Strange JamieJAMIE STRANGE (Labour): Mr Assistant Speaker thank you for the opportunity to take a call on the Employment Relations (Triangular Employment) Amendment Bill. I will attempt to bring a little bit of common sense to this debate tonight because this bill will not ruin the labour hire industry. I do challenge the Opposition—we were asking as the speeches were happening—how will it ruin the labour hire industry. No answer came forward because it's just empty rhetoric. Another argument we heard was it will cost businesses money. How will it cost businesses money? There was no answer again. We also heard that it's an old bill so therefore not relevant today. The sad truth is that yes it is an old bill but it's still relevant. We're still faced with some of the challenges that we had 12 years ago.So I'd like to acknowledge Kieran McAnulty for the work that he's done in bringing this bill to the House. I'd like to say well done on having it drawn from the ballot in the first instance. Also I would like to join with a chorus of others around acknowledging Darien Fenton and the wonderful work that she's done over many many years for workers in this country. She's been a tireless advocate and she remains so. I'd also like to thank the Education and Workforce Committee. I was a member of the committee while this bill was passing through and I was able to personally hear some of the submissions on this.The Employment Relations (Triangular Employment) Amendment Bill amends the Employment Relations Act 2000 to strengthen the personal grievance provisions of the Act. And that's the key point: the personal grievance provisions of the Act. It will allow workers employed by one employer but working under the control and direction of another business organisation—commonly called triangular employment—to apply to the Employment Relations Authority to have their host employer or controlling third party joined to a personal grievance.The key point here is around fairness. This bill equalises conditions between permanent and labour hire employees. Currently there is a gap in our legislation which means that labour hire employees are treated differently to permanent employees. There is a vulnerability for labour hire employees and that was raised quite clearly by the Hon Clare Curran that there is a vulnerability—and when I move on to some of the submissions they will certainly highlight that. It's important that all employees have a sense of security in their workplace. They're all there they're working hard they're doing their bit to contribute to our economy and there should be a strong sense of security for all employees.So a small but significant number of employees are exploited in the absence of law in this area. If we're going to build an economy that's working and growing for all of us we must ensure that workers are fairly and well treated. I'd just like to highlight some of the submissions.So as we've heard there were 174 submissions to the select committee on this bill. So there was certainly a lot of interest in this bill from a range of agencies unions businesses and general members of the public. So there was certainly a lot of interest here. A number of changes were made at select committee in response to submitters' feedback including replacing the term primary employer" with "employer" and "secondary employer" with "controlling third party". The second key change that was made was the removal of the collective agreement provisions because of the complexity it would introduce to the labour hire model.I just want to move on and highlight a couple of the submissions that we heard. The first one I'd like to bring to the House's attention is from the National Council of Women of New Zealand. Now the National Council of Women of New Zealand is an organisation representing 245 organisations—so it's an umbrella organisation so it's certainly very significant. And they note in their submission a couple of points that I'd just like to highlight. They note "The purpose of this bill is to ensure that employees employed by one employer but working under the control and direction of another business or organisation are not deprived of the right to … allege a personal grievance." We have heard from the other side of the House that they aren't deprived but the reality is that they are.Many of them are vulnerable workers. There is quite a clear power imbalance and that's a key point that must be remembered in this debate. There is a power imbalance and it's important that workers have the security and the confidence and the ability to lodge a personal grievance if the relationship breaks down. The National Council of Women of New Zealand carry on; they say "We believe that the amendments in this bill support the object of the Employment Relations Act 2000 … which includes the building of productive employment relationships"—very sensible which is a key to our economy. It's a key to business productivity that there are productive employment relations. And it talks about promoting this through good faith: acknowledging and addressing the inherent power imbalance in employment relationships. Common sense—common sense I'm sure the members would agree.The final point I'd like to highlight from the National Council of Women is where they talk about the protections for vulnerable workers. "[The National Council of Women] supports this bill because we believe it will improve the working lives of low-paid mainly female employees working in fields such as"—and here's some of the industries where there are a lot of vulnerable workers which is why this is so important—"cleaning catering laundry and orderly services by restoring essential employment protections." The ability to lodge a personal grievance is quite clearly an essential employment protection. "Māori and Pacific women are disproportionately represented in these fields of work"—the submission goes on—"and given the links between their lower incomes and lesser access to health care and lower home ownership rates".The second submission that really interested me and I'd like to bring to the House and make those listening tonight aware of was from the CTU—the Council of Trade Unions.Hon Andrew Little: They know a thing or two.JAMIE STRANGE: They do indeed. "There is a large agency workforce in New Zealand subject to these unfair triangular employment relationships …"—and this has clearly been highlighted tonight from a number of speakers such as—"on building sites farms in factories and at the airport in varying capacities." These employees are paid at minimum or below minimum wages—how can someone be paid below minimum wages?—due to being contractors many times and are not entitled to annual leave sick leave or even KiwiSaver. So there are issues out there in our workforce and this bill addresses one of those key issues. And that's why it's excellent that this bill is passing through the House. What we know the CTU says is that "The current framework regulating labour hire/triangular employment is inadequate to ensure fairness"—a keyword "fairness"—"and basic employment and health and safety protections for workers engaged [as] labour hire."This is not going to ruin the labour hire industry. This will strengthen the labour hire industry so I am confused—and I'm sure members over this side are confused—as to why the Opposition won't support this bill. So why won't they support workers being able to raise a personal grievance?Hon Andrew Little: They hate workers.JAMIE STRANGE: I'm not going to pass a judgment on their view of workers but I am confused. I am genuinely confused. I'm not sure if they're playing politics. I don't know what's going on over that side of the House. But vulnerable workers—there is a power imbalance and it's important that those workers have the right have the ability have the confidence to be able to raise a personal grievance?Many of us have worked in businesses in various aspects of employment where unfortunately a relationship has broken down between the employer and the employee. Fortunately it doesn't happen too often but every now and then it does and it's unfortunate when it does. But when that relationship does break down—Hon Andrew Little: You want to have a place to go.JAMIE STRANGE: You've got to have a place to go as a great man once said. You must have a place to go. An employee must have the ability to lodge a personal grievance. So this is about fairness and this is about people having the ability to lodge a personal grievance in confidence. Thank you.Amendments recommended by the Education and Workforce Committee by majority agreed to."