bronte - Copeland Ashcroft

A raft of new regulations to support the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (Act) were released recently, covering general risk and workplace management, worker engagement, participation and representation, major hazards, asbestos, as well as infringement fees and more specific topics like mining, quarrying and adventure activities.

The new Act clearly directs that all workers must be allowed the opportunity to engage and participate in decision making about health and safety matters affecting them. Engaging workers in health and safety matters makes good business sense because they are the people carrying out the work which health and safety risks relate to, and it encourages “buy in” to safe practice because there is a higher degree of ownership. This helps to build a positive safety culture, as well as reducing risk taking behaviour and associated loss time injuries. Engagement with workers is also a crucial step in your process to work towards continual improvement regarding health and safety risk management, required by the Act.

WorkSafe NZ summarises the meaning of these terms as follows:

Engagement is how a business involves its workers in work health and safety matters and decisions.
Participation practices are the on-going ways for workers to raise health ans safety concerns, be part of making decisions which affect work health and safety, and offer suggestions for improving health and safety.
In summary, engagement and participation should involve:

asking for, listening to and taking into account the views of workers when making decisions that may affect their health and safety;
explaining to workers the results of any health and safety decision in a timely way;
having clear ways for workers to raise their own suggestions for improving health and safety.
All businesses must have worker participation and engagement processes regardless of size or risk level.

How you manage engagement with workers in terms of processes and practice will depend on your business circumstances. Engagement could be managed by talking about health and safety matters at toolbox or other regular meetings, by regular meetings of a formal health and safety committee with elected health and safety representatives.

Employers must facilitate the election of health and safety representatives and establish health and safety committees where requested by workers. The exception to complying with such a request is if the business has less than 20 workers or is not within the scope of any “high-risk” sector or industry prescribed by regulations.

High-risk sectors industries include aquaculture, forestry and logging, fishing, hunting and trapping, coal mining, food product manufacturing, water supply, sewerage and drainage, waste collection, treatment and disposal services, building construction and heavy and civil engineering construction. Current industries prescribed by the regulations include adventure activities, mining and quarrying.

An employer may also initiate an election for a health and safety representative or establish a health and safety committee at their own initiative. This is a well-established way to support worker engagement and participation.

The regulations set out requirements for health and safety committees, elections for health and safety representatives, records that must be kept, and training. To ensure you understand the requirements as they apply to your business, we recommend seeking advice.

Disclaimer: We remind you that while this article provides commentary on employment law topics, it should not be used as a substitute for legal or professional advice for specific situations. Please seek guidance from your employment lawyer for any questions specific to your workplace.

Associate Transport Minister Craig Foss announced in a Press Release this week that mandatory drug and alcohol testing will be introduced for the commercial aviation and maritime sectors by 2017. Employers in these sectors will be required to undertake random drug testing, and to implement a drug and alcohol management plan approved by either the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) or Maritime New Zealand (MNZ).

The law in respect of drug and alcohol testing in New Zealand continues to develop slowly, and this change indicates a significant shift, in line with a recommendation arising out of the review of the Carterton hot air ballooning accident where 11 people were killed. The new law will empower employers with the tools to manage the risks associated with drug and alcohol use by employees in these recognised safety-sensititve sectors. It will also provide for sanctions by the CAA and MNZ, if employers do not comply with requirements.

A draft Bill has yet to be released, but Minister Foss has indicated each drug and alcohol management plan must outline the employment relations processes that will happen if there is a positive test result. We will keep you posted on developments in this respect, and plan to run a seminar later in the year on drug and alcohol testing in employment. In the meantime we can assist with drafting and reviewing drug and alcohol plans and policies, and recommend that employers who are using drug and alcohol testing seek advice prior to implementation.

The potential for higher penalties for non-compliance as a result of upcoming changes to Health & Safety regulations means employers in the high-risk agricultural sector need to be more aware than ever of their obligations.

The Government will establish new Crown Agent Worksafe New Zealand by December 2013, when it also plans to introduce to Parliament a new Health & Safety at Work Act, which is expected to come into force by December 2014.

The agricultural industry is a high risk environment and all employers need a practical understanding of their obligations given the major reforms underway in the health and safety regulatory environment.

Currently a conviction may bring a fine of up to $500,000, imprisonment for up to two years, or both. Under the proposed changes, three new offence categories will be established, with penalties ranging from $100,000 up to $600,000 and five years jail for individuals, and $500,000 to $3 million for corporates.

To ensure compliance with the legislation, employers need to proactively address health and safety and prevent harm in the workplace.

Progressive Consulting recommends that employers adopt the following measures:

Identifying and controlling all hazards by creating a Master Hazard List containing all possible hazards and their risk level, and assessing which hazards are significant. Where there are significant hazards the employer needs to take all practicable steps to eliminate, isolate and or minimise these hazards to prevent injury or damage. Often the employees are in the best position to identify hazards and come up with practical controls.
Proper training and supervision including an induction process for all new employees. If employees do not have the required knowledge and experience they should always be supervised.
Keep a workplace register to record all incidents, near misses and accidents in the workplace. Employers should then investigate and take all practicable steps to prevent these events from re-occurring. In the event of serious harm or accident the employer must notify the Secretary (Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment) as soon as possible and follow up with written notice within seven days. A recent case saw a New Zealand company fined $150,000 for failing to notify four serious harm injuries that occurred between 2006 – 2009.
Provide reasonable opportunities for the employee to participate effectively in the on-going improvement of health and safety in their workplace. This can include being involved in hazard identification, elimination, isolation and minimsation of significant hazards, workplace monitoring, training and supervising.
The new approach will also improve worker participation. Health and safety representative will have new powers to stop unsafe work and to issues notices requiring the appropriate person to address health and safety concerns.

A law change restricting zero hour contracts becomes effective from 1 April 2016, following amendment to the Employment Relations Act 2000 (“Act”).

Zero hour contracts are currently used in a number of industries such as tourism, agriculture and hospitality, where businesses struggle to predict the specific workload in advance and require employees to be available to work, without any guarantee of hours. The law change means that this will no longer be permitted, and all employers who currently use zero hour arrangements need to review and revise their employment agreements and staffing arrangements.

Take the example of a Queenstown tour company that operates daily boat tours, where tourists may make last minute bookings. This means the business often has to hastily arrange more employees to operate the boats, but until now, they have managed this unpredictability by having employees ready and able to work. However, those employees have not been paid where no work became available.

Now, under the Act, employers must meet a number of criteria before they may use an availability provision. An availability provision must be set out in the employment agreement and may only be used where the employee has agreed minimum hours of work and there are genuine reasons for including an availability provision. Reasonable compensation must also be provided for the employee’s availability.

In determining whether a business has a genuine reason for such a provision, the following must be considered:

Whether it is practicable for the employer to meet business demands for the work without an availability provision,
The number of hours the employee is required to be available; and
The proportion of those hours to the agreed hours of work.
When determining reasonable compensation payable for availability, relevant factors including the following must be taken into account:

The number of hours the employee is required to be available,
The proportion of those hours to the agreed hours,
Any restrictions that arise from the availability provision,
The rate of pay for work available for, and;
If paid by a salary, the amount of the salary.
If you need to use an availability provision, we recommend that you seek advice so that a tailored solution for your specific circumstances can be developed, to ensure that you comply with the Act. Importantly, not using an availability provision does not restrict you from contacting an employee and requesting they work. However, in that case, the employee will be free to decline which may create an issue in terms of staffing cover.

A number of other changes have also been made to employment legislation, and we discussed those here https://www.copelandashcroft.co.nz/news/employment-standards-legislation-bill-passes

We recommend that you review and revise your employment agreements to comply with the new law.

As you may be aware, on 1 April 2016, the Employment Standards Bill came into force making changes to parental leave provisions by extending paid parental leave from 16 to 18 weeks.

Paid parental leave may now be extended to 26 weeks, with the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ paid leave) Amendment Bill passing its second reading in Parliament on 25 May 2016.

This Bill is being pushed by the New Zealand Labour Party with the argument that extending paid parental leave to all for the first six months of life is a wise investment in New Zealand’s future and that early investment and intervention is a much better option than having to spend more taxpayer money on the outcomes of getting it wrong.

This latest bill also adds additional provisions around ‘work contact hours’ by allowing working parents the flexibility of returning to work for a certain amount of time during the parental leave period without losing their entitlement to paid parental leave.

Interestingly, a similar provision was recently introduced under the recent 1 April 2016 employment legislation changes, workers are now allowed “Keeping in Touch Days” by working up to 40 hours during the 18 weeks of paid leave. Therefore, deletion of the ‘work contact hours’ set out in this latest bill is being debated.

The bill is yet to be debated by a committee of the whole House. It will then pass to a third reading in Parliament where it will either be passed or rejected…..watch this space!

Throughout the course of an employment relationship, an employee, particularly those at a senior level, will have access to commercially sensitive information about the business they work for including client lists, prices, marketing, trade secrets and intellectual property. Understandably, where an employee then leaves the business the employer often wants to protect this information to maintain their client relationships and the ongoing viability of their business.

The best way for a business to do this is to ensure that a valid restraint of trade clause is included in an employee’s individual employment agreement.

This clause should prohibit the employee from working directly or indirectly for a competitior company and/or setting up a rival business immediately after the end of their employment. The clause will also usually prohibit the employee from attempting to entice other employees to join them.

Many people are misguided in their belief that restraint of trade clauses are not enforced by the Courts. Restraints of trade are only enforceable if they are reasonable and do not go against the public interest. This means that the Courts will not enforce any restraint of trade clause where the clause is an attempt to limit or reduce competition and/or reduce the right of an individual to work for whomever they chose. However, the Court is likely to consider a restraint of trade clause valid and enforceable in the following circumstances:

Where there is a legitimate proprietary interest to be protected;
Where the restraint is reasonable in the circumstances; and
The employer is promptly seeking to restrain the employee after the termination of the employment.
Even if a legitimate proprietary interest exists, there are several factors the Courts consider when determining the reasonableness of the relevant clause. These include:

The period of the restraint. The Court has commented that a period of 12 months is at the upper limit of what is reasonable;
Geographical scope. The restraint should not cover too great an area and should only cover the area the business operates in; and
Consideration. Whether the employee received anything in exchange for agreeing to the restraint of trade clause.
The Court may either decline to enforce the restraint of trade clause if it is deemed unreasonable or modify it (or make some other order) under Section 8 of the Illegal Contracts Act 1970.

The best way to make sure you can protect your legitimate proprietary interests after an employee exits your business is to ensure you tailor an appropriate restraint of trade provision in the employment agreement at the start of the employment relationship. Our team can provide advice and assistance on restraint of trade provisions, including drafting and assisting to enforce these.

By Lucia Vincent and Rebecca Laney

Privacy concerns present themselves in many different ways to an employer or payroll professional who may receive requests for information about their staff or payroll. Requests range from a friend wanting a personal contact number to a company seeking verification of specific details like an employee’s bank account, position and remuneration. Too readily complying with such requests can pose problems. Taking a look at what laws protect privacy helps avoid the pitfalls when responding.

Protecting Privacy

Parliament enacted the Privacy Act 1993 (Act) to protect and promote individual privacy. The Act sets out 12 important principles that employers must observe when it comes to collecting, using, storing and disclosing the personal information of staff. Personal information means information relating to an identifiable individual. Obvious examples are details for contacting someone or their date of birth, pay rates and employment history.

The Act applies to all agencies including most employers and payroll professionals working for or even independently of an employer. Any person employed or otherwise in the service of an agency acts on behalf of the agency when performing the duties of their employment. So if an employee discloses information about an individual, their employer will be treated as having disclosed it. Similarly, if an employee knows information about someone, then their employer is deemed to also know and hold that information (unless the employee holds that information solely due to their connections with another agency).
It’s the Principle of It

Twelve information privacy principles govern what an agency can and can’t do when it comes to personal information.

Principles 1 to 4 govern why, where and how an agency may collect personal information. Specifically, an agency must collect information fairly, lawfully and without unreasonably intruding into an individual’s personal affairs. An agency must collect information directly from the individual unless an exception applies (such as if the information is publicly available or the individual authorises collection from someone else). Collection must relate only to a necessary and lawful purpose connected to an agency’s function. When collecting information an agency must ensure prior to collecting it that the individual is aware of this fact, the reason for collecting the information, any applicable law, who will receive and hold it, any consequences of non disclosure, and the individual’s right to access and correct it. Exceptions may apply including where complying would prejudice the maintenance of the law.

Principles 5 and 9 relate to storage, protection and retention of personal information. An agency must put in place reasonable safeguards to protect against unauthorised or unlawful loss, access, use, modification, disclosure and/or misuse. Principle 6 establishes that an individual is entitled to obtain and access their personal information if it is readily available (and to be advised that they can correct it in accordance with Principle 7 and the various guidelines within that principle). Principle 8 requires an agency to take reasonable steps to ensure information is accurate, up to date, complete, relevant and not misleading, before using it. Principle 9 limits how long and for what purpose an agency may store personal information.

Principles 10 and 11 govern the use and disclosure of the information. For example, an agency should only use personal information for the purpose it obtained it, unless the agency believes on reasonable grounds that the information is publicly available, the individual authorised it, or an exception applies. Disclosure is allowed on very similar terms under Principle 11. Disclosure is ok if it is in relation to the purpose for which an agency obtained it, the information is public, it is to or authorised by the individual concerned, or if it is defined as being necessary under the Act. Lastly principle 12 relates to unique identifiers and their assignment.

Gaining Access

An individual may direct any information privacy request to an agency. An agency must respond as soon as reasonably practicably and no later than 20 working days as to whether they will grant the request. Every agency must give reasonable assistance to an individual who wishes to make a request, even directing them to the appropriate agency.
Any refusals must be based on good reasons (like being necessary to protect national security or trade secrets). More common grounds include that disclosure would involve the unwarranted disclosure of the affairs of another individual, relate to evaluative material (such as a confidential reference supplied to a prospective employer), or because the information does not exist or cannot be found. Refusals cannot be made for reasons not specified by the Act.

Employment and Privacy

The principles set out in the Act are not directly enforceable in the Employment jurisdiction. But the Employment Court or Employment Relations Authority will consider the Act when assessing what a fair and reasonable employer would do. In NZ Amalgamated Engineering Printing and Manufacturing Union Inc v Air New Zealand Ltd [2004] 1 ERNZ 614 (EmpC) the Employment Court confirmed that it had no jurisdiction to determine whether interference with the privacy of an individual had occurred. Similarly, in New Zealand Public Services Assoc Inc v Southland Regional Council [2005] ERNZ 1008 (EmpC) the Employment Court found that although the Employment Relations Authority did not have jurisdiction to determine whether there was a breach of the Act or its principles it “…can and will in this case inform the Court’s interpretation of other legislative provisions and, in other cases, what is reasonable in employment” (12).

But don’t take this to mean that privacy concerns trump any other rights or obligations. In Vice-Chancellor of Massey University v Wrigley [2011] NZEmpC 37 the Employment Court considered whether potentially breaching the privacy of an individual might provide a good reason to refuse to provide information to an employee where it was relevant to a proposed decision to select them for redundancy (required under the duty of good faith). The Court concluded that it did not.

Complaining

The Act empowers the Privacy Commissioner to monitor the Act and in particular the use of personal information. Under the Act the Commissioner has the power to issue specific codes of practice that can modify the privacy principles in relation to classes of agency, industry or profession.

An individual alleging that an agency has interfered with their privacy may complain to the Privacy Commissioner who may choose to investigate, conciliate and/or take further action as it considers appropriate. If escalated to the Human Rights Review Tribunal, monetary damages can be awarded against an offending agency.

An agency may be held to have interfered with the privacy of an individual if the action breached a privacy principle and has or may have caused an individual loss, detriment, damage or injury, adversely affected their rights, benefits, privileges, obligations or interests, or resulted in significant humiliation, loss of dignity or injury to their feelings. This threshold is quite high when compared with the objectively fair and reasonable standard an employer may be held to have breached under the Employment Relations Act 2000, and that could justify remedies for “… humiliation, loss of dignity, and injury to the feelings of the employee,” without “significant” evidence of same being required.

Got the Message?

In Case Note 215508 [2011] NZ Priv Cmr 5 a woman complained that a debt collector interfered with her privacy when they contacted her workplace and left a message with a workmate who recorded it in a note and placed it on a notice board that staff could read. The Commissioner noted that under principle 11 an agency which holds personal information must not disclose that information unless it believes, on reasonable grounds, that an exception applies. Although the debt collector professed a belief that it had not disclosed any personal information about the individual involved (because it did not discuss the nature of the call, any financial details, nor any previous history during the conversation with the workmate), the Commissioner disagreed and said that it:

“… considered that even disclosing the name of the agency in relation to its dealings with the woman constituted personal information about her. This was on the basis that the name of the agency could easily be associated with debt collection services. It was clear from the information provided by the woman that her workmates had made this association in this case.”

The agency eventually accepted the settlement proposed by the individual and reminded its employees that they should make sure they were speaking to the person they were trying to contact before using the company’s name.

Keeping Mum?

Going back to our opening example, one can easily see how an employer or payroll professional could breach privacy principles by indiscriminately supplying a personal contact number for their staff or details about an employee’s bank account, position and remuneration. But breaches may also occur by failing to provide access to personal information where an individual requests it. Carefully considering how to respond becomes crucial when faced with such requests.

All agencies, including employers and payroll professionals, must respond responsibly to requests for information made by someone apart from the individual concerned. If in doubt, check with the individual and obtain their written agreement before releasing any information. Being overly cooperative can be costly, not only due to damages or settlements if found to have interfered with an individual’s privacy, but also in terms of your organisation’s reputation.

Disclaimer

We remind you that while this article provides commentary on employment law topics, it should not be used as a substitute for legal or professional advice for specific situations. Please seek guidance from your employment lawyer for any questions specific to your workplace.

First published in Pay And You (PAY) – Issue 4, June 2013
http://www.nzppa.co.nz/magazine/04/

Trial periods are available to all employers for new employees for the first 90 days of employment, and are a helpful tool because they allow employers to dismiss without recourse to a personal grievance claim for unjustified dismissal.

However, there are a number of requirements that must be met in order for the trial period to be safely relied upon to dismiss, and the Courts strictly interpret these requirements because they limit employee rights.

Requirements

The employment agreement must include a trial period provision which states:That the employer may dismiss the employee in the first 90 days of employment; and
In that case, there is no entitlement to bring a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal.
We recommend that a trial period clause also provides for a shorter notice period, and for the employee to be required to take garden leave during the notice period (because case law has determined that payment in lieu of notice is not acceptable where employment is terminated during a trial period – notice must actually be given).
The employee must be a new employee, and must not have done any work for this employer in the past. A person that starts work, even just for five minutes, will not be considered a new employee. Make sure you double check this – it is especially relevant where you are purchasing a business with existing employees when timeframes are often tight and getting employees to sign new agreements is a low priority.
A trial period clause must be:Included in the employee’s written employment agreement; and
Signed by the employee prior to their first day of work (even an hour after starting has been held to be too late!).
Employees must be told of the trial period when an offer, even a verbal offer, is made. It is also a good idea to include a sentence in your offer of employment letter that states that the agreement includes a trial period.When offering an employment agreement, you must also inform the employee that they have the right to seek independent legal advice and give them an opportunity to seek such advice prior to signing the agreement.
Dismissing during an trial period

If you are concerned about an employee’s performance or conduct, and their employment is subject to a trial period, we recommend that you first check that you have adhered to the above requirements. To terminate in reliance on a trial period, you need to prepare a letter for the employee explaining this and giving notice, before the 90 day timeframe has expired. You should give this letter to them at a meeting where you explain the decision.

Although you don’t have to give a reason for dismissing unless you are asked, it is good to be able to point to something if you are. This is because you are still required to be proactive in your communication with the employee, including telling the employee why you are dismissing them if they ask, even if those reasons wouldn’t usually be a justifiable reason for dismissing them without the trial period.

Remember, all other employment obligations apply during the trial period and an employee is not prevented from bringing any other kind of claim, for example, regarding discrimination.

If in doubt, call us for help – the trial period provides a great opportunity for flexibility, but only where used in strict compliance with the legal requirements.

Employment Standards Bill introduced to Parliament

An Employment Standards Bill which proposes to protect vulnerable workers and tackle harmful anti-competitive behaviour to create a level playing field for all businesses was introduced to NZ Parliament by Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Michael Woodhouse on Thursday 13th of August 2015.

“The changes aim to better support families by recognising the diversity of modern work and family arrangements and making it easier for parents to stay connected to the workforce.” Mr Woodhouse said.

The Bill will likely result in tougher sanctions for employers who intentionally breach minimum employment standards, increase the scope for labour inspectors to check on employers and provide an impetus on the employer to keep clearer records of employment standard adhesion.

The Bill also aims to stop employment practices such as “zero-hour contracts as a reaction to the intense media coverage recently. The Bill, however will allow employers to request an employee be available on demand, without the need to compensate them.

“The Government has been clear that there is no place for these type of employment arrangements and I particularly look forward to submissions from workers and employers on this aspect of the Bill. The Government is committed to ensuring the employment law is fair and supports the flexible, modern workforce that is critical for the productivity of our economy.” Woodhouse concluded.

The Bill proposes to amend the following Acts:

1. Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act 1987

2. Employment Relations Act 2000

3. Holidays Act 2003

4. Minimum Wage Act 1983

5. Wages Protection Act 1983

Below is a summary of the details of the proposed changes and how these may affect you as an employer.

Tougher sanctions on serious breaches
For the most serious breaches, such as exploitation, the maximum penalty will increase to $50,000 for an individual and for a company either$100,000 (or three times the financial gain for a company) whichever is greatest. The changes here are significant as currently the maximum fine was $10,000 for an individual and $20,000 for a company.

The potential for public shaming is also increased as employers will be publically named if they have been found to have breached minimum standards by the ERA or Employment Court. Individuals could also face the possibility of being banned as employers if they commit serious breaches of employment standards.

Another big change is that senior employees within the company such as directors, senior managers, legal advisors and other corporate entities can also be held accountable for breaches of employment standards if they were knowingly and intentionally involved in the breach.

The government believes that most businesses will not experience any increase in compliance costs resulting from these proposals. As the author of the Bill, MP Woodhouse states:

“The Government is committed to ensuring the employment law is fair and supports the flexible, modern workforce that is critical for the productivity of our economy.”

The focus of the proposals is on businesses that are not currently meeting their obligations. They will face minor compliance costs to become compliant and risk facing financial penalties if they don’t (with serious breaches resulting in significantly higher penalties).

Clearer-record keeping requirements
Consistent record-keeping requirements for wages, time, holidays and leave will be required across all employment legislation. The Government has stated that there will be flexibility around the format for records, so long as “they can show compliance with the law”.

The main requirement will be that employers can produce a record of the number of hours worked each day in a pay period, and the pay for those hours, in an easily accessible format. The Bill does not specify the how these records should look.

Increased tools for labour inspectors
There will be an increased power for labour inspectors to:

a) request any record or document from an employer that they consider will assist them in determining whether a breach has occurred and;

b) share information with other government agencies, such as Immigration New Zealand, the Companies Office and Inland Revenue.

Labour inspectors may also request further records and documents from employers when they need to obtain supporting evidence to substantiate an alleged breach – for example, when the required wages and time records are not evident, or incomplete.

Changes to Parental Leave under new Bill
The proposed changes will extend paid leave to people with non-standard working arrangements and increase the flexibility of the scheme.

1. It is proposed that casual, seasonal, temporary, fixed-term employees, workers with more than one employer and employees who have recently changed jobs will be entitled to paid parental leave. Currently, employees need to have worked for an employer for at least 10 hours a week over six months to become eligible for maternity leave.

2. Eligible workers who have multiple employers will also be able to combine their income from each job to maximise their paid parental leave payment (up to maximum cap).

Parents will still have the option of choosing parental tax credit instead of paid parental leave.

3. Parental leave entitlements will also extend to a wider group of other than biological and formal adoptive parents, such as Home for Life parents, whāngai, grandparents, and others permanent guardians. A “primary carer” is the main person taking day to day care of the child (not more than 5 years of age). To be eligible, primary carers will need to be employed before assuming care of the baby and meet the same work-related criteria as birth mothers and adoptive parents. Each child will be allowed one primary carer.

NB Employees will be able to take unpaid parental leave more flexibly provided they meet certain criteria.
4. Introduction of “Keeping in Touch” hours.

Employees will be able to work up to 40 hours during the 18 weeks paid parental leave.

The Keeping in Touch days are not compulsory and would only be used on mutual agreement between the employer and the employee.The baby will need to be at least four weeks old before the Keeping in Touch days can be used.
Extended unpaid leave to employees who have been with their employer for more than six months but less than 12 months.These employees will beable to take unpaid leave in addition to their paid leave, up to a total period of six months.Currently, an employee in this situation is only entitled to take paid parental leave of up to 16 weeks.
5. An Increase in penalties for fraud. The penalty for people who make a false statement, or intentionally mislead Inland Revenue, or anyone administering paid leave, will increase from $5,000 to $15,000.

Changes to Zero Hour Contracts and unfair employment practices
The Bill aims to prevent unfair employment practices such as “zero-hour contracts”. The changes will ban the following:

employers not committing any hours of work, but expecting employees to be available when required unless employee are able to refuse work offered or the agreement compensates employees for making themselves available;
employers cancelling a shift without reasonable notice or compensation to the employee;
employers putting unreasonable restrictions on secondary employment of employees;
employers making unreasonable deductions from employees’ wages.
Where the employer and employee agree to a set amount of hours, they will be required to state those hours in the employment agreement.

An employer will not be able to send an employee home part-way through a shift or cancel it, without receiving compensation. Employers will be required to either give employees reasonable notice before cancelling work, or compensate them for late notice. Notice periods and compensation rates will need to be agreed and stated in the employment agreement.

Our Advice to you as an employer
Now is the time to review the employment standards you have in place at your business to ensure your employment agreements and policies will conform with the proposed changes, in light of the fact that there may be tougher new penalties for breaching minimum employment standards. .

Please give us a call if you are unsure whether your current employment agreements and policies would meet the proposed changes

The Employment Standards Legislation Bill was passed last week and comes into effect 1 April 2016, changing the following five key employment laws:

Employment Relations Act 2000
The Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act 1987
Minimum Wage Act 1983
Holidays Act 2003
Wages Protection Act 1983
The impact of the new law includes:

Addressing unfair employment practices such as “zero hour contracts”, by setting requirements for agreed hours of work, “availability” provisions, and cancellation of shifts;
Making wage, time and leave record keeping obligations consistent across all employment laws;
Requiring employers to consult regarding deductions from remuneration, and prohibiting unreasonable deductions;
Restricting unreasonable prohibitions on secondary employment;
Extending paid parental leave to more workers and increase flexibility; and
Strengthening enforcement of employment standards.
Last minute proposed changes which would have required employers to compensate employees working intermittently or irregularly for public holidays, sick leave and bereavement leave were excluded from the Bill at the final reading.

To ensure compliance with these changes, employers will need to review and revise their employment agreements. To find out more about the changes, contact us. We will be talking about the changes in presentations throughout New Zealand this month. For details on those events and to register, visit https://www.copelandashcroft.co.nz/training-events