Twyford Phil: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTwyford Phil: Employment Standards Legislation Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 08 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6366. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatū): Members of the public are often a bit disbelieving when you tell them that in Parliament the Opposition will often vote for Government bills. They think because they see the contest of ideas in question time that it is always about conflict and that we always disagree. On this side of the House we take seriously our role as legislators and when a bill makes even a small marginal increase in the well-being of the general population we feel compelled to vote for it. It might not be perfect; it might not have the kind of ambition that we do but if it offers even some very incremental gain we will vote for it.But it is so depressing and dreary to be in this House debate after debate bill after bill voting for completely inadequate legislation. This is yet another example of a bill that is at first blush a mixed bag to say the least. It has got some good parts in it which I will touch on but other parts we have serious misgivings about.This bill illustrates I think the fact that in National’s parallel universe not only is there no housing crisis and the economy is going fine but also this bill will end zero-hour contracts. That is what Michael Woodhouse promised. He went on TV and said that he was going to end zero-hour contracts because they are unconscionable. But actually what we find looking at this bill is that the effect of it is that it simply creates a new set of rules for zero-hour contracts. The Government is not abolishing them and it is not getting rid of them; it is simply regularising or legalising them.There was one very telling part of the regulatory impact statement that I want to refer to. There is a discussion in the regulatory impact statement about how the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment prepared the first version of it and then when Treasury got hold of it—and I am sure the clammy hand of the Minister can be seen in this as well. The ministry had initially considered the option of a general ban on unconscionable practices—that is zero-hour contracts. It was deemed that it might have unintended consequences and the National Government’s actually putting a stop to zero-hour contracts would have been considered to be a very undesirable and unintended consequence.This bill is the National Government’s idea of a win-win. What it wants to do is polish the idea that it is listening to public opinion which was clearly outraged by zero-hour contracts and the incredibly exploitative situations that many workers find themselves in. The Government wants to polish up the notion that it is a moderate centrist Government that listens to public opinion but at the same time what it wants to do is pursue that most precious of National Government goals: pushing down labour costs undermining the rights of workers and weakening collective bargaining. That is what the provisions in this bill do not only on zero-hour contracts but also on some of the other issues that I want to mention shortly. They weaken the position of workers in the workplace.Let us talk a little bit more about zero-hour contracts because what the bill seeks to do is address this in a couple of ways. First it says that an individual employment contract is required to containonly an indication of the arrangements that relate to the times that an employee has to be available for work. That provides littleprotection if any at all. Under the bill if the employer requires the worker to be available for work beyond their contracted hours then they have to put an availability clause in the employment agreement and the availability clause must include some compensation for being available for work. It does not say how muchand as previous speakers in this debate have said that could be a minuscule amount—a symbolic amount. It could mean that the amount is rolled up into a salary. It actually makes matters worse. At the moment the legal position of zero-hour contracts is highly dubious. The courts do not look kindly on them. This bill will institutionalise them and that is the big concern that we have.