Pillay Lynne: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading In Committee Speaker Recalled 
Pillay Lynne: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading In Committee Speaker Recalled 
[Volume:668;Page:15399] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour) 
: 
 Although I am critical of the bill I will raise something that I believe was overlooked at the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. I am particularly pleased to see that the Attorney-General is the Minister in the chair because he is a details person—like me—and I am sure that once this matter is pointed out he will agree. If the Minister and the Committee could look at new section 20A which is to be inserted in the Employment Relations Act by clause 6 they will see the words “the employer or the representative of the employer must advise … the union of the employer’s … decision as soon as is reasonably practicable but no later than …” and the following words were changed at the select committee from “2 working days” to “the working day”. The section now refers to “the working day”. 
Hon Christopher Finlayson 
: Clause what? 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: New section 20A(2)(b) in clause 6. The Minister will see that the words “the working day” are underlined. Then section 20A(2)(c) refers to “within 2 working days”. The phrase has not been changed there to “the working day”. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Is this the calibre of the union movement? 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: If the member would just be quiet for a minute I will point out to the Minister in the chair that under section 20A(3) the provision requiring 2 working days has been amended to “no later than the working day”. I feel very confident in saying in light of section 20A(2)(b) and (3) which refer to the day after that either there is an error or it just has not been amended. I can see that the Minister has already picked up on that. He is nodding wisely. If we can have that fixed that would be good. I thank the Minister for that. 
While I am on this clause I also request that very serious consideration be given to the other very very good amendments relating to union access that have been put forward by Trevor Mallard. They particularly refer to some reasons where access would not be able to be declined or where prior consent does not have to be gained. One amendment would add the words “unless the access is required for urgent health and safety matters”. That is really important if otherwise a whole day is spent waiting. If it is an urgent health and safety matter such as an unsafe machine and the union is called in it is very important for consideration to be given in those circumstances. 
Another amendment would add the words “unless the access is required for matters relating to harassment or discrimination of any employee”. If we look at the worst-case scenario where perhaps a woman worker is being sexually harassed she will want to call the union organiser in to discuss that matter. It is absolutely untenable we suggest that that worker will have to wait for the next day. If it is about harm to employees or where the health and safety of employees is paramount we say that it is very important that in those instances prior consent for access is not required. 
Another amendment would add the words “unless the access is required for matters relating to redundancies or potential dismissals or where the union representative is seeking to represent a worker in an employment dispute.” I can put my hand on my heart and say in many cases if the union comes in the matter can be resolved without that worker losing his or her job and without the situation escalating rather than bubbling bubbling bubbling over 24 hours into a seriously dysfunctional one. 
So I request that the Minister although he has accepted one amendment look really carefully at these amendments. I think they are very very good amendments. Certainly we would rather the bill did not come into effect at all.