Mahuta Nanaia: Employment Relations (Probationary Period Repeal) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Mahuta Nanaia: Employment Relations (Probationary Period Repeal) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13040] 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato) 
: 
 I want to know what the plan is for young people. What is this Government’s plan to get young people into employment? On this side of the House we know that over 60000 young people are currently unemployed but what is the Government going to do about it? Nothing! National members have said absolutely nothing about how they will generate employment opportunities in our communities so that those 60000-plus young people can get a job and keep a job—that is real jobs real wages and our young people being looked after. That is why I want to speak to this particular bill. If the 90-day probationary period is the solution that the National Government has to get young people into employment then I can say now and I am supported by the Maori Party that it is not working for Maori young people and it is not working for Pacific young people. For the 60000-plus young people who are currently unemployed this bill has not made one iota of a difference. 
Meanwhile members on the other side of the House continue to say that this bill will be fantastic because it is a probationary opportunity to give a young person a go. Well the statistics speak for themselves. This is not about naming and shaming; this is about saying “Look at the statistics; they speak for themselves”. Over 60000 young people are currently unemployed and they are not helped by the 90-day probationary period bill so this bill that Carmel Sepuloni has brought forward to get rid of the 90-day probationary period bill signals a clear message. That is why Labour is supporting it. It reaffirms our values that workers should be given a fair go when they are given a job. They should not be able to be fired at will for no reason. 
I ask members to put themselves in the shoes of young people getting a job their first job. They are excited; they are keen to do something—anything. They have an opportunity they get into the workplace they get tasks to do and their supervisors say that those are the tasks for the day. The young people do the jobs to the best of their ability but hello at the end of the day their supervisors are unhappy. The supervisors have not thought for one minute that they were unclear on the instructions that they gave to such young people. When a supervisor relays information back to the boss who is worried about only time frames and bottom lines the next day the young person is called and told not to bother going back because the company has too much work to do. Under the current law which this Government is promoting as being popular for young people those young people can be fired without any reason whatsoever and got rid of. 
How would those young people feel? They would feel rejected dejected and most of all unconfident about their future job prospects. They would have nothing on their CV. Getting released from their first jobs for no reason at all leaves them nothing on their CV so what are their future job prospects? 
One member on the opposite side of the House decided to accuse Carmel Sepuloni of not knowing anything about her electorate. But Carmel knows that in the places where young people work—McDonald’s Burger King supermarkets movie theatres and such places—they are really afraid of the type of legislation that might hurt their opportunity to keep a real job. If young people got jobs today wanted to campaign to increase the minimum wage and went out on a limb to say “Well actually the work that we do should be valued and paid as such.”—that is if those young people campaigned to increase the minimum youth wage—their boss could get rid of them. Is that fair? 
Under National’s labour market legislation that situation would be absolutely within the realm of possibility but under Labour we say no. Workers deserve a fair go they deserve to be protected in the workplace and they deserve to be given a fair go. If they are released from work they should be given the opportunity to know why. That is why we are supporting this particular bill. 
I just cannot believe that the member for Hamilton East stood up in this House to promote a bill that will have impact on those young people who work in Countdown in Hamilton East and in the Warehouse in Hamilton East saying that the legislation will create more opportunities. In fact there are far more young people looking for work than there are jobs available yet the member for Hamilton East is continuing to promote that bill. He needs to get in contact with real people on the ground because young people want to know what the National Government’s plan is to create growth so that young people can be employed—so that they can keep their jobs get paid a real wage and more important ensure that their future job prospects will continue to grow from further opportunities and not be cut off at the post by the 90-day probationary period bill.