early in the Christian era there were trading ships plying between India and China,some of which touched at river mouths in the Malay Peninsula.”37 These traders’ reports
indicated “ample evidence of the existence of Malay Kingdoms in the north, notably in Kedahand Singgora and Ligor from a very early date” before “the 15th century”.38 Indeed, significant
interactions among these peoples had been going on even prior to Malaysia’s colonisation.
Therefore, it does not come as a surprise, for instance, that the “history of English law” inMalaysia “was one of accommodating the law to fit local circumstances and the so-called‘Mahometans, Hindoos, and Buddhists’, which loosely connoted the Malay, Indian andChinese populations, their religious communities and customs.”39 This suggests that plurality
in Malaysia’s legal system is linked to ethnic diversity within that system. And the “ethnic
distribution in Malaysian society…has influenced industrialization and human resource
development strategies.”40 The state’s role has been pervasive in this distribution. Moreover,there are “state-help” and “self-help” provisions in Malaysian labour law.
Colonised/controlled initially through Malacca (“the Malay Empire which had united the wholeof the Peninsula and the East Sumatran Kingdoms under a single overlord”) by the Portuguese(in 1511), the Dutch (in 1641) and later the British (first in 1795, next in 1808 and then in1825), though the British took control of Penang early on as well under the “Straits
Settlements”, the “Federation of Malaya” in 1956 was promised formal independence by“August 1957”.41 These foreign influences are discernible in the country’s labour law. But the
Malaysian state’s involvement has been ubiquitous, functioning in ways that have tended tofavour managerial prerogatives. While these might suggest “entangled legal histories”,42 thereis legal endemism as well in the form of labour rules having endogenous origins. And there has
been a range of market economies – Asian (implying networks and personal relationships),43
coordinated (involving strategic interaction of actors) and liberal (entailing market
competition).44

35

Ibid.
Ibid.
37
M.C. ff Sheppard Historic Malaya: An Outline History (Malayan Historical Society, n.d.) at 2.
38
Ibid 2-3.
39
Stephanie Po-yin Chung “Understanding ‘Chinese customs’: Sinchew rulings in the Straits Settlements, 1830s– 1870s” in Shaunnagh Dorsett and John McLaren (eds) Legal Histories of the British Empire: Laws,
engagements and legacies (Routledge, London, 2014) 141 at 142.
40
Verma, Kochan and Lansbury, above n 8.
41
Sheppard, above n 37, at 6-16. In page 15 Sheppard notes that “the Federation of Malaya Agreement was
signed in Kuala Lumpur on 21st January 1948, and came into force on 1st February of that year.” The“Federation of Malaya” is to be distinguished from the much earlier “Federated Malay States” that consisted ofPerak, Selangor, Negri Sembilan, and Pahang (see Sheppard, pages 14-15).
42
See Duve, above n 16.
43
See Wailes, Kitay and Lansbury, above n 25.
44
Ibid 32; and see also Hall and Soskice, above n 10.
3659

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73
2.1.

Pre-1940s up to 1980

The British had implemented “divide and rule policies” and relied on “Chinese and Indianlabour” in the course of “the colonial period.”45 Crinis and Parasuraman (2016) explain thatthe:46 “Chinese, Indian and Malay communities were corralled in certain sectors of theeconomy…The Malays remained in the subsistence economy, and the Chinese and Indian
population were employed in tin mining and rubber plantations, respectively.”
According to Ayadurai (1993), labour legislation in Malaysia:47…was first enacted over 120 years ago to regulate the employment ofimmigrant Chinese and Indian labour in the mines and on the plantations. It
was not until 1940 that laws were introduced to regulate trade unions andtrade disputes. By this time the immigrant labour force had formed the first
trade unions.
In 1948, the British colonial government declared a “State of Emergency” in Malaya following
the Malayan Communist Party’s reversion to armed struggle to attain political aims.48 This
paved the way for the compulsory registration of trade unions. 49 Those unregistered were
outlawed.50 This also effectively broke communist control over the labour movement,
crippling the latter in the process.51
In 1950, the Malayan Trades Union Congress was established.52 Five years later, theEmployment Act was enacted, but its implementation was held in abeyance until 1957 when
Malaya gained independence from the British.53 “Since independence…, Malaysia” had “beenruled by Barisan National, an inter-ethnic coalition dominated by the United Malays National
Organisation (UMNO)”,54 until the May 2018 general election in which this ruling coalition
lost the majority of seats in the parliament.

Vicki Crinis and Balakrishnan Parasuraman “Employment Relations and the state in Malaysia” (2016) 58(2)The Journal of Industrial Relations 215 at 217.
46
Ibid.
47
Dunston Ayadurai “Malaysia” in Stephen Deery and Richard Mitchell (eds) Labour Law and Industrial
Relations in Asia: Eight Country Studies (Longman Cheshire, Melbourne, 1993) 61 at 63. Compare The Labour
Code, 1912 of the Federated Malay States (Enactment No. 6 of 1912, as amended) in Federated Malay Statesand A.B. Voules “The laws of the Federated Malay States 1877-1920” Vol. II (1921) California Digital Library<https://archive.org/details/cdl?and%5B%5D=laws+of+the+federated+malay+states&sin=&sort=titleSorter>
332-401. The Labour Code, 1912 contained eleven Parts, including Part II on Provisions Relating to
Immigration, Part III on General Provisions Relating to Labour, Part IV on Provisions Relating to Special
Classes of Labour, Part V on Provisions Relating to Priority of Wages and the Truck System, Part VI on
Provisions Relating to Assisted Migration, Part VII on Special Provisions Relating to Labourers Employed in
Mines, Part VIII on Provisions Relating to the Health of Assistants and Labourers, Part IX on Provisions
Relating to Places Unfit for the Employment of Labour, Part X on Special Offences, and Part XI on Provisions
Relating to Procedure, Actions and Rules.
48
Ayadurai, above n 47, at 92.
49
Ibid.
50
Ibid.
51
Ibid.
52
Ibid.
53
Ibid.
54
Crinis and Parasuraman, above n 45, at 217.
45

60

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73“At the time of independence, the non-Malay Chinese owned most of the country’s economic
assets and the numbers of non-Malays almost outnumbered the Malays…” and these “…ethnic
divisions shaped the politics of industrial relations in Malaysia.”55
Thereafter, the Trade Unions Act was passed in 1959.56 This legitimised unions, but required
registration of unions and regulation of their affairs.57 Then, the “Great Railway Strike”
occurred in Malaya which resulted “in railway workers being recognised as government
employees.”58
Malaysia was formed in 1963, consisting of Malaya, Sabah, Sarawak, as well as Singapore.59
But in 1965, Singapore seceded from Malaysia.60 In 1967, the Industrial Relations Act becamelaw, “entrenching the system of compulsory arbitration first introduced under emergency
legislation in 1965, and establishing the Industrial Court to arbitrate disputes.”61
In 1969, racial riots took place in Kuala Lumpur “after the results of the general election”
showed “that the opposition parties together polled more votes but won fewer seats than theruling coalition party.”62 “Chinese-dominated parties won a considerable number of seats inthe parliament…” while the “…government invoked the Internal Security Act,” which was “arelic of colonial times…”63
Two years later, the New Economic Policy was launched – aimed at eradicating poverty andrestructuring society in 20 years, it has helped improve the lot of the disadvantaged Malays.64“The State…set employment quotas for Malays under the New Economic Policy (NEP)” thatfirms must meet “to qualify for import protection, tax holidays and direct state investment.”65“Malays were given preferential treatment in business, employment and education to allow
them to ‘catch-up’ to the non-Malay population, but especially to the Chinese.”66 The 1971
NEP was also a way “to manage racial tensions.”67 In the same year, the Employment Act,
Trade Unions Act and Industrial Relations Act were substantially amended.68 A further
revision was made to the Industrial Relations Act in 1976.69
In 1978, the Malaysian Employers’ Federation was established.70 The following year, the“Airlines Employees’ Union dispute over terms and conditions of employment with thenational carrier, Malaysian Airlines System”, resulted in “unionists being interned under theInternal Security Act and the union…being deregistered and subsequently replaced by an

55

Ibid.
Ayadurai, above n 47, at 93.
57
Ibid.
58
Ibid.
59
Ibid.
60
Ibid.
61
Ibid.
62
Ibid.
63
Crinis and Parasuraman, above n 45, at 217.
64
Ayadurai, above n 47, at 62-63, 93.
65
Verma, Kochan and Lansbury, above n 8.
66
Crinis and Parasuraman, above n 45, at 217.
67
Ibid.
68
Ayadurai, above n 47, at 93.
69
Ibid.
70
Ibid.
56

61

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73
enterprise union.”71 The Employment Act, Trade Unions Act and Industrial Relations Act wereagain substantially amended in 1980.72
2.2.

1980s to present

The Private Employment Agencies Act (Act 246) became law in 1981,73 to regulate private
employment agencies that supply workers to employers. Thereafter, the tripartite “National
Labour Advisory Council (NLAC)” was reconstituted in 1983.74 The government announced
in 1986 its intention to create “a National Labour Policy” based on “industrial harmony”.75
Four years later, the “Malayan Communist Party” renounced its armed struggle andsurrendered, formally ending the insurgency in 1990.76 That same year, the “National
Economic Consultative Council” was appointed to help the government shape a “National
Development Policy” to replace the NEP77 although still anchored to its underlying philosophyof societal reordering.
Thus, in the 1990s, the “government’s emphasis shifted…towards the development” of “a highvalue economy, through a strategy known as Vision 2020, which emphasised the importanceof a knowledge economy built on education and industrial upgrading in the domestic sector aswell” as “the export sector.”78
From the mid-1990s, however, the courts exhibited a measure of “judicial activism” in deciding
some labour cases in favour of employees, though these were “largely restricted to the field of
the law of personal employment where the courts” seemed “more willing to step in” tomoderate employer discretion.79 Still, these decisions had the effect of expanding somewhat“the scope of judicial review” and were significant in that sense, too.80 But the courts could
not make broader changes, particularly as to collective labour law considering “the strong andclear legislative intention to restrict trade union power.”81
The legislative intention to weaken unions continued as changes were made in 2010 to theTrade Unions Act, Employment Act and Industrial Relations Act to permit “greater use ofcontract labour”, which was later “strengthened” by further amendments “to the Employment
Act” in 2012.82 These changes had the effect of enhancing employer discretion83 “to substitutecontract workers, many of them temporary labour migrants, for core workers or to change the71

Ibid 93-94.
Ibid 94.
73
See Crinis and Parasuraman, above n 45, at 218.
74
Ayadurai, above n 47, at 94.
75
Ibid; and see Peter Wad “Enterprise Unions: Panacea for Industrial Harmony in Malaysia?” (1997) 12
Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies 89 at 90 <https://rauli.cbs.dk/index.php/cjas/article/view/2177/2172>.
76
Ayadurai, above n 47, at 94.
77
Ibid.
78
Crinis and Parasuraman, above n 45, at 218.
79
Suhanah Sharifah Syed Ahmad “Law and labour market regulation in Malaysia” in Sean Cooney, Tim
Lindsey, Richard Mitchell and Ying Zhu (eds) Law and Labour Market Regulation in East Asia (Routledge,
London, 2002) 55 at 83, 84.
80
Ibid.
81
Ibid 84.
82
Crinis and Parasuraman, above n 45, at 219.
83
See Chris Howell “Trajectories of Neoliberal Transformation: European Industrial Relations since the 1970s”(Lecture, Newcastle Business School, The University of Newcastle, Australia, 29 September 2017). According
to Howell, employer discretion means “freedom to hire and fire”, “freedom to assign workers to tasks” and“freedom to set the amount, type and distribution of wages.”72

62

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73
status of core to contract workers.”84 Whether this expansionary logic of employer discretion
will intensify or abate following the results of the 2018 general election that put in place a new
government led by the Pakatan Harapan remains to be seen. Indeed, before its rise to power,
the nascent ruling coalition’s campaign hinged on a raft of reforms which was aimed at puttingsome distance between itself and its predecessor.
2.2.1. Some Key Provisions of the Employment Act
Based on the foregoing brief historical account, the oldest labour legislation in Malaysia that
became effective upon the country’s independence is the Employment Act as amended. Thissection looks into some of its key provisions. While the British common law has strongly
influenced the legal system of Malaysia, and the Employment Act was enacted during British
rule, i.e., prior to independence, a closer look suggests many civilian law elements exist as
well, owing possibly to the Portuguese and the Dutch influences (which seeming link requires
deeper study). The Employment Act itself contains robust “state-help” rules85 that articulate
more “principles” and “rights” than “remedies” and, thus, tend to correspond to provisions of“The Labour Code, 1912” enacted then by the Federated Malay States of Perak, Selangor,
Negri Sembilan, and Pahang.86 They are quite detailed and specific, apparently employing“deductive”87 reasoning as they begin with concepts (Part I) before going into particularsituations (Part II, et seq.). For instance, the Employment Act defines “contract of service”,“contractor”, “employee”, “employer”, “domestic servant”, and “apprenticeship contract”.
More “principles” and “rights” are detailed in subsequent “prescriptive”88 rules regarding
contract of service and termination thereof, payment of and deductions from wages, contractors
and principals, employment of women, domestic servants, rest days and hours of work,
termination, lay-off and retirement benefits, employment of foreign employees, among others.
In the civil law tradition, too, the Employment Act seems to recognise “administrative action”
as “inherent power”89 given its very specific rules on inspection, complaints and inquiries,
general penalty, and regulations, and appears to require “statutory grant of power” for “judicial
action”90 considering aspects of its rules of procedure. However, “the open-ended,discretionary nature of”91 the legislation can be seen, too, in the provisions on regulation whichsuggest that it is developmentalist. At the same time, the complaints/inquiries provisions and84

Crinis and Parasuraman, above n 45, at 219.
See Kohler, above n 12.
86
See Legrand, above n 28, at 64-74; see also Denis Baranger “Boundaries of Public Law” (Miegunyah
Distinguished Visiting Fellowship Public Lecture, Melbourne Law School, The University of Melbourne,
Australia, 26 July 2017) <http://law.unimelb.edu.au/about/mls-video-gallery/public-lectures-and-events/2017miegunyah-distinguished-visiting-fellowship-public-lecture-26.7.17>; and see also The Labour Code, 1912,
above n 47. Notably, Part I, Chapter I of The Labour Code, 1912 had stated explicitly “Saving of Netherlands
Indian Labourers’ Protection Enactments, 1909”, which is evidence of Dutch influence on labour law. See also
J.R. Innes “Some Notes on the Constitution and Legislation of the Federated Malay States” (1916) 16(1) Journalof the Society of Comparative Legislation 24 at 25, 27 <https://www.jstor.org/stable/752660>. Innes also points
out in page 27 that the “local Labour Code” was a good example “of codification…found suitable to local
requirements” which was not a mere transplant from India.
87
See Legrand, above n 28, at 64.
88
Ibid 68.
89
Ibid 52, 75.
90
Ibid.
91
See Christoph Antons “Law reform in the 'developmental states' of East and Southeast Asia: from the Asian
Crisis to September 11, 2001 and beyond” in Christoph Antons and Volkmar Gessner (eds) Globalisation andResistance: Law Reform in Asia since the Crisis (Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2007) 81 at 81, 90.
85

63

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73
rules of procedure in the statute are in the nature of “remedies”92 that allow for redress of“wrong”;93 albeit they constitute little evidence of common law features.

3. Context and Political Economy of Labour Laws
3.1.

State regulation through labour rights

The Employment Act makes use of the lingua franca of principles and rights. For instance,
there is also a provision that seems to set forth an equality of rights between employers andemployees in the matter of terminating a contract of service:94
Either party to a contract of service may terminate such contract of service
without notice or, if notice has already been given…, without waiting for the
expiry of that notice, by paying to the other party an indemnity of a sum equal
to the amount of wages which would have accrued to the employee during
the term of such notice or during the unexpired term of such notice. Either
party to a contract of service may terminate such contract of service without
notice in the event of any wilful breach by the other party of a condition of
the contract of service.
But in the next breath, it appears “to regulate – and repress – labor”.95 The following provisionindicates that the employer may, upon grounds of misconduct, after inquiry dismiss sans noticethe employee:96
An employer may, on the grounds of misconduct inconsistent with thefulfilment of the express or implied conditions of his service, after due inquiry–(a) dismiss without notice the employee;(b) downgrade the employee; or(c) impose any other lesser punishment as he deems just and fit, and where apunishment of suspension without wages is imposed, it shall not exceed aperiod of two weeks. For the purposes of an inquiry…the employer may
suspend the employee from work for a period not exceeding two weeks but
shall pay him not less than half his wages for such period: Provided that if theinquiry does not disclose any misconduct on the part of the employee theemployer shall forthwith restore to the employee the full amount of wages so
withheld.
And in the matter of terminating employment by reason of redundancy, which is beyond thecontrol of the employee, the employer seems to have a very wide discretion. The following

92

See Baranger, above n 86.
See Legrand, above n 28, at 71.
94
Employment Act 1955, Part II<http://www.ilo.org/dyn/travail/docs/1496/Employment%20Act%201955.pdf>.
95
See Stanley Aronowitz The Death and Life of American Labor: Toward a New Workers’ Movement (Verso,
London, 2014) at 54. Aronowitz cites Karl Polanyi.
96
Employment Act 1955, Part II<http://www.ilo.org/dyn/travail/docs/1496/Employment%20Act%201955.pdf>.
9364

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73
provision appears to indicate the only limitation, i.e., that foreign employees, if any, be “let go”
first before local employees:97
Where an employer is required to reduce his workforce by reason of
redundancy necessitating the retrenchment of any number of employees, theemployer shall not terminate the services of a local employee unless he has
first terminated the services of all foreign employees employed by him in acapacity similar to that of the local employee.
Thus, Malaysian “employers continue to exercise their traditional, legally entrenched,prerogatives, in particular the right to retrench or dismiss”98 through labour law.
In this sense, labour law is a regulatory tool to achieve workplace harmony or at least asemblance of it. As noted by Aronowitz in relation to American labour law: 99 “Labor law is,in brief, an invocation to class collaboration, or at least class peace. It has above all a regulatory
function, which is hidden under its apparent declaration of the rights of labor.”
Under the Employment Act, labour regulation uses the language of labour rights.
3.2.

“Sporadic” and “peripheral” role of common law“Industrial relations in Malaysia are characterised by tight government supervision.”100“Individual employer-employee relations are regulated by the” Employment Act.101“Collective relationships are governed by the” Industrial Relations Act.102 “The labour lawsof the post-colonial era have served the purpose of giving effect to government objectives ofindustrialisation and social re-structuring.”103 The “system is largely the creation of thelegislative process” and “owes little to common law…”104 Albeit, the courts have apparently
played “an important role in softening the effect of repressive legislation through statutory
interpretation and the application of principles of justice and equity” as may be gleaned fromthe “rise in judicial activism in labour cases” from the mid-1990s.105 But these have been
largely “sporadic” and “peripheral”, to borrow the metaphor of Baranger (2017) in his
discourse on public law (in common law jurisdictions).106 These have been “sporadic” because
judicial review of government and/or employer actions happens only when a labour casereaches the courts which is not very frequent; these have been “peripheral” because “common
law fastens, not upon principles, but upon remedies”,107 and they have been mainly limited “tothe field of the law of personal employment”108 or the Employment Act.
3.3.

Labour law as public law/development law and expansion of employer discretion

97

Ibid Part XIIB.
Ahmad, above n 79, at 82.
99
Aronowitz, above n 95.
100
Ayadurai, above n 47, at 90.
101
Ibid.
102
Ibid.
103
Ahmad, above n 79, at 85.
104
Ayadurai, above n 47, at 90.
105
Ahmad, above n 79, at 82, 83.
106
See Baranger, above n 86.
107
Ibid.
108
Ahmad, above n 79, at 83, 84.
98

65

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73
Malaysian labour law is public law in that it is being used by the government to regulate therelations of capital and labour, though favouring the former over the latter, to achieve state
objectives. Its “external boundaries” are determined through a “process of differentiation fromprivate law”109, e.g., the Civil Law Act 1956 which is the civil law administered in Malaysia.110
For example, the Civil Law Act “regulates the relations between…private persons”111 while
the Employment Act’s special rules govern individual employment relations based on“requirements of the public interest”112, i.e., attainment of state objectives of “industrialisationand social re-structuring.”113 Labour law is also development law as it provides “administrative
guidance” via “bureaucratic competence” to attain the state’s developmental goals. 114 The“internal boundaries”115 of Malaysian labour law are individual employer-employee relations
under the Employment Act (“state-help”116 rules) and collective labour relations under the
Industrial Relations Act (“self-help”117 rules).
As Crinis and Parasuraman point out:118
In practice, the system operates as a combination of state-employer bipartismin the policy arena and management unilateralism at the workplace…Close
ties between industry and government have stifled the capacity of workers toorganise into effective trade unions…there is little likelihood of detection of
employer’s failure to comply with regulatory requirements…
“The industrial relations strategy in Malaysia is to focus on cost containment to facilitate thecompetitive strategy of low cost exports, and on the need to attract foreign investment.”119“The repressive labour and industrial laws inherited from the colonial period and enhanced bysuccessive post-independence Malaysian governments are still largely in force…”120 In short,“state-help” and ‘self-help” rules created by the state through the legislative process, thoughmany, function in ways that expand employer discretion.
3.4.

Individualisation, de-collectivisation and decentralisation of employment relations
through state regulation“Malaysian employers prefer to deal with employees on an individual rather than collective
basis and they are supported in this strategy by the state”121 through labour law, too. Thus, theunion density in Malaysia “is still very low” at “less than 10 per cent of the workforce.”122“The change”, pursuant to the “Look East Policy”, in 1983 “from an industrial to an enterprise109

See Baranger, above n 86.
See Civil Law Act 1956 (Act 67)<http://www.agc.gov.my/agcportal/uploads/files/Publications/LOM/EN/Act%2067.pdf>.
111
See Baranger, above n 86.
112
Ibid.
113
See Ahmad, above n 79, at 85.
114
See Antons, above n 91, at 90.
115
See Baranger, above n 86.
116
See Kohler, above n 12.
117
Ibid.
118
Crinis and Parasuraman, above n 45, at 218.
119
Verma, Kochan and Lansbury, above n 8, at 346.
120
Ahmad, above n 79, at 81.
121
Ibid.
122
Ibid; and see also Dzulzalani Eden “Transformasi Kesatuan Sekerja Dalam Pembangunan Negara” (paper
presented to Konvensyen Kesatuan Sekerja, Riverside Majestic, Kuching, 30 April 2015)<https://ir.unimas.my/10295/>.
110

66

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73
model fragmented the already weak national unions” that contracted further “with the newemphasis on enterprise (in-house) unions.”123 The amendments to the Trade Unions Act,
Employment Act and Industrial Relations Act in 2010, and to the Employment Act in 2012,
contributed as well to the individualisation, de-collectivisation and decentralisation of
employment relations in Malaysia. There has been “greater recourse to individual bargaining
between employee and employer or unilateral employer decision-making” (individualisation),“a shrinking in the collective organisation and capacity” of employees (de-collectivisation) and“a shift from higher levels of collective bargaining to lower ones, closer to the firm or
workplace” (decentralisation).124 What is peculiar, however, with this “neoliberal trajectory”
in Malaysia is there has been no concomitant deregulation, i.e., “greater reliance upon market
mechanisms in the organization of the labor market.”125 On the contrary, there has always beenstate regulation through labour law as public law and development law, i.e., labour law as
having a strong “regulatory function, which is hidden under its apparent declaration of therights of labor.”126
3.5.

Work creation, ethnicity and trichotomy

The 1971 NEP has been a key “work creation programme” introduced by the Malaysian
government “to encourage new employment opportunities”127 especially for Malays. This workor labour rule aimed at reordering societal structure has endogenous origins. As aptly explainedby Milner (2008):128
When we look at transformations in detail, some have been intended, somenot. Seeking a specific economic or political advantage, for instance, canentail top-down ideological leadership – a frequently encountered theme in‘Malay’ societies – that radically and unintentionally transforms the social
order. Some strategies employed by Archipelago sultanates and later bycolonial regimes turned out to be cases of this, virtually creating or
legitimizing new and rival elites. A modern example is the unpredicted risein 1970s Malaysia of a powerful and radical Islamic movement that followed
the implementation of programmes designed to address ‘Malay’ economic
disadvantage. But there are also clear instances of deliberate, top-down
implementation of social change – some dating back to the kingdom of
Melaka and earlier.
The kingdom of Melaka (Malacca) had been well-known even before the Portuguese
invasion.129 Malaysia’s NEP, together with its labour laws as exemplified by the Employment
Act, make up the trichotomy of indigenous law, imported law and development law.130 As
noted, the NEP is an endogenous development. The Employment Act is imported law in that it
has both civil law and common law elements, though, seemingly, there is more of the former
than the latter. At the same time, the Employment Act is development law as explained above.

123

Crinis and Parasuraman, above n 45, at 218.
See Howell, above n 83.
125
Ibid.
126
See Aronowitz, above n 95.
127
See Michael Jackson and Victor Hanby Work Creation: International Experiences (Saxon House,
Farnborough (Eng), 1979) at 6.
128
Anthony Milner The Malays (Wiley-Blackwell, West Sussex (UK), 2008) at 15.
129
See Sheppard, above n 37, at 4-8.
130
See Yasuda, above n 26, at 19, 20, 22-4, 42.
12467

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73
The confluence of work creation, ethnicity and trichotomy has been realised largely throughstate regulation.
The extensive role of the state can be clearly discerned, too, from the varieties of capitalism
extant in Malaysia.

4. Varieties of Capitalism
Malaysia has embarked on mixed approaches to industrialisation, often led or driven by thestate.
4.1.

Coordinated market economy through ISI

Initially, the country’s import substitution industrialisation (ISI) was market-led.131 From“…1957 to 1970…” the state was involved “in the development of infrastructure and the ruralsector…while” the private sector took care of “industrialization” with the “state” facilitating“the creation of a favourable climate for foreign investment in import substitution
industries…”132
The World Bank also influenced this policy approach, which had mixed results.133 “On the
one hand, by 1969, the economy was growing at above 5 per cent per annum…On the other
hand, ethnic Malay participation in this economic growth was limited.”134
In 1971, state-led ISI was commenced with the NEP which was “promulgated in response to
Malay nationalism.”135 “Its first objective was to restructure society to increase the economic
standing of Malays by bringing them into the modern economy.”136 Kuruvilla and Arudsothy(1995) indicate that the NEP:137…was designed to increase the ethnic distribution of the workforce inproportion to the ethnic distribution of the population, and to increase
bhumiputra (sons of the soil, i.e. Malay) share of corporate ownership from
2.4 per cent in 1970 to 30 per cent by 1990. The strategy emphasized
redistribution via growth in output and employment. In operational terms, anemployment quota of 30 per cent for Malays was a prerequisite to qualify
firms for import protection and tax holidays. Government contracts werereserved for Malay-owned firms, and all firms had to keep aside 30 per centof shares of Malays.
Thus, “the Malaysian state exerted increasing control over the private sector via both regulationand direct investment in furtherance of NEP goals.”138 “Consequently, private sector
investment fell” and the “shortfall” as well as “the utilization of government funds to buy shares
Sarosh Kuruvilla and Ponniah Arudsothy “Economic development strategy, government labour policy andfirm-level industrial relations practices in Malaysia” in Anil Verma, Thomas Kochan and Russel Lansbury (eds)
Employment Relations in the Growing Asian Economies (Routledge, London, 1995) 158 at 159-161.
132
Ibid 159-160.
133
Ibid 161.
134
Ibid.
135
Ibid.
136
Crinis and Parasuraman, above n 45, at 217.
137
Kuruvilla and Arudsothy, above n 131, at 161.
138
Ibid 162.
131

68

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73(undersubscribed by the Malay business community for which they were reserved) resulted ina major resource crunch that led to increased borrowing from international banks.” 139 This
influenced the transition to export-oriented industrialization (EOI).140
4.2.

Liberal market economy via EOI

According to Kuruvilla and Arudsothy:141
The resource crunch drove the government to articulate a mixed policy. On
the one hand, the government launched a massive campaign to encourage
private and foreign investment during the 1977-80 period…On the other
hand, the state also increased its involvement in the development of heavy
import substitution industries.
As already noted, there was really no deregulation or total “freedom of the market fromgovernment regulation, that is, laissez-faire economics”.142 “The outpouring of government
revenues…combined with the recessions of 1982 and 1985, and the draining of revenues by
the heavy industrialization programme drove Malaysia’s external debt to unprecedented
levels.”143 In order “to meet its interest payments on foreign debts, the state re-emphasizedexport-oriented industries, simplifying bureaucratic controls, increasing investment allowances
and incentives, and reducing corporate and development taxes”.144
This “EOI strategy has made Malaysia dependent on low-cost labour-intensive foreigndominated manufacturing for export to meet interest payments, and for continued industrial
growth.”145 This also “forced the government to enact policies that kept costs low to preserve
Malaysia’s competitive advantage of cheap and disciplined labour in order to continue to attract
foreign investment.”146 The “state also increased its involvement in the industrial relations
sphere to a considerable extent, moving from controlled pluralism to greater state control.”147
Commenting on Malaysia’s economic transformation, Bhopal and Todd (2000) note that:148
Within the two decades following 1976 the Malaysian economy transformed
from an agricultural to a predominantly manufacturing one. By 1996,
manufacturing accounted for 80.6 per cent of commodity exports, contributed
34.3 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) and employed 25.5 per centof the workforce. However, development has occurred on a narrow, primarily
electronics, base…

139

Ibid 162-163.
Ibid 163-166.
141
Ibid 163.
142
See Aronowitz, above n 95, at 53.
143
Kuruvilla and Arudsothy, above n 131, at 164.
144
Ibid.
145
Ibid 166.
146
Ibid 168.
147
Ibid.
148
Mhinder Bhopal and Patricia Todd “Multinational Corporations and Trade Union Development in Malaysia”
in Chris Rowley and John Benson (eds) Globalization and Labour in the Asia Pacific Region (Frank Cass,
London, 2000) 193 at 193.
140

69

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73“The proportion of Malays, Chinese and Indians in the labour movement has reflected thechanging political economy of Malaysia.”149 “This economic development has expanded the
Malay waged class such that Malays comprise the majority of trade union members.”150 Then,the Asian financial crisis struck.
4.3.

Asian market economy as typified by work in informal economy“Malaysia’s economic crisis started in July 1997…Economic growth rate declined.”151 It raised
inflation, unemployment and poverty rates.152 Thus, informal sector activities – “petty trading,carpentry, direct selling and home-based production” – grew.153“This growth”, according to Shahadan (2007), was:154…illustrated in the expansion of communities of informal street traders(hawkers), as well as in the surge of home-based production and a small
number of increasingly formalized ventures located at fixed businesspremises such as small-scale manufacturers. The slow expansion rate posted
by the formal economy reduced labor absorption of new work seekers.
During the crisis, many were forced to seek employment in the informal
sector…out of necessity rather than choice.
Work in the informal economy entails networks and personal relationships155 and involves
identification and solidarity among actors,156 which are elements of a “third variety ofcapitalism” as defined by Wailes, Kitay and Lansbury (2008).157 As Shahadan explains:158…new entrants who participate in informal sector activities due to an
economic crisis continue to engage in these activities even after the crisis.
This is a reflection of the continuous demand for informal businesses which
provide cheaper goods and services. As the country’s economy improves, theparticipants receive higher income from the informal sector compared to theirprevious jobs before the crisis. This motivates them to remain in the sector.
Income from work in the informal economy is hardly taxed directly. “Own account workers”
had “the highest proportion of employment in the informal sector in non-agricultural sector” at“55.1 per cent in 2015, down 7.1 percentage points compared to 2013.”159

149

Ibid 194.
Ibid.
151
Faridah Shahadan “Impacts of the Malaysian Economic Crisis on the Livelihood of Informal Sector
Participants” (2007) 27(1&2) Philippine Journal of Labor and Industrial Relations 56 at 56.
152
Ibid.
153
Ibid 57, 75.
154
Ibid 75.
155
See Wailes, Kitay and Lansbury, above n 25, at 33.
156
See Yasuda, above n 26, 22, at 37.
157
Wailes, Kitay and Lansbury, above n 25, at 33.
158
Shahadan, above n 151, at 76.
159
Department of Statistics Malaysia, above n 3.
150

70

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73

5. Employment and GDP
During the transition to EOI in the 1980s, “job security” was “not well entrenched in
Malaysia.”160 “The dominant strategy” was “to downsize the core labour force” in times of“economic downturns.”161 “Continuous improvement of production technologies…resulted inworkforce reductions.”162 “Other labour shedding methods” included “retrenchment, recontracting, contracting out, temporary shutdowns and use of temporary or casual
employment.”163 Contracting out or outsourcing arrangements came about notwithstanding
Act 246 (1981). These are reflected in Figure 2 which shows that unemployment started to go
up in 1982 and reached a peak of 7.4 per cent in 1986, and hovered between 7.3 per cent and7.2 per cent in 1987 and 1988, respectively. The unemployment rate began to go down in 1989
after government’s announcement about the National Labour Policy and appointment of the
National Economic Consultative Council164 in line with the NEP’s philosophical underpinningof societal reordering. The unemployment rate started to increase again, from its lowest pointof 2.4 per cent in 1997, during the Asian financial crisis. The global financial crisis also saw
the rise in unemployment to a peak level (since 1995) of 3.7 per cent in 2009.

Unemployment rate (%)
Malaysia
8
7.4 7.3

7

7.2

6

5.7

5.6
5

5
4.5
4.1
3.7

3.4

3.2

3.1

3

3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.5

3.4
3

3.7
3.3 3.2 3.3

3.3

3.1 3 3.1

2.9

2014

3.8

2011

4

3.1

2.5 2.4
2
1

2015

2013

2012

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1993

1992

1990

1989

1988

1987

1986

1985

1984

1983

1982

0

Figure 2: Unemployment rate in Malaysia
Source: Department of Statistics Malaysia165
160

Verma, Kochan and Lansbury, above n 8, at 346.
Ibid.
162
Ibid.
163
Ibid.
164
See Ayadurai, above n 47, at 94.
165
The line graph and trend line are based on data obtained from the Department of Statistics Malaysia, Official
Portal<https://www.dosm.gov.my/v1/index.php?r=column/ctimeseries&menu_id=NHJlaGc2Rlg4ZXlGTjh1SU1kaW
Y5UT09>.
161

71

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73

While the policies discussed above have “resulted in increasing the economic participation of
Malays”, i.e., “Malay share of total manufacturing employment increased to 32 per cent, while
Malays in managerial positions rose to 17 per cent, and Malay share ownership increased toabout 8 per cent…,” they did not meet “Malay nationalist expectations…”166
Crinis and Parasuraman maintain that the shift:167…from import substitution to export-oriented production…generated
employment for the large numbers of workers in the manufacturing andconstruction sectors and on palm oil estates. Although these jobs solved
Malaysia’s unemployment problem, they did not meet the promises of thegovernment to provide Malays with quality employment and a fair share ofcapital accumulation.
That is also why the strategy Vision 2020 has been adopted.168 But instead of “…displacing
labour-intensive manufacturing, this push towards higher-end production” has been “pursued
in parallel, meeting demand for low-paid employment in low-end labour intensive industries”
via “the importation of labour migrants and continuing to maintain social order through state
repression.”169 Overall, “foreign workers…have no legislative protections for the governanceof their employment” and their “working conditions and wages are much lower than” those of“Malaysian workers.”170
These notwithstanding, the trend line in Figure 2 suggests a general decline in unemployment
which stood at 3.1 per cent by 2015. This is very close to Sir William Beveridge’s (1944) full
employment definition of 3 per cent.171 And it is worth noting that services and industry have
expanded over time. Table 1 shows the employment and GDP structures in Malaysia. While
the services sector has the highest proportions in terms of employment and GDP, the industry
sector has sizeable shares as well.
Malaysia
Agriculture (%)
Industry (%)
Employment
13
36
GDP
11
41
Table 1: Employment and GDP structures in Malaysia, 2010.
Source: Boquet (2017)172

Services (%)
51
48

Changes to the Private Employment Agencies Act have been reported recently.173 Notably, too,
the Pakatan Harapan promised during the election campaign to achieve Vision 2020 along with
controlling/reducing inflow of foreign workers, creating quality employment, increasing
minimum wage, enhancing worker rights (including unionisation and collective bargaining),
166

Kuruvilla and Arudsothy, above n 131, at 162.
Crinis and Parasuraman, above n 45, at 218.
168
Ibid.
169
Ibid.
170
Verma, Kochan and Lansbury, above n 8, at 346.
171
William Beveridge Full Employment in a Free Society: A Summary (The New Statesman and Nation andReynolds News, London, 1944) at 12<https://library.lse.ac.uk/archives/beveridge/9A_79_Full_employment_in_a_free_society.pdf>.
172
Boquet, above n 2. See Table 8.2 Employment structure and GDP structure in selected Asian countries.
173“Government to enforce Private Employment Agencies (Amendment) Act 2017” Malay Mail (online ed,
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 6 January 2018).
167

72

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73
and setting up an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.174 If the new government isable to follow through, these could bring about a paradigm shift in state regulation towards
worker rights and voice. Of late, however, there have been proposals from the new
government’s advisers to review the “affirmative action measures” in the NEP,175 the basic
principles of which have been maintained in Vision 2020.176 The proposed review purportedly
aims to stimulate competitiveness.177 Such review must remain consistent though with
Malaysia’s Federal Constitution that prescribes “reservation of quotas” for the Malays “tosafeguard” their “special position”.178

Conclusion
Malaysian labour laws and varieties of capitalism are not necessarily “dichotomous variables
that fill separate ontological vacuums.”179 While this exploratory research suggests that“entangled legal histories”180 exist, there is also endogeneity that is largely state-led or -driven.
The “trichotomy” of “indigenous law”, “imported law” and “development law”181 is extant in
the country’s labour law system. The NEP might be deemed an aspect of “indigenous law”, a“modern example”182 which has pre-colonial antecedents. It developed endogenously, persists
over time and seems unique to Malaysia (legal endemism).183 Being part of “top-down
implementation of social change”,184 in many ways it involves “state help” 185 regulation. The
imported traits of Malaysian labour law, as exemplified by the “state-help”186 rules in the
Employment Act, seem to have more civil law than common law elements. But the
Employment Act is also developmentalist.
Facets of Asian, coordinated and liberal market economies have been present. The Asian style
involving identity, solidarity and communitarianism is recognisable through work in theinformal economy. Workers tend to “seek employment in the informal sector… ‘out ofnecessity rather than choice’” via “home-based production,” among others.187 The coordinatedapproach is demonstrated by import substitution industrialisation while the liberal strategy isrepresented by export oriented industrialisation.

“Buku Harapan Rebuilding our Nation Fulfilling our Hopes”<http://kempen.s3.amazonaws.com/manifesto/Manifesto_text/Manifesto_PH_EN.pdf> at 11, 14, 69, 75, 76, 77,
78, 92, 112, 133, 134, 136, 137.
175
C.K. Tan “Mahathir advisers propose review of Malay privileges to spur economy” Nikkei Asian Review(online ed, Japan, 20 August 2018).
176
See Economic Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s Department, Malaysia “Vision 2020, 1991-2020”<http://www.epu.gov.my/en/development-policies/vision-2020>.
177
Tan, above n 175.
178
Federal Constitution of Malaysia, Part XII <http://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/my/my063en.pdf>.
179
See Sale, above n 12, at ch 3; and see also Jonathan Sale “Exploring the possibility of harmonising ASEAN
labour laws for employment growth through evidence-based mixed methods” (paper presented to Symposium
on Evidence-Based Law and Practice, The University of Newcastle, 22 May 2017).
180
See Duve, above n 16.
181
See Yasuda, above n 26, at 19, 20, 22-4, 42.
182
See Milner, above n 128.
183
Sale, above n 12, at ch 2, 3.
184
See Milner, above n 128.
185
See Kohler, above n 12.
186
Ibid.
187
Shahadan, above n 151, at 57, 75.
174

73

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 55-73
These suggest as well that the Malaysian system’s legal/economic pluralism andunemployment situation have a relationship which is influenced “by extensive State control
guaranteeing a high level of managerial prerogative within the workplace”.188 The election
win of the Pakatan Harapan might bear some repercussions to this in the light of its campaign
promises. Will labour regulations swing in the opposite direction this time favouring worker
rights and voice? While such a paradigm shift remains uncertain, still labour law changes by
the State seem to be among the significant “external influences” to “labour market
organisation”189 and work creation in the case of Malaysia. To that extent, change andcontinuity can be plausibly anticipated.
In order to gain a more holistic perspective about the “internal boundaries”190 of Malaysianlabour laws, however, a closer look at the “self-help”191 rules in the Trade Unions Act andIndustrial Relations Act, including their outcomes, is proper. Underemployment rates over timeneed to be examined, too. Moreover, Malaysian labour laws’ epistemological assumptions,mode of legal thinking, sources, purpose, scope, organisation, function, residual law-making
and enforcement are among the expanses demanding deeper study.

See Patricia Todd and David Peetz “Malaysian Industrial Relations at Century’s Turn: Vision 2020 or a
Spectre of the Past?” (paper presented to Conference on Research on work, employment and Industrial
Relations 2000, Association of Industrial Relations Academics Australia & New Zealand (AIRAANZ))<https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au/bitstream/handle/10072/1136/13951.pdf>.
189
See David Marsden The End of Economic Man? Custom and Competition in Labour Markets (Wheatsheaf
Books Ltd, Great Britain, 1986) at 2-5.
190
See Baranger, above n 86.
191
See Kohler, above n 12.
18874

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90

Transition of a Contract of Employment: from the Locatio
Conductio to the Relational ContractGYÖRGY KISS*
Abstract
This article presents the correlation between the economic background of a given era and legal
regulation of labour. It aspires to answer the question: what legal construction most suits acurrent global economy. The author shows the effect of locatio conductio on the employment
contract of today and offers three possible scenarios regarding future labour law. One such
scenario is the maintenance of the current, traditional concept that strives to secure a balance
between security of the employee and flexibility of employment. The second scenario entails
possibilities provided by the so-called gig economy; it deconstructs almost all limitations
provided by labour law and, at the same time, annuls the structure of labour law as it is today.
The third scenario proposes an adaptation of a specific interpretation of long-term contract –relational contract – to labour law.

I.

The evolution of the structure of traditional employment
relationshipThe purpose of this study is to analyse the connection between the changing economic
requirements and the legal form of work done for others. The main question is: when is theconnection between the law and the economy regarded as adequate and inadequate? The impactof the economy is extremely complex. Ultimately, the advancement of the economy determines
the societal evaluation of work. For this reason, it is important to explore the philosophical andthe political evaluation of work in the different ages. It seems necessary to give a shorthistorical overview, although this method might be questionable. Some authors believe thatlabour law is a relatively young area of the law system, with new dogmatic basis; therefore, it
is unnecessary to find its roots in the long history or, at most, it is sufficient to refer to its
historical preliminaries with due criticism. This argument is in connection with the efforts
concerning the autonomy of labour law.1 However, the history of labour law justifies thatlabour law has not surpassed its ancient heritage – at least in a legal dogmatic sense. A good
example of this is the appearance of a locatio conductio between jurisprudence and legislationin the18th to19th centuries. Another question is: in what age was the locatio conductio in linewith the social and economic requirements?2*

Professor, National University of Public Service; University of Pécs; Chair of MTA-PTE Research Group ofComparative and European Employment Policy and Labour Law; Kiss.Gyorgy@uni-nke.hu;
kiss.gyorgy@ajk.pte.hu
1
The dispute on the autonomy of labour law became more pronounced in German law after the creation of the
BGB. See about the two opposite approaches Heinz Potthoff “Probleme des Arbeitsrechts” (Diederichs, Jena,
1912). Sinzheimer emphasised: “Das Arbeitsrecht umfaßt ein sachliches und persönliches Element. Das
sachliche Element ist die abhängige Arbeit. Das persönliche Element bilden die Arbeitnehmer.” Hugo Sinzheimer“Grundzüge des Arbeitsrechts” (Jena, Fischer, 1927) 7-9. “Über Grundgedanken und die Möglichkeit eines
Einheitsarbeitsrechts in Deutschland” [in Arbeitsrecht und Rechtssoziologie]. (1922 Frankfurt am Main, 1976
Europa Verlag)
2
See the critique of pandectistic Paul Oertmann “Volkwirtschaftslehre des Corpus Juris Civilis” (Berlin, Prager,1891) 75-79.

75

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90
a. Evaluation of work in ancient Greece
The first area of this research is ancient Greece. First of all, it is to be emphasised that what wecall ancient Greece was hardly a uniform structure, either politically or philosophically. It issufficient to refer to the significant difference between Athens and Sparta. The notion of ‘work’
was synonymous with ‘slave-labour’, and the economic system was built on this form ofworking.3 However, it is necessary to analyse the activity of free persons and their attitude towork. In this respect, Hesiod’s paper ‘Works and Days’ is remarkable.4 Catharina Lies andHugo Soly remark that this work “was not merely a condemnation of idleness, but also andespecially a relentless encouragement of diligence”.5 Hesiod recognised that a society, andabove all, an economy cannot be based on looting and pillaging. Nevertheless, the evaluationof the so-called ‘hard-work’ was not clearly positive. In the early periods, the significant
majority of Athenians preferred to live a so-called contemplative life. At that time, farmers andartificers worked as self-supporters, or for direct barter trade. It was a so-called non-market
economy, but some kind of competition between free persons was taking shape. Later, theactivities of farmers, smiths and artificers were appreciated by society, however, traders did
not enjoy such appreciation even though the economy of city-states would have collapsed
without the trade sector, which contributed significantly to the development of law. Despite
the increasing value of work, there was another factor hindering the evaluation of work, namely
the political structure of city-states. While in Athens the most appreciated activity wasparticipation in political life, in Sparta, military activity was considered most important. Bothof these societies were deeply divided. The all-time elite stood above the average free persons,and the ‘oligarchic perspective’ established their inequality and immunity in Athens.6 The
situation was similar regarding soldiers in Sparta.
Nevertheless, as far as the legal framework is concerned, contracts forms, on which thecontractual system of Rome was based, were in place.7 While it is not possible to find aconcrete, denominated contract, it is provable that, under this contract, the work was done bya free person, and paid for by the other party paid. It can be stated that this contract is likely tohave been similar to a rental deal.8
b. Inheritance of locatio conductio operarum
The dispute of unity versus diversity of the locatio conductio allows several conclusions to be
drawn. It is important that the separated expressions (rei, operarum, and operis) were
unknown.9 However, Mayer-Maly stated that the locatio conductio is a complex legal concept;
it is far more than a terminological unit.10 Many authors stand for the position that the locatio‘Work as we know it is a modern invention’. See Catharina Lies and Hugo Soly “Worthy efforts: attitudes towork and workers in pre-industrial Europe” (Leiden – Boston, Brill, 2012) 13; (Referring André Gorz “Critiqueof economic Reason”, eng. transl. (London – New York, Verso, 1989) 14.
4
Hesiod: Works and Days, Trans. Martin, Litchfield West (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1978)
5
Catharina Lies and Hugo Soly above n3, at 20.
6
Christian Meier “Griechische Arbeitsauffassungen in archaischer und klassiker Zeit. Praxis, Ideologie,
Philosophie. Weitere Zusammenhang” [in Manfred Bierwisch ed. Die Rolle der Arbeit in verschiedenen Epochen
und Kulturen (Berlin, Akademie Verlag, 2003) 19-76.
7Herbert Applebaum “The concept of work, Ancient, Medieval and Modern” (New York, State University of
New York Press, 1992), particularly 75.
8See earlier Julius Georg Lautner: “Altbabilonische Personenmiete und Erntearbeitsverträge” (Leiden, Brill,1936) 3. Lautner used the “Selbstvermietung” phrase.
9
See Fritz Schulz “Classical Roman law” (Oxford, University Press Oxford, 1951) 543.
10
Against the so-called “Einheitsfunktion” see Theo Mayer-Maly „Locatio Conductio” (Wien – München, Verlag
Herold, 1956) 19.
376

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90
conductio is both unified and fragmented.11 Pókecz highlighted that it had been a false approach
to focus on the unity or diversity of the locatio conductio. More importantly, it deals with any
process when additional value is created by work.12
However, it is highlighted that the Roman economy cannot be interpreted the way we donowadays. Schulz stated that slave labour was more important than the labour of free persons.13
According to Oertmann’s analysis, the economic situation can be interpreted as goods producedby the slave were used by others for their own benefit. Consequently, this cannot be regarded
as an overall benefit to society as a whole. The economy consisted of the isolated activities ofindividual people.14 From that, Schulz draws the conclusion that “classical law of hire was inharmony with these social and economical facts.”15 Thus, the locatio conductio survived aslong as the fabric of the society was changing in response to the influence of economic
development. This change meant the decline of the classical contractual Roman law. Contract
law did not continuously allow for the absence of abstraction. In later times, various legaltransactions were probably used as legal expressions of work. Thus, we can refer to the
stipulatio or mancipatio and the iusiurandum liberti.16
c. The status-relationships in the feudalistic society
At first sight, the significant features of the feudalistic society were the so-called statusrelationships, instead of contracts. These relationships were weaved into all areas of life.17 The
status relationship determined, in particular, the relationship between the liege and the serf. It
is no accident that agriculture was generally a most valued activity in the Middle Ages “as thegreatest wealth-producing” sector. The legal status of the person was not obtained on acontractual basis; they were born into this status. In the status relationship, reverse allocation
was applied. The serf received no remuneration for their work, but was obliged to work for theland they used.18
Later, urban communities strengthened and, for this reason, society became polarised and thediversification of work began. Many kinds of work was based on contract, and the firstelements of collective labour law, e.g. in mining, started to take shape. Nevertheless, theprimitive labour-market was under rigid control.19 This control was either internal or external.
Internal control was present in the organisation and operation of guilds. “The monopolistic
logic behind the guild system thus dictated the type of vocational training which was provided
in the form of strictly disciplined apprenticeship.”20 The monopolistic logic covered the market
too. The strict regulation of apprenticeships and the artificial exclusion of market competition
were the biggest barriers to development. External control was partially connected to the
Armando Torrent “The controversy on the trichotomy ‘res, operae, opus’ and the origin of the ‘locatio
conductio’. Revista Internacional de Derecho Romano, (2012) 10, 396.; Vincenzo Arangio-Ruiz ‘Istituzioni didiritto romano’ (Napoli, Jovene, 1984) 235-240.
12
Attila Pókecz Kovács “A munkavégzésre irányuló szerződések tipológiája a római jogban” (The typology ofthe so-called works contract in the roman law) Tudományos Dialóg 2000 22-25.
13
Schulz, Fritz above n9, at 544.
14Paul Oertmann above n2, at 78-79.
15
Schulz, Fritz above n9, at 545.
16
Francesco de Robertis “I rapporto di lavoro nel diritto romano” (Roma, Zanichelli, 1967) 223.
17
See Herbert Summer Maine “Ancient law, its connections with the early history of society and its relation tomodern ideas” (London, John Murray, 1908)
18
Werner Ogris “Geschichte des Arbeitsrechts vom Mittelalter bis in den 19. Jahrhundert” Recht der Arbeit (1967)
4, 86-289.
19
Bruno Veneziani “The evolution of the contract of employment” [in Bob Hepple (ed.) The making of labour
law in Europe] (London – New York, Mansell, 1986) 32-33.
20
Bruno Veneziani above n19, at 38.
1177

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90
guild’s relationships. Many medieval cities governed the prices and wages against market
requirements.21 These orders, rules and different ‘work-books’ meant a rigid restriction on theemployee’s freedom of contract – if it is possible to talk about contract and freedom in today's
sense at all.
At all events, the contract became increasingly important in the determination of the legal statusof domestic and agricultural servants.22 The status of domestic servants and agricultural
servants show a duality. On the one hand, the de facto status is highlighted, namely: direct
dependency, strict subordination and the unquestioned obedience. On the other hand, theirwork was based on ‘contracts’. These contracts were concluded verbally. The servant did notcontract their services for a certain work/job, but leased their own labour. In this sense, thiscontract was similar to the locatio conductio operarum.
It can be concluded that the different legal forms were in line with the social and economic
circumstances and requirements. The locatio conductio operarum was a typical contract
between free persons, but the de facto status of the locator did not differ much from thesituation of the slave.23 Later, the appearance of new contracts (stipulatio, mancipatio, etc.)reflected the need for changes, but it did not lead to a breakthrough. Obviously, thesedevelopments cannot be evaluated in a uniform way across different periods of the Middle
Ages. But the so-called ‘status’ was an arrangement determined by society, not by a contractual
relationship. At this point we should refer, again, to the famous sentence by Maine: “we may
say that the movement of the progressive societies has hitherto been a movement from Status
to Contract.”24

II.

The first breakpoint; the industrial revolution and the “massproduction economy” – the development of traditional structure of
employment relationshipa. From status to contract
Status to contract meant the freedom of contract, or in other words, the principle of laissez
faire, laissez passer. This principle “can be taken as the programme of economic liberalism.”25
Another famous sentence of this era is the following: “Qui dit contractuel, dit juste”.26 This
was the period when the so-called free market emerged, inducing fundamental change in theeconomy. Development into a market economy was in progress. The guilds were banned27 and,as a main principle, a contract was concluded between free and equal persons. The subordinatedworking person, previously in a ‘status relation’, gained a new legal position. They were nolonger a ‘servant’, but a free employee.

21

Bruno Veneziani above n19, at 35; Catharina Lies and Hugo Soly above n3, at 222-276.
See James Rogers “Six centuries of work an wages; The history of English labour” (London, Sweet & Maxwell,1894), 467-492.; Wilhelm Ebel, “Quellen und Geschichte des deutschen Arbeitsrechts” (Berlin, Duncker &Humblot, 1964); Henri Pirenne “A középkori gazdaság és társadalom története” (History of medieval economic
and society) (Budapest, Gondolat, 1983)
23
See a se locare and operas suas locare expressions.
24Henry Summer Maine above n1725“Laissez faire, laissez aller, le monde va de lui-même” See Thilo Ramm “Laissez-faire and state protection ofworkers” [in Bob Hepple (ed.), The making of labour law in Europe, (London – New York, Mansell, 1986) 72.
26
See Louise Rolland «Qui dit contractuel, dit juste» (Fouillée) …en trois petits bonds, à reculons” IXe Congrès
de l’Association internationale de méthodologie juridique (Tunis, nov. 2005) Les principes généraux de droit.
27
See Loi de Chapelier in France
2278New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90
However, in this context, it is necessary to interpret the notions of ‘equality’ and ‘freedom’. At
this point it is worthwhile to refer to the Havighurst’s argument28 regarding equality, hequestions if the use of this word is appropriate. Equality may be interpreted in two ways,
namely: ‘equality for the strong’ and ‘equality for the weak’. In his opinion: 29 “…contract in
its wild anarchic state contributes to equality for the strong. When it is domesticated andsubjected to law, it still shows traits that make for this kind of equality.”
As far as ‘freedom’ at that time is concerned, it meant the free decision to conclude andterminate a contract. The employee had little say in the determination of the content of thecontract. For this reason: 30…the history of the idea of the “contract of employment” can be seen as
the history of a false aspiration. The promise of freedom of contract in theemployment relationship was never fully achieved. The freedom of theworker in the labour market was impeded by his social condition – that is,by the status.
In this context, it is helpful to highlight Friedmann’s remark, that the law should not be sittingwith folded arms and tolerate that the contract be a disguised form of the status.31
b. The continued existence of locatio conductio in the legislation
The principle of freedom of contract and the assumption of equality were important because
these principles appeared at the level of legislation. The French Civil Code implemented theseprinciples. The principle itself was new but the legal form remained unchanged as rent, louage.
Veneziani draws attention to an important contradiction. In its original form, it was prohibitedto apply the locatio conductio to life and living persons.32 But the construction of the rent was,nevertheless, implemented in the French Civil Code.33 The substance of this solution was ‘lecontrat de louage de services’. See Pothier’s statement: “Contrat de louage de services‘consensuel, synallagmatique et commutatif’…”34 A similar solution is found in German law,
too. In this context, the approach of the pandectists is remarkable. Windscheid’s famous
sentences reflect the essence of the solution: “Die Miethe, welche den Gebrauch einer Sache
zum Gegenstand hat, heißt Sachmiethe; die Miethe welche den Gebrauch einer Arbeitskraftzum Gegenstand hat, heißt Dienstmiethe.”35
The regulation based on the lease-theory received heavy criticism. Oertmann emphasised thatan entirely new legal system, based on new principles, should have been established. Insteadof this, the law took over, without criticism, the locatio conductio, which had been designed
for a totally different social and economic environment.36 It can be argued that no other
Harold Havighurst “ The nature of private contract” (Evanston, Illinois, Northwestern University Press, 1961)
Harold Havighurst above n28, at 128-129.
30
Bruno Veneziani above n19, at 70.
31
Wolfgang Friedmann “Law in the changing society” (London, Stewens & Sons, 1971) 122.
28
29

32

Bruno Veneziani above n19 at 41

See Henry Guilleaume Camerlynck “ Traité de droit du travail” (Paris, Dalloz, 1968) 9-26.; Robert-Joseph
Pothier “Traité des obligations” (Paris, Dalloz, 2011)34
Robert-Joseph Pothier above n33, Cit: Henry Guilleaume Camerlynck above n33, at 2-12.
35
Bernhard Windscheid – Theodor Kipp “ Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts” 9. Aufl. (Frankfurt, 1906, Band 2) §399. About the pandectistic see Georg Friedrich Puchta “Lehrbuch der Pandekten” (Leipzig, Verlag vonAmbrosius Barth, 1838) 630; Eduard Hölder “Pandekten – Allgemeine Lehren, mit Rücksicht auf den
Civilgesetzentwurf” (Freiburg, Akademische Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1891) 404.
36
Paul Oertmann, above n2, at 79.
33

79

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90
contractual construction was available. Nevertheless, in connection with the draft ofBürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB), Gierke emphasised that the contract of employment was nota simple exchange contract. In his view, the contract of employment’s substance is its‘personality and community’ (personenrechtliches Gemeinschaftsverhältnis) character37 under
BGB § 611 “Durch den Dienstvertrag wird derjenige, welcher Dienste zusagt, zur Leistung
der versprochenen Dienste, der andere Teil zur Gewährung der vereinbarten Vergütung
verpflichtet. Gegenstand des Dienstvertrags können Dienste jeder Art sein.” The basic
question is the following: does the regulation of Dienstvertrag in itself represent a significant
difference compared to ‘Dienstmiehte’? Probably not. For this reason, it was necessary to
regulate a particular kind of Dienst, namely the Arbeitsvertrag. BGB § 611a introduces
additional elements to the Dienstvertrag that allow the regulation to be brought closer toreality.38
c. The subordination as differentia specifica of employment relationshipThe most important expressions in this text are ‘weisungsgebundene, fremdbestimmte Arbeit’,
persönliche Abhängigkeit’' and ‘Weisungsrecht’. Previously, it was quite an effort to justify
why there was no subordination in certain types of work performed for other persons; while
this was self-evident in employment relationship,39the task was far from simple. With theappearance and recognition of Dienstvertrag, it should have been reasonable to emphasise theequality of parties. However, all authors sought to justify the subordination of the employee,
in various approaches. Despite the fact that the theory of economic and personal dependence
had later been dismissed, Veneziani pointed out that freedom of employees – within theframework of contractual freedom – was not to become a reality on the labour market due totheir social status.40 Richardi has a noteworthy approach regarding the justification ofsubordination. He stated that the reason behind dependent work must be found in factors withinlaw, and it is nothing else but the abstract definition of service. Whereas in the service contractand in the contract of assignment, the person rendering the service undertakes an obligation to
perform a service which is limited by legal transaction. Under these obligations, the recipientof the service (customer, agent) does not have the option to obtain a ruling position over the
person providing the service in the course of performance.41 Before going into the analysis of
the consequences of an abstract definition of service in the contract, it is necessary to highlightthat labour law is fundamentally the law of those who generally do not have the opportunity or
skills to participate in the legal transaction as an independent party.
d. The special features of the contract of employment
The ‘abstract definition of service in the contract’ means that the contract of employment(Arbeitsvertrag, contrat du travail) is a so-called incomplete contract. The term of ‘incomplete

Otto Gierke “Der Entwurf eines Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuches und das deutsche Recht” (Leipzig, 1889) 245-246.
BGB § 611a: “Durch den Arbeitsvertrag wird der Arbeitnehmer im Dienste eines anderen zur Leistung
weisungsgebundener, fremdbestimmter Arbeit in persönlicher Abhängigkeit verpflichtet. Das Weisungsrecht kannInhalt, Durchführung, Zeit und Ort der Tätigkeit betreffen. Weisungsgebunden ist, wer nicht im Wesentlichen freiseine Tätigkeit gestalten und seine Arbeitszeit bestimmen kann. Der Grad der persönlichen Abhängigkeit hängt
dabei auch von der Eigenart der jeweiligen Tätigkeit ab.”39
Richardi referred to the dependence of individual employees as the premise of labour law. “Die Abhängigkeit
des einzelnen Arbeitnehmers ist der Grundtatbestand des Arbeitsrechts.” Reinhard Richardi “Kollektivgewalt und
Individualwille bei der Gestaltung des Arbeitsverhältnisses” (München, Beck, 1968) 1.
40
Bruno Veneziani above n19, at 31-72.
41
See above n 38 about the fremdbestimmte Arbeit.
37
38

80

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90
contract’ does not originate in labour law42, but its interpretation, with regards to the evaluationof contract of employment as a long-term contract and as a ‘relational contract’, is very
important. At this point, it is necessary to clarify that subordination and the incompletecharacter of the contract of employment together make the employee’s protection necessary.
Added to this is the long-term nature of employment relationship. In other words, a correlation
is detectable between an incomplete contract, legal subordination of an employee and longterm character of an employment relationship. Originally, the employment relationship wasestablished for an indefinite period, with the purpose of providing full time. Thus, the contractof employment is interpretable as a manifestation of the long term contract, though the longterm character of employment relationship has a specific feature. As a starting point, we use
Freedland’s43 standpoint on the nature of employment relationship whereby the employment
relationship is a long-term legal one with multiple time levels, irrespective of whether it wasestablished for an indefinite or fixed period. This, at the same time, determines the mutualityof rights and obligations. The first tier of the contract of employment is a kind of base tier, partof every contract established with the purpose of performing work, and relates to the present.
This means that one party is obliged to perform certain work, while the other party is obliged
to pay compensation for this work. It is apparent that this is not only part of the contract of
employment, but also of business contracts, assignments, brokership, etc. However, Freedlandemphasises that the contract of employment has an inherent promise for continued work andcontinued provision of work. Eventually, this mutual promise provides the stability of theemployment relationship, which can be, in certain cases, crucial to the employer as well, but it
is obviously the fundamental, vital interest of the employee.44 Accordingly, the employment
relationship has a so-called two-tiered structure; the essence of this is the employer’s implicit
promise for continued provision of work, which is manifested in legislation as an obligation
for the provision of work.
What are the consequences of a long-term employment relationship in general? The long-term
nature described above enforces certain characteristics in the dynamics of the legal relationship.
In this respect, the most important element is the problem of foreseeability. Naturally, in thiscontext, it is not the liability for damages, reasonably unforeseeable at the time of conclusionof the contract, which brings predictability into the focus, but the justification of altering thecontract’s future content.45 The documents referred to primarily do not analyse predictability
in respect of long-term contracts; and because liability is involved in this institution,
predictability has a different interpretation here than in case of long-term contracts where thefocus is not on liability for damages,46 but on the assessment of circumstances that might
facilitate the alteration of the content of the legal relationship, within certain limits.

Jean Tirole “Incomplete contracts: where do we stand?”, Econometrica (1999) 4, 741-781.; Oliver Hart and
John
Moore
“Incomplete
contractsandownership:Somenewthoughts”<<https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/hart/files/incompletecontactsandownershipaer.pdf> >.
43
Mark Freedland „The contract of employment” (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1976).
44
Ibid, at 19-21.
45
The problems of predictability, in fact, did not arise in the relation to the contract and the legal relationship –that is, not in respect of the alterability of this legal relationship. Instead, predictability came into the forefront in
the relation of unforeseeable events and damages occurring during contract performance. See: Convention on
Contracts for the International Sale of Goods Section 74; The Principles of European Contract Law Article 9:503;
UNIDROIT Principles Article 7.4.4.; Draft common Frame Reference III Section 7 III. – 3:703, and also CESL
Art. 159-165.
46
Just a few examples from the abundant literature on liability and foreseeability: Franco Ferrari “Comparative
ruminations on the foreseeability of damages in contract law” Louisiana Law Review, (1992-1993) 4 1257-1269.;
Ole Lando “Foreseeability and remoteness of damages in contract in the DCFR” European Review of Private Law(2009) 619-639.; Jeffrey M. Perloff “Breach of contract and foreseeability doctrine of Hadley & Baxendale” 104281New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90

The next question is, what are the consequences arising from the contractual content of theemployment relationship? The essence of the problem is whether, in such circumstances, it ispossible– or maybe more importantly, whether it is necessary at all – to define contractual
content in a precise and detailed way. The idea of the incomplete contract primarily aims toprevent expenses which are unforeseeable at the time of performance. Periodic review is an
essential feature of such contracts. This is when the parties must reconsider the mutual benefits
deriving from the legal relationship.47 Thus, long-term, incomplete contracts need periodic
review (re-negotiation), also, because this ensures the safe sustainability of this type of legal
relationships and, at the same time, the security of the parties’ status.48 Regarding the labour
law aspects of incomplete contracts, it has been highlighted that there is an increasing numberof professions or work types where advance predictability – as a requirement – is simply not
feasible, it does not operate. Such unpredictability, along with pre-design, particularly basedon it, has had and may still have diverse consequences even today. One such consequence isproviding the opportunity of unilateral alteration of conditions of employment relationship by
the employer.

III.

The second breakpoint; the heterogeneity of work versus
homogeneity of labour law

a. The tensions of traditional approach of employment relationshipThe long-term character of an employment relationship and subordination of employee had an
unexpected effect also. The regulation was based on the traditional characters of labour law,but employment had become more diverse in the meantime. The consequence of this was thatmany people sought the solution outside labour law.49 The reasons of this trend were analysed
in detail. It was clear that the macro-economic changes were not conducive to the traditional
form of employment. The requirement of a change in labour law is formulated in the ‘Lisbon
Strategy’ (LiS).50 The document highlighted that the European Union (EU) “is confronted witha quantum shift resulting from globalisation and the challenges of a new knowledge-driven
economy”51. The LiS evaluated the EU’s strengths and weaknesses, and formulated the needto create “more and better jobs for Europe”52 and urged to begin discussions on an active
employment policy.
The content of the Green Paper based on the LiS, and its purpose53 “…is to launch a publicdebate in the EU on how labour law can evolve to support the Lisbon Strategy’s objective ofachieving sustainable growth with more and better jobs.

Journal of Legal Studies (1981) 39-64.; Edwin Peel “The Law of Contract” (13th Edition) (Sweet & Maxwell,
London 2011) 3.
47
Jean Tirole above n 42, at 741-781.
48
Duoglas Bernheim and Michael Whinston “Incomplete contracts and strategic ambiguity” (1999) The American
Economic Review 9, 902.
49
See the title of the conference in Zell am See (1987): Flucht aus dem Arbeitsrecht (Escape from the labour law).
Summary of the conference see: Klaus Firley “ Flucht aus dem Arbeitsrecht” (1987) Das Recht der Arbeit, 4-5,
271-289, 411-422.
50
Lisbon European Council 23 and 24 March 2000 Presidency Conclusion.
51
LiS The new challenge, point 1.
52
Ibid. The way forward, point 5.
53
Green Paper – Modernising labour law to meet the challenges of the 21th century; COM (2006) 3.

82

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90”The Green Paper stated that European labour markets face the challenge of “combining greater
flexibility with the need to maximize security for all”54. For this reason the Green Paper,
amongst others, encourages the identifying the key challenges that have not yet yielded anadequate response. It also mirrors the clear gap between legal and contractual framework andthe realities of the world of work. The paper seeks to encourage discussion on how different
types of contractual relations, this, together with employment rights applicable to all workers,
could facilitate job creation and assist both workers and enterprises by easing labour market
transitions, assisting life-long learning and fostering the creativity of the whole workforce.
It is worth highlighting two elements in the latter quotation. One is ‘different types ofcontractual relations’ (unterschiedliche Arten vertraglicher Beziehungen), the other one is‘labour market transitions’ (Übergänge auf dem Arbeitsmarkt). In this context, the Green Paper
analysed the situation of labour law. It is emphasised that the original purpose of labour law
was to offset the inherent economic and social inequality within the employment relationship.55
This evaluation of the document is correct. Labour law centered on the statement of theemployee’s legal status, and built up its legal system from the traditional concept of an
employee. This system consists of three elements, namely: the typical content of the contractof employment is establishing an employment relationship for an indefinite period; theexclusive causa of employment relationship is the contract of employment56; and finally, theparties in the employment contract/relationship are one employer and one employee. Under theGreen Paper, the “rapid technological progress, increased competition stemming fromglobalisation, changing consumer demand and significant growth of the services sector haveshown the need for increased flexibility”.57
b. New labour market policies – unilateral altering’s power of employer
The argument of the Green Paper is not without antecedents. The attempt to create a newlabour-market policy has already begun; for example the Danish model of ‘flexicurity’,58 theBiagi-reform in Italy,59 and the Spanish labour law reform.60 These solutions have many
common features but, most important, for our topic, is the opportunity to modify the working
conditions of the employment relationship, found particularly in the new Spanish regulation.61
These regulations are important from a certain respect. Namely, while the strengthening of theemployer’s power to change the relationship did not have a legal basis, these rules were infavour and supported the efforts of the employer.

54

Ibid. at 3.
Ibid. at 5.
56
The significant difference between employee and worker (Arbeitnehmer und arbeitnehmerähnliche Personen)see Guy Davidov “Who is a worker? (2005) Industrial Law Journal, 3, 57-71.; Nicole Neuvians, “Diearbeitnehmerähnliche Person” (Berlin, Duncker & Humblot, 2002)
57
Green Paper above n53 at 5.
58
See Kongshøj Madsen “The Danish modes of ‘flexicurity’ – A paradise with some snakes” Conference Paper
was presented at the Annecy Conference on the Future of Work and Social Protection arranged by ILO and theFrench Government on 16-18 January 2002 in Lyon
59
Michele Tiraboschi “The reform of the Italian labour market over the past ten years: a process of liberalization?”(2008) Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 427-458.
60
Federico Durán López “Spain’s post-reform labour market legal framework, SEFO Spanish Economic andFinancial Outlock, 2015, May.; Javier Gómez Aballeira “The Spanish Labour Reform and the Courts:
Employment Adjustment and the Search for Legal Certainty” (2012) Spanish Labour and Employment Relations
Journal, 41-45.
61
Giménez, Daniel Toscani “La modificación unilateral de condiciones e trabajo por el empresario – Comentarios
a la Ley 3/2012, de 7 de julio” (El Derecho, Madrid, 2014); Manuel Lague Perra and Anna Ginés “Modificationof working conditions in Spain” (2014) IUSLabor, 3
55

83

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90
What were the options available to employers? Comparative analyses confirm that the ability
to alter the content of the employment relationship in the process of performance has become
increasingly important. In this context, it is necessary to highlight that the sources of labour
law are of diverse legal nature. These sources can generally be classified into legislative andcontractual components. The complexity of the sources of labour law is highlighted by
Adomeit, who also analysed the source system of law in terms of altering the content of theemployment relationship. Employment relationships differ from other legal relationships
because their content is determined and affected by various factors (Bestimmungsgründe).62 As
far as contractual sources are concerned, the content of the contract of employment
fundamentally determines the employer’s possibility and power to alter. This is important tohighlight, especially in today’s unpredictable economic environment, because, behind thedesire for unilateral, or quasi-unilateral changes to the employment relationship, there are theemployer’s economic interests. When the parties regulate the working conditions in thecontract of employment in detail, these conditions can only be modified by an amendment of
the contract. However, this is where the concept of the above mentioned incomplete contract
comes into the picture. The contract of employment as an incomplete contract may entitle theemployer or, for example, the collective agreement, to regulate the employer’s power tochange.
Thus, it is possible to change the working conditions without changing the employment
contract. Such a distinction can be found in French labour law. Nevertheless, it can be statedthat the contract needs to be amended in case of all events that can lead to changes in theessential content elements of the employment relationship.63 The distinction between thecontent of the contract of employment and the employment relationship can also be observedin English labour law. The content of the employment relationship is fundamentally determinedby two factors: the express terms laid down in the contract of employment, and the implied
terms traditionally attached to it. The elements determining the content of the employment
relationship are not included in the contract of employment but generally in the collective
agreement. Naturally, the terms of the contract of employment are mutually binding by theparties, but the ‘vital part of the contract’; more precisely the dynamics of the employment
relationship is not provided for in this contract. Accordingly, the English employment
relationship is referred to as an incomplete contract for a number of reasons.64 The incomplete
contract provides abundant room for the employer to exercise certain ‘privileges’. A numberof experts support the principle of managerial prerogative from the employer’s perspective,
with the argument that every long-term investment comes with risks. These investments are
implemented through specific legal transactions; such is the contract of employment and its
legal effect, the employment relationship. In this context, the following argumentation may
apply to employment relationship as well. In case the content of a legal transaction that
establishes a longer-term investment does not cover every detail, deriving from privileges
based on property/ownership the investor has the right to unilateral altering, therefore theeffectiveness of the business is guaranteed from the start.65
The problem of changing working conditions (Gestaltungsrecht) is a focal area of German
labour jurisprudence.66 The employer’s power to change is associated with the long-term
Klaus Adomeit “ Rechtsquellenfragen im Arbeitsrecht” (München, C. H. Beck’sche, 1969) 5.
These elements are mainly outside the employer’s unilateral decision power concerning how work is performed.
For further details see Paul-Henry Antonmattey “Les clauses du contrat du travail” (Rueil-Malmaison, Liaisons,
2009)
64
Ann Pankhurst “Work effort under the incomplete contract of employment” (Cambridge, New Hall, 1988) 5-8.
65
Oliver Hart, and John Moore above n 42
66
Eduard Bötticher “Gestaltungsrecht und Unterwerfung im Privatrecht” (Berlin, Walter de Gruyter & Co., 1964);
Ulrich Preis “Grundfragen der Vertragsgestaltung im Arbeitsrecht” (Neuwied, Luchterhand, 1993) 37-50, 51-85.;
62
63

84

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90
character of the employment relationship and, consequently, with the uncertainty of thecontractual promise (Umbestimmtheit).67 But, the question is whether the employer’s generalright to conduct (allgemeines Weisungsrecht) could serve as a base for the employer’s so-called
extended right to discretion (erweitertes Weisungsrecht). The majority position in German
literature assumes that the employer’s general right to conduct could be extended throughindividual contracts. This would be allowed via a clause called Versetzungsklausel(Versetzungsvorbehalt) which would permit the employer to change the nature of theemployee’s job activities as well as their place of work. This would help to avoid frequent
amendments to the contract of employment when there are changes in circumstances requiring
significant modification in performance, and these changes only become evident after theconclusion of the contract. The subject of this, ultimately agreement-based, right to conduct
reaches beyond an employee’s obligation to contract performance, as it would also allowchanges outside the contract, not specified in advance.68 Mentzel refers to the fact that German
law enforcement developed the limits of such right to conduct relatively early, stating that,
although a general right to conduct might not exceed the contract, its extension by the contractof employment or by a collective agreement was permitted.69 Recent legislation has also
recognised this possibility, emphasising that the change, apart from being agreement-based,must be objectively grounded.70

IV.

A new approach to the long-terms contracts

a. Theory of relational contract
Contracts can be grouped into two general categories: short-term and long-term contracts.71
Many refer to the former as ‘discrete transactions’.72 According to the evaluation by Macneil,such contracts are characterised by two general features: they are short and limited in scope.73
The following are, not exclusively, the features of these exchange-type contracts. The
transactional type generally involves fewer parties and able to be monetised in terms of its
contents; from an economic perspective, it is a contract of exchange. The elapsed time between
performance and then conclusion of the contract is short; contract performance generally does
not require continuity. The contents of the agreement are clear; it is designed and worded forthe present. The actual contents of the contract is complete, its design is also complex. The
substance of the contract is the act of the exchange itself; its temporal dimension is‘presentiation of the future’.74 Consequently, the parties are fully bound to the plan, i.e. to thecontents of the contracts concluded.
Walter Böttner “Das Direktionsrecht des Arbeitgebers” (Marburg, Elwert, 1971) Alfred Böker “ Das
Weisungsrecht des Arbeitgebers” (Frankfurt a. Main, Athäneum, 1971);Rolf Birk (Die arbeitsrechtliche
Leitungsmacht (Köln, Carl Heymanns, 1973) 23-79.
67
Thomas Mentzel “Die Änderung von Arbeitsbedingungen kraft Direktionsrecht oder im Wege voran
konsentierter Änderungsverträge” (Hamburg, Verlag Dr. Kovać, 2003) 3-4
68
Thomas, Mentzel above n 67, at 91-92.
69
Ibid. at 163-180.
70
See § 315 BGB „Bestimmung der Leistung durch eine Partei”;
71
Morten Hviid “Long-term contracts and relational contracts” Encyclopaedia, encyclo.findlaw.com/4200book,46-47., Ian Roderick Macneil “The many futures of contracts” (1973-1974) Southern California Law Review,
691-816; “Essays on the nature of contract” (1978-1979) North Carolina Central Law Journal 159-200.
72
Ian Roderick Macneil “The many futures of contracts” above n 71, at 693.
73
Ibid, at 720.
74
Macneil’s theory is that the term “presentation” plays an important role in the classification of contracts.
“Presentiation” is only a manner in which a person perceives the future’s effect on the present; but it depends
upon events outside the individual psyche, events viewed as determining the future. Presentation is, thus, arecognition that the course of the future is bound by present events, and, by those events, the future has, for many85

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90
In contrast, a so called ‘relational contract’ is not simply a contract of exchange. Further to theeconomic effects of the contract, there are other factors not of an economic but basically ofsocial nature. A large part of these contracts cannot be, or is difficult to monetise. Relational
contracts are long-term, and do not terminate when one or two obligations are met. Macneil
highlights that individuals entering into such relations so do gradually, in some cases, startingwith their birth and the contract ends with their death. The substance of relational contracts is
continuous planning. While transactional contracts have the nature of ‘presentiation of the
future’, the relational contracts is “futurizing of the present”.75
However, is every long-term contract is also a relational contract? The dilemma of long-term
contracts, according to Baird, is the “need to fix responsibilities at the outset and the need toreadjust them over time permeates the long-term contractual relationship”76. The first onemeans loyalty to the contractual obligation, while the second means the flexible adjustment of
the contract to the circumstances that have changed or will change in the future.77 Hviid
emphasises that this ‘tension’ is observed both in cases of long-term and relational contracts.
According to this, there would be two contract types, “although closely related, neither is asubset of the other.”78 Goetz and Scott emphasise that relational contracts “encompass mostgeneric agency relationships, including distributorships, franchises, joint ventures, andemployment contracts.”79 At the same time, the author draws attention to the fact that theconcepts of simple long-term contract and relational contract are often intermixed. Theirstandpoint is that classic contingent contracts need to be distinguished from and relational
contracts.80
However, the contract of employment does not paint a sophisticated picture While the contractof employment can, without a doubt, be evaluated as an incomplete contract, the following
statement is true for the contract of employment: “relational contracts also require morecreative control mechanisms than conventional contingent contracts do.”81 The authors of thispaper have detected an important difference between the ‘traditional’ relational contract andthe contract of employment. The parties of a relational contract want to maintain thisrelationship and, because of the invested financial and intellectual property, they seek to avoid
ceasing the contract. In other words, the parties have become a so-called ‘forced-community’.
This does not apply to the contract of employment.
b. Contract of employment as a relational contract
Bird clearly states that “employment is a relational contract”,82 however, the emphasis that
“employment relations immediately transcend wage-for-services exchanges and develop into
complex whole person relationships based upon trust, commitment, and shared solidarity”83
Reveals that the interpretation is also multifaceted. He is of the opinion that “one-third of
employees work without a contract referencing discharge laws; work norms influence virtually
purposes, been brought effectively into the present.’ Ian Roderick Macneil “Restatement (second) of contracts
and presentation” (1974) Virginia Law Review, 589.
75
See Ian Roderick Macneil “The many futures of contracts” above n 71, at 738-740.
76
Douglas Baird “Self-interest and cooperation in long-term contracts” (1990) The Journal of Legal Studies 586.
77
Ibid. at 586.
78
Morten Hviid above n 71, at 46.
79
Charles J. Goetz and Robert E. Scott “Principles of relational contract” (1981) Virginia Law Review 1091.
80
Similar Morten Hviid above n 71, at 46
81
Charles J. Goetz and Robert E. Scott above n 79, at 1093.
82
Robert C. Bird “Employment as relational contract” (2005) U. Pa. Journal of Labour and Employment Law
215.
83
Ibid. at 209.

86

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90
all employees present in a workplace”.84 He describes in detail the similarities between thecontract of employment and the relational contract, but points out a significant difference: thesubordination of the employee. Nevertheless, his conclusion is as follows:
Relational contracts represent the dominant bargain between employer and employee.
An enforceable relational contract, based upon well-established sources of culture,credo, and expectation, is an accurate representation of what the parties intend in theemployment context.85
In the English literature, this connection was addressed by Brodie.86 He points out that theemployment relationship has multiple forms, and more than one of these, such as certain
atypical forms of employment, allow the employer to bypass basic employee protection rights.
Concerning the traditional contract of employment, it is doubtless thatthe implied term of mutual trust and confidence is much more wide ranking but, in allprobability, would not extend to requiring an alteration of the parties’ obligations in thelight of radically changed circumstances’87
Apparently, Brodie refers here to unilateral changes, to which the employee is not obliged toconsent, however. It is important to note that, further on, the duty of trust and confidence could
not be used to render the original content of the contract meaningless.88
Undoubtedly, Macneil’s criteria are clear in his own system. At the same time, the content of
the contract of employment has evolved in a different direction from that of the values
represented by Macneil’s theory of contract.89 Consequently, the adaptation of the criteria ofrelational contract to the contract of employment is doubtful. Brodie draws attention to the factthat the commercial contract and the employment contract exist in two different areas. The
employee is not in a competitive position in their own environment, they are unable to easily
convert a contractual partner, i.e. their possibility to conclude a new contract is minimal.

V.

Limits of unilateral changing of the content of employment
relationship – regulatory environment

An essential purpose of labour law regulation is safeguarding the employee’s legal status,
referred to as status protection. Due to expected problems arising from the long-term nature of
the employment relationship and the dominant position of the employer, the contract of
employment – in the majority of cases – contains predefined conditions.90 However, if these
conditions evolved as a result of implied terms, they might allow the employee abundant
opportunity for changes.91 Therefore, the contract of employment can easily show the features
84

Ibid. at 215.
Robert C. Bird above n 82, at 206.
86
Douglas Brodie “How relational is the employment contract?”(2011) Industrial Law Journal 236.
87
Ibid. at 238.
88
Ibid. at 236.
89
In this context see State of South Australia v McDonald [2009] SASC 219. The following argument can befound in this decision: “The development of the implied term can be seen as consistent with the contemporary
view of the employment relationship as involving elements of common interest and partnership, rather than of
conflict and subordination”.
90
Martin Henssler and Wilhelm Moll “AGB-kontrolle vorformulierter Arbeitsbedingungen” (München, C. H.
Beck’sche, 2011); Jens Suckow (et al) “Der vorformulierte Arbeitsvertrag” (Köln, Luchterhand, 2011)91
Ian Smith and Nicolaus Randall “Contract actions in modern employment law: Developments and issues”(London, Butterworths, 2002) 29-96.; Catherine Barnard “Reconsidering the mechanism to regulate working
conditions in the light of diversified and individualised employees and the declining labour unions”
85

87New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90
of the general conditions of contract. Accordingly, the content elements of the contract of
employment must be flexible and adaptable. As a consequence, a general condition applicableto the contract of employment may include an employer’s unilateral right to contract changes,
and reference to the collective agreement (or work council’s agreement).
When altering the content of the employment relationship, the crucial factor is content control,
which has multiple levels. The first immanent level lies within the contract itself; this derives
from the fact that the basis of entitlement to unilateral altering power is also rooted in thecontract. Content control of the contract is fundamental at this level.92
The second level of control should be provided by labour law regulation. The requirement ofequitable assessment has relevance in this respect. Section 315 of BGB applies to themodification of the content of the employment relationship as well as to control of thismodification. If the employer’s altering power derives from the contract of employment, whilereferring to the reservation by Birk on contractual entitlement,93 we do not refer to control of
the content but of equitable assessment.94
The next phase of the regulatory environment is connecting the alteration of the content of theemployment relationship and termination of the employment relationship. In this respect, theregulation of so-called Änderungskündigung is remarkable.95 The precise determination of thecondition of termination by the employer can create a balance between the altering power of
employment and the protection of the employee.

VI.

Conclusiona. Contract of employment as a relational contract – prerequisites
Despite the fact that – in a contract of employment – the parties are not reunited community
interests as in in the case of a relational contract, it may also become necessary to maintain theemployment relationship in changing circumstances. This can be ensured by the employer’s
unilateral, or more precisely ‘quasi’ unilateral, power to alter.
Labour law regulation should be based on the principle of the contract. Consequently, unlessotherwise provided in the labour regulation, the principle of civil law and provisions of the
http://www.jil.go.jp/english/events/documents/clls04_barnard1.pdf, 51-58.; Hugh Collins “ Regulating theemployment relation for competitiveness” (2001) Industrial Law Journal 17-47.; Wolfgang Grobecker “ Implied
terms und Treu und Glauben” (Berlin, Duncker & Humblot, 1999) 231-256.
92
See as comparison Dorothea König “Die Inhaltskontrolle von Arbeitsverträgen in Deutschland, England undFrankreich” (Freiburg, Rombach, 2010), and further Loraine Watson “Employees and the Unfair Contract Terms
Act” Industrial Law Journal, (1995) 4, 323-336.; Mark Freedland, “The personal employment contract” Oxford,
Oxford University Press, 2003) 190-192.
93
In any case, it is worth considering Birk’s remark asserting that the altering and concretising power of theemployer had been fundamentally adopted on the basis of unwritten law and judicature – also as a consequenceof legal history experience. Rolf Birk above n 66-n 77.
94
Rolf Birk above n 66, at 55-56.; Gerrick von Hoyningen-Huene “Die Billigkeit im Arbeitsrecht” (München,
C.H. Beck, 1978) 47-85, 128-172.; Hugh Collins – Keith D. Ewing – Aileen McColgan “ Labour Law”
(Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2012) 765-799.; In connection with control of discretion, see thereasonable test Douglas Brodie “ The contract of employment” (Edinburgh, W. Green & Son Ltd., 2008) 87-91.
95
See Franz X. Wallner „Die Änderungskündigung” (München, C.H.Beck, 2005); Jens Jüttner “ Der Vorrang derÄnderungskündigung vor Beendigungskündigung” (Baden-Baden, Nomos, 2010); Günther Löschnigg (Hrsg) “Die Kündigung aus wirtschaftlichen Gründen und ihre Beschränkungen im internationalen Vergleich” (Wien,
OGB Verlag, 2008)88

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90
Civil Codes are to be applied. This problem has been raised mainly in continental law.
Nevertheless, the application of the rules of civil law does not depend on whether or not there
is codified legislation. However, this solution has strict conditions. In this context, a good
example is the German draft on contract of employment.96
An employer’s entitlement to unilaterally alter the content of employment relationship should
be based on the contract of employment or collective agreement. As far as the entitlement of
the employer is concerned, this would be better regulated in the collective agreement, because
it is only in this way that balance between the parties can be assumed. However, this solution
requires clarification or the relationship between contract of employment and collective
agreement. In this respect, it is important that the collective agreement has a more significant
role. .97
Control of the contract of employment and of the collective agreement is needed especially incases when, upon entitlement by contract, one of the parties can alter the content of the legal
relationship. This control is equally applicable to the employment contract and the collective
agreement. The control has to designate the content and the limitation of the contractual
entitlement on the basis of regulation of the general conditions.
Special protection is necessary against dismissal for economic reasons. It is safe to say thatdismissal for economic reasons within EU Member States is generally considered an ultima
ratio option, preceded by appropriate measures. Naturally, this applies to dismissal due tochanges in the employer’s economic circumstances, and is shown in a number of cases of facts,
institutions and procedures in each state. In this respect, in French labour law it is worth noting
how the altering of content of the employment relationship due to economic reasons(modification du contrat de travail pour motif économique) is connected to termination, due tothe same licenciement pour motif économique)98, which could refer to the principles of unfair
labour practice as it is known in English law, in particular, the institutions of prohibition of
unfair dismissal and the right to justified dismissal.99 Finally, the German system for protectionof dismissal needs to be mentioned here which, apart from Änderungskündigung mentioned
above, introduced multiple restrictions to protect the employee.100
The role of collective labour law should be strengthened. A function of collective labour law
is to establish a balance between the parties. The labour law cannot be imagined without thecorrelative unit of individual and collective labour law. The collective part of labour law plays
an important role in the development of the EU labour law, although their impact in Central
European countries is still low in our days.
b. Possible versions of future labour law

See, Diskussionsentwurf eines Arbeitsvertragsgesetzes (ArbVG) 2. Fassung – Stand: August 2006. Bertelsmann
Stiftung; The Section 1 of this draft stated the following: “Das Arbeitsverhältnis wird durch Vertrag begründet.
Soweit dieses Gesetz nichts anderes bestimmt, gelten die Bestimmungen des Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuches. (Unlessotherwise provided in this Act, the provisions of the Civil Code shall apply.) Martin Henssler, and Ulrich Preis “
Entwurf eines Arbeitsvertragsgesetzes” (München, Beck, 2015)97
About the voluntary/contractual sources see Simon Deakin and Gillian S. Morris “Labour Law” London,
Butterworths, 1989), 75-80.
98
Jean Pélissier – Alain Supiot, – Antoine Jeammaud “Droit du travail” (Paris, Dalloz, 2006) 461-468.; Françoise
Favennec-Héry “Modification du contrat de travail: le glissement de l’objectif vers le subjectif” (2003) Revue dejurisprudence sociale, 6, 459–465.
99
Hugh Collins – Keith D. Ewing – Aileen McColgan above n 94, at 800-854.
100
See Gerrick von Hoyningen-Huene „Kündigungsschutzgesetz” München C.H. Beck, 1992); Ulrich Preis “Prinzipien des Kündigungsrechts bei Arbeitsverhältnissen” (München, C.H. Beck, 1993)
96

89

New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(3): 75-90
In summary, the following may be laid down. The labour reforms so far have been implemented
under the influence of state intervention. The legislator generally took into account thelawfulness of the contract law, however, flexibility aspirations favoured the ‘equality of thestrong’.101 Furthermore, the success of reforms always depends on the state of the economy.
For these reasons it should be asked: does the current legal construction of labour law meet theeconomic requirements? There are several signs that it does not.
One possible road to take is to keep the current system, to limit the content of traditional locatio
conductio within the framework of strict social restrictions. It is apparent that, despite all
efforts, this version pushes the boundaries of traditional labour law; controlled flexibility
approach and various active labour market policy measures have not rendered results.
Another possible road leads to total freedom of employment and provision of employment.102
This version almost completely annuls the current system of labour law. Its reality is, indeed,evident with regard to the emergence and spreading of new methods of employment as well as
provision of employment. This started with the appearance of the so-called crowdsourcing
where certain groups of employees saw a chance for themselves to become a factor to regulate
economic movements or at least a chance to participate more actively in processes concerningthem.103 Visibly, the legal practice tries to manage employment by digital platforms within theframework of traditional labour law institutions.104 It remains to be seen how successful thisapproach is.
The third road is the adaptation of the relational contract to employment contract. Theinterpretation of contract of employment as a relational contract has received many criticisms.
Nevertheless, this interpretation and implementation to the praxis is not necessarily to be
rejected. This idea is based on the contract itself.105 This contract, however, is a lot more thana mere agreement of exchange. In this context, the legislation only creates conditions andprotects against abuses.

101

See Harold Havighurst above n 28 at 127-129.
One of the symptoms is the employment by the digital platform. See Jeremias Prassl and Martin Risak “Uber,
TaskRabbit, & Co: Platforms as Employers? Rethinking the Legal Analysis of Crodwork” (2017) Comparative
Labor Law & Policy Journal 3. 619-652; Miriam A. Cherry “Beyond Misclassification: The Digital
Transformation of Work” (2016) Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal 10 577-603; Valerio de Stefano“Introduction: Crowdsourcing, The Gig Economy, And the Law” (2017) Comparative Labor Law & Policy
Journal 10, 461-470.
103
See Prassl, Jeremias – Risak, Martin: Uber, TaskRabbit, & Co: Platform as Employers? Rethinking the Legal
Analysis of Crodwork. Comparative Labour Law & Policy Journal, 2016/3. 619.
104
See C-437/15. Asociación Profesional Elite Taxi v. Uber System Spain SL, 48.
105
In this context see Ian Roderick Macneil “ The new social contract” (Yale University Press, New Haven andLondon, 1979)102

90