Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 18 August 2010. Volume:665;Page:13211. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
12. 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Labour 
: Is it her intention that an employer is entitled to advertise a vacancy with a 90-day trial period where an employee can be dismissed with no reason given as a condition of employment under the current Employment Relations Act? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 It is my expectation that employers should be free to advertise any of the terms and conditions they intend to offer a successful applicant. If a prospective employee agrees to a 90-day trial period and wants to take up that job opportunity then it is win-win for both. 
Darien Fenton 
: So if an employer is entitled to make as a precondition for employment a 90-day trial period when an employee can be dismissed for no reason given why did she say in the House 2 weeks ago that unless employees want a trial period they do not have to have one? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: Because that is exactly true. If an employee does not want to have a trial period he or she does not need to have one. It is an opportunity for an employee to get his or her foot in the door and to be given a chance. There are numerous stories of employees taking that opportunity and really enjoying it. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: What reports has the Minister seen of trial periods delivering opportunities to New Zealand? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: I have seen a report of a hairdresser in the central North Island who took on somebody who was a bit rough around the edges whom she would not have hired without the 90-day trial period. Six months on the employment relationship is working out brilliantly. The employer now has a new hard-working employee and the employee is learning valuable skills and has a solid career path. 
Darien Fenton 
: When she said in the House 2 weeks ago in relation to jobs advertised with 90-day trial periods as a condition of employment: “clearly it is not compulsory for a prospective employee to apply for that job.” did that include someone on the unemployment benefit who is referred by Work and Income to a job with a 90-day trial period and told that if he or she does not take that job he or she will lose his or her benefit? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: As I have said before the trial period is voluntary for prospective employees. If they do not want to avail themselves of that job opportunity and that trial period then they do not have to. 
Darien Fenton 
: Is it possible for an employee who is dismissed under the 90-day trial period to then face a 13-week disqualification period from Work and Income because a case manager believes that he or she was dismissed for misconduct reasons even though that employee has no way of testing the validity of that dismissal through an unjustifiable dismissal claim? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: I do not have responsibility for the Ministry of Social Development. I suggest that that question be redirected to the appropriate Minister. 
Darien Fenton 
: Does she agree that employment law is there to protect against abuse of the inherent inequality of power in employment relationships as outlined in the Employment Relations Act; if so why is she allowing those abuses that are occurring under her current 90-day trial period? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: I think that the member is making some assumptions. If there have been abuses why have they not been brought to the attention of the Department of Labour in the last 18 months? In that time the 90-day trial period has been working very very well.