Gosche Mark: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Gosche Mark: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:642;Page:12062] 
Hon MARK GOSCHE (Labour—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 The purpose clause of the Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill gives a bit more meat to the debate than the previous two clauses we have been discussing. As members who have read the bill and understood it will have seen a significant change has been made in the purpose clause from what was originally quite a narrow group of people who would have been able to qualify. The replacement clause is the new majority clause and members will note that it is a majority clause because the National Party could not bring itself to support this very sensible proposition. 
The clause states: “The purpose of this Act is to insert a new Part 6AA into the principal Act to—(a) provide a statutory right to employees who meet specified criteria as to the period of their employment to request a variation of certain terms and conditions of their working arrangements because they provide care of certain persons; and (b) place certain duties on employers who receive those requests.” How could anybody oppose that? As the author of the bill Sue Kedgley said the clause is very light-handed. It will not bring down the world and it will not bring employers to their knees as the National Party likes to pretend. The clause provides for the right of employees to request of their employers a variation of certain terms and conditions of their working arrangements. 
I was sitting on a select committee the other day and I read some very interesting stuff from Business New Zealand about productivity in this country—the National Party should take note of it. Business New Zealand said that there is a greater need for part-time work and flexible working hours because they will assist an improvement in productivity. 
 Where is Dr Lockwood Smith when we need him in this debate? He has been going on and on about improving productivity for so long that I cannot remember when he was not talking about it. We had Business New Zealand in front of the select committee saying that we need to encourage the ability for more workers to have part-time hours and flexible working times. This bill will allow people to request that right from their employers. 
Anne Tolley 
: There is nothing stopping them now. 
Hon MARK GOSCHE 
: If there was nothing stopping them—and we heard all about that during the something like 18 months the bill was with the select committee—we would have seen a massive change in employers’ approach to this bill. We offered them the chance by having an adjournment if you like on this bill of 1 whole year. 
We asked the employers who came along to the select committee and submitted whether they could show us the educational material they gave to their members of the Employers and Manufacturers Association showing them how to go about making a request because we had worker after worker and group after group coming and saying that it was extraordinarily difficult to get that simple request listened to. 
The evidence was from professional women and from workers in supermarkets factories and the many many industries that presented themselves but every one of them said that they had difficulty in getting their employers to consider their requests. They did not want a law change just for the sake of it; they wanted a law change because of their own personal experience. 
We had employers saying they wanted to improve productivity in New Zealand by encouraging flexibility of working arrangements and they asked for a voluntarist approach. We gave them a year and said: “Go ahead and do it. Show us your stuff.” but unfortunately they just did not bother. They just paid lip-service to the idea. As a result we have this very light-handed legislation that asks employers in New Zealand to please listen to the requests. 
Bob Clarkson 
: Certainly don’t say please! 
Hon MARK GOSCHE 
: If it does not suit Bob Clarkson as an employer there are seven reasons why he can say no and legitimately say no. What is wrong with that? I ask what is wrong with that. Employees are given the right to request and employers are given a whole menu of reasons to say: “For this particular reason I am sorry but I cannot accede to your request.” And those employers would have obeyed the law. They would have listened to requests from people who after all have responsibilities in their family home to look after a child a sick relative a disabled person or an older person in need of care. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: And people make those arrangements all the time. 
Hon MARK GOSCHE 
: That shows us how heartless National members are. They do not even want to give a worker a right in law to make that request. They say: “Oh they have a right now.” Well I ask Dr Mapp how it is that so many people turned up to that select committee and said that that right did not exist in reality. The right might exist in some theoretical legislation that Dr Mapp would dream up but it ain’t in the reality of the workplace right now.