How about the PG claim to be a minimum of $100,000-00, plus costs, plus an UNLIMITED fine for whatever the Company or Employer may have done wrong in discrimination or constructive dismissal, on all NEW appointments from the day that the Pinkos returned.

What would that do for recruitment and employment in this Country from that point onwards?

Employers are not always wrong. An extreme view? That is what the UK has at the moment effectively.

If the last election had been based on FPP, and
If there was a 70 seat Parliament
the current position would be . . . . .

National 41
All other Parties 29

That’s what yu call a majority government!!

Wendyl Nissan is the biggest airhead in the media. A complete waste of space Every Friday Holmes and Mike take the piss out of her and like all dumbarse lefties it all goes right over her head.

Shes the complete example of the Chardonnay Socialist A Clark luvvie. Thick as 2 short planks. It was nutbars like her that voted for the bloody socialists and kept them in power for those 9 looooong years.

Being an office janitor and advising the business owner whose toilets you clean on how best to avoid crusty bits on the inside of the toilet bowl does not qualify in my mind as “advising small business”

Employment Relations Amendment Bill: Part 2
Amendments to principal Act
6 Probationary arrangements
Section 67 is amended by omitting “or trial” in each place where it appears.
7 New sections 67A and 67B insertedThe following sections are inserted after section 67:

“67A When employment agreement may contain provision for trial period for 90 days or less“(1) An employment agreement containing a trial provision, as defined in subsection (2), may be entered into by an employee, as defined in subsection (3), and an employer as defined in subsection (4).

“(2) Trial provision means a written provision in an employment agreement that states, or is to the effect, that—
“(a) for a specified period (not exceeding 90 days), starting at the beginning of the employee’s employment, the employee is to serve a trial period; and
“(b) during that period the employer may dismiss the employee; and
“(c) if the employer does so, the employee is not entitled to bring a personal grievance or other legal proceedings in respect of the dismissal.

“(3) Employee means an employee who has not been previously employed by the employer.

“(4) Employer means an employer who, at the beginning of the day on which the employment agreement is entered into, employs fewer than 20 employees.

“(5) To avoid doubt, a trial provision may be included in an employment agreement under—
“(a) section 61(1)(a), but subject to section 61(1)(b):
“(b) section 63(2)(b).

“67B Effect of trial provision under section 67A“(1) This section applies if an employer terminates an employment agreement containing a trial provision under section 67A by giving the employee notice of the termination before the end of the trial period, whether the termination takes effect before, at, or after the end of the trial period.

“(2) An employee whose employment agreement is terminated in accordance with subsection (1) may not bring a personal grievance or legal proceedings in respect of the dismissal.

“(3) Neither this section nor a trial provision prevents an employee from bringing a personal grievance or legal proceedings on any of the grounds specified in section 103(1)(b) to (g).

“(4) An employee whose employment agreement contains a trial provision is, in all other respects (including access to mediation services), to be treated no differently from an employee whose employment agreement contains no trial provision or contains a trial provision that has ceased to have effect.

“(5) Subsection (4) applies subject to the following provisions:

“(a) in observing the obligation in section 4 of dealing in good faith with the employee, the employer is not required to comply with section 4(1A)(c) in making a decision whether to terminate an employment agreement under this section; and

“(b) the employer is not required to comply with a request under section 120 that relates to terminating an employment agreement under this section.”

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2008/0008-1/latest/whole.html#DLM1765613

Employment Relations Act 2000: Personal grievances
102 Employee may pursue personal grievance under this Act

An employee who believes that he or she has a personal grievance may pursue that grievance under this Act.
103 Personal grievance

(1) For the purposes of this Act, personal grievance means any grievance that an employee may have against the employee’s employer or former employer because of a claim—
(a) that the employee has been unjustifiably dismissed; or
(b) that the employee’s employment, or 1 or more conditions of the employee’s employment (including any condition that survives termination of the employment), is or are or was (during employment that has since been terminated) affected to the employee’s disadvantage by some unjustifiable action by the employer; or
(c) that the employee has been discriminated against in the employee’s employment; or
(d) that the employee has been sexually harassed in the employee’s employment; or
(e) that the employee has been racially harassed in the employee’s employment; or
(f) that the employee has been subject to duress in the employee’s employment in relation to membership or non-membership of a union or employees organisation[; or]
[(g) that the employee's employer has failed to comply with a requirement of Part 6A[[; or]].]

Has she not heard about the recession and about the threatened and actual job losses and business closures?
Maybe not given her awareness of most economic issues.

The New Year is when many of these layoffs and closures take effect – and on the other hand many people do their hiring at this time of year.

So both the timing and the reality of the recession make passing this Bill an urgent matter.
(Of course Ms Nissan sits on a few cushy jobs and is not worried about her immediate prospects so has little empathy for others.)

But imagine you are in a small town and have worked in a timber mill all your life and it closes for lack of construction work and you are out of work.

Your employer was the only sawmill in town – and indeed the only “manufacturer” in town.

So you respond to an advertisement seeking workers in the Dairy factory in the town just down the road.

Of course you have never worked in a Dairy factory in your life, and the employer is reluctant to take on someone without experience.

But now you can say “GIve me three months to show you I am a quick learner. We had many changes in plant and technology over my time in the mill and I can learn to use your machinery and computers just as a learned to use the machinery and computers in the mill!”

At least you have a chance.

That is why this Bill MUST go through before Xmas.

But where are John Key’s PR people? I have not heard anyone make this point!
I would be prepared to have a go for ninety days!

DPF “All employment rights such as good faith, non-discrimination, non-harrassment, holidays, leave, OSH are maintained during a probation period. It is only if you are sacked for non performance, that you can not take a personal grievance. If you are sacked because you are pregnant (for example), you can still take a grievance.”

The employee may still bring a grievance should they believe that the real reason is other than performance/job fit. The Employment Tribunal may still consider the grounds for the dismissal to ensure they comply with performance/job fit. I know you lefties cannot understand this,try harder. Ignorance is no excuse for hysteria.

The benefits of this bill are huge. 1) Encourages employers to hire otherwise “risky” employees. 2) An employee (perhaps one confident of his or her abilities and with good credentials) can cotnract out of this provision so it will not apply across the board. 3) It is limited to SME’s. 4) It gives employees some experience making it likely that if the person cannot secure that job, then they will be in a good position to secure the next. 5) For those on a benefit, if it does not work out, there is no stand down to go back on the benefit. 6) Employers are not going to throw away good staff in some attempt to take advantage of this act, employees take time to train and fit on so changes are not desirable as a general rule. 7) Employers have to spend a great deal of time and money on processing failing employees through the warning system (one informal plus two formal 2 warnings) and at the end of it the employee may got to Court anyway to argue a grievance. This is an unacceptable risk and compliance costs for many SME’s so why would they hire anyone other than an experienced worker? 8. This law will encourage employers to hire staff during this tough economic climate helping lessen the burden on the taxpayer of having more and more people out of work. This is the rationale for urgency (in addition it is a key part of National’s mandate and a similar bill has been to select committee before and it is pure semantics to argue the member bill is quite different, the philosophy and substance of this bill is very much the same and it has been watered down to address some of the select committee’s concerns).

All the hysteria from the left on process is a joke when you look back at what the Clark government rammed through. EFA and retrospective validiation of election overspend anyone?? Dont worry what is good overall for the country in these tough times?

I suggest they wake up and stop expecting us to participate in their fantasy.

New Zealand would be better off if it got rid of Unions.

Ah Bless!!

Ill be 65 in 2014. Still white hopefully( though my grandkids are blond maoris). Already senile (or so the wife says). Hope that clears things up in my case (if not I probably wont care by 2014).

Well without the pink anyway depending who his sarge is.

They just can’t see that there was a big swing against them.

In FPP they would have all but disappeared.

As for Wiggy, and his Put me First Party, then the ‘Court of Public Opinion’ spoke.

It was a resounding and unnanimous “Guilty”, and the sentencing was for “Life”

By the way wiggy, where is our money that you stole?

Pity you are unwarranted, and unbadged. Pity you smug loser.