The truth on Port of Tauranga
March 16th, 2012 at 3:00 pm by David FarrarThe CTU and MUNZ have been holding up the Port of Tauranga as a bad unsafe port, with low wages. Whale Oil did something which I haven’t seen anyone in the media do – ask them if it is true. He has blogged the CEO’s response, which I extract below:
We have been really disappointed with the factual inaccuracies and unprofessional misrepresentation of the safety record of our port by the CTU President, Helen Kelly. Unfortunately, we have had to waste shareholders’ money (which ironically includes >90% of our staff who hold shares in the Company) to instruct our solicitors to warn Ms Kelly against recklessly continuing in this regard. Her statements about the safety record of this port are factually incorrect and we believe deliberately misleading.
We are aware that the CTU have made an Official Information Request to the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC), seeking our port’s claims history. We are aware of this because ACC asked for our consent to release this information as they are bound to do under the Privacy Act. We of course agreed to this information being released as we are proud of the improvement in safety performance at the port.
The actual ACC claims history shows Port of Tauranga to have one of the best safety records of all New Zealand ports – less than half the NZ ports’ average. Ms Kelly is in possession of this information, but chooses to ignore it, as it clearly does not fit her argument.
The graph shows PoT to be half the average. Only two other ports seem to be at the same low level. Of course not all accidents are of equal harm, but nevertheless to have half the ACC claims of other ports is commendable.
Safety is our number 1 priority at the Port and in fact we have a goal of achieving a zero harm work environment and considerable management effort is focused on striving to achieve this goal. Our Board set a target this financial year to try and achieve a 30% improvement in Total Injury Frequency Rate – we are proud to have just achieved this improvement last month.
I imagine a port where 90% of employees are also shareholders would be motivated to have as safe a workplace as possible.
Ms Kelly also goes on to suggest there is a race to the bottom between the two ports with respect to pay and working conditions. I would dispute this: many of our skilled workers actually earn more than the Ernst & Young figures for Ports of Auckland’s average stevedoring income. I am very comfortable with this – our employees and contractors are highly skilled and work very hard to consistently deliver upper decile productivity. I guess the main difference though is that they expect to be working, when they are paid to be working!
This is at the heart of the dispute. MUNZ resisted any changes in the current structure that sees someone paid for 40 hours work only 26 on average.
Maybe this explains why our Port of Tauranga has net crane productivity rates 38% greater than Ports of Auckland’s (Ministry of Transport data) or on a gross measure (not allowing for netting out smoko breaks and any industrial action), the difference in gross crane rate between Ports of Auckland and Port of Tauranga is some 60% (shipping line data).
I’ve got an idea. Why not sell Ports of Auckland to the Port of Tauranga – then you’d have employees able to become shareholders of their employer – something which works so well at PoT.
Related posts:
- Port of Auckland to contract out workforce
- What a diference
- Union wants all ports nationalised
- The great port stand-off
March 16th, 2012 at 3:11 pm
Would be interesting to know which one is POA?
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 3:14 pm
Lead item on the news tonight (both channels), yeah right!
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 3:16 pm
The claim that the Port of Tauranga is unsafe is based on fatalities.
So DPF since you are so keen to find the ‘truth’, how many people have been killed at the port in say the last 5 years?
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 3:17 pm
>then you’d have employees able to become shareholders of their employer
Whoa! This is a mixed ownership model. Labour, the Greens, and NZ First will be absolutely opposed to employees owning shares in what were previously government owned businesses.
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 3:26 pm
Yeswedid – clearly not enough, or kelly would be exploiting the figures
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 3:28 pm
YesWeDid – since you seem incapable of doing your own research: it’s 2 in the last 5 years…3 in the last 10
Kelly is claiming 3 people have died at POT recently.
1)About 10 years ago a man was killed on POT Sulphur Point Wharf when he was struck and crushed by a hoist with a container on. Both people involved were NZL staff and were not part of Port of Tauranga’s own container terminal operations.
2)The second death which happened in the last couple of years was a very experienced stevedore who was struck by a hoist carrying breakbulk cargo on Mount Maunganui wharf – not at the Port’s container terminal at Sulphur Point. The investigation into this death concluded that all safety measures had been taken by all concerned. It was a terrible and tragic circumstance of someone being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
3)And the most recent death last year, was a Fulton Hogan worker who was struck and crushed by a Fulton Hogan machine whilst doing work at the port. This man was not a port employee doing stevedoring or straddle driving, and neither MUNZ nor Helen Kelly got involved in the incident.
Paraphrased from Whaleoil http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2012/03/fact-checking-helen-kelly/
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 3:29 pm
It’s another case to show how bad ( or lazy ) Journalism has got in New Zealand. The other recent case was how when Fran O’Sullivan made a couple of phone calls to the receivers of the Crafar farms and to the real estate agents -Bayleys to show that the farms been advertised widely NZ as being offered for sale individually or as a lot.
Vote:YesWeDid — so safety is measured only by the number of deaths. Nothing else counts !! Of course the deaths are serious and I’m sure Ports of Tauranga takes that very seriously, but there is more to safety that that. I think what Kelly and co. are doing is called cherry picking in other circles.
March 16th, 2012 at 3:48 pm
Given that socialisim is based on a lie, one needen’t be surprised at this. If they’re a socialist, and their mouth is open, they’re lying. I hope POT sues them until the pips squeak.
cheers
David Prosser
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 4:02 pm
Poor socialist scum, their world is crumbling before their eyes. The world has caught up with these wharfie extortionists, their thuggery and lies are slowly been exposed. How long can these self serving bludgers continue to hold New Zealand to ransom? Their days of extortion are coming to an end and the quicker the better.
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 4:11 pm
> we have had to waste shareholders’ money to instruct our solicitors to warn Ms Kelly
I’m surprised Whale Oil wasn’t sent copies. Maybe they are more professional at PoT.
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 4:13 pm
Cows4me makes a very good point. By defending the indefensible and making up stories the CTU and the Union are being exposed as manipulative and mendacious. I guess they have been used to having their propoganda published without question and used to being given a free ride by the police when on pickets. It is not a coincidence that Shearer is trying to distance himself from the Unions.
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 4:44 pm
great post, thx dpf, and also RightNow – saves me going to Whale Oil (no offence to anyone or anything, including the man himself).
i think this info shows why it the POAL dispute is not playing out in mainstream politics as a left versus right issue, and why Len and Labour have been reluctant to back the Union’s claims and demands. isn’t transparency a great thing…
not sure why everyone is jumping on the “socialist scum” bandwagon, but i guess this is what you call “happy mischief”?
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 4:48 pm
maybe its an old left versus new left issue?
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 4:53 pm
bij – I think it’s a gang (unions) vs non-gang mentality.
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 5:01 pm
I’m surprised Whale Oil wasn’t sent copies. Maybe they are more professional at PoT.
Clearly you’re not a fan of whistle blowing when the shoe is on the other foot….
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 7:24 pm
CTU and MUNZ are utterly desperate. They’re grasping at straws now, along with making BS up (which is what they’ve done all along.)
Kelly and Parsloe are the Judas sheep – they’ve led the wharfies up the ramp and into the abbatoir. Those two will still have jobs when the wharfies won’t.
Having said that, the wharfies are their own worst enemies with their campaign of thuggishness and intimidation.
Good riddance to MUNZ, and may the education unions be next.
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 7:47 pm
MUNZ – More Unemployed New Zealanders !
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 9:30 pm
burt – Bloody Utterly Rigid Tory
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 9:32 pm
Seriously the first enemy killed in war is truth – and an industrial dispute often resembles a war.
And employers are as bad at lies as unions. I have had many experiences of that. Maybe I’ll write a book about it.
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 9:42 pm
That would be Union members promoted beyond their level of competency.
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 10:06 pm
After what I have discovered about inept union tactics in this dispute I think I will wrote a book about how unions have held NZ back through bullying, intimidation and lying….I reckon I have 5 chapters alone on the POAL dispute…plenty more out there…send them in and i will make a book.
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 11:01 pm
I’m with David prosser at 3.48.
Vote:Got in one.
March 16th, 2012 at 11:43 pm
@RightNow i agree entirely.
Vote:March 16th, 2012 at 11:51 pm
Whale Oil:
Q1: How many union-employer negotiations have you attended?
Q2: How many times have you acted as an advocate in a union-employer negitiation?
Vote:March 17th, 2012 at 12:11 am
Nice and well written, but which one is Poa?
Vote:Donaldson New Zealand
March 17th, 2012 at 7:50 am
I can’t see what impact the safety figures have other than to give minor purchase in the tit for tat war. It remains that 3 have died at POT (not all wharfies), while it also remains that isn’t a fundamental issue in the Auckland strike. A lot of this stuff comes out in the wash in the overall picture, being all rah rah about anything while the Auckland port remains looking like a ghost town is premature. Interesting to note that the spokesman for POT claimed that some staff there are paid more than the rates in Auckland, maybe that is a reason why they work more flexible hours. Despite all the mud slinging this dispute is not getting solved. I haven’t read anywhere on here that something like 220 odd of the Auckland workers have by temporary injunction been declared to be still employed by POA, no details about that but meanwhile a reconfiguration of the safety record of POT that still remains at the same unfortunate tally of 3 men deceased.
Vote:March 17th, 2012 at 8:50 am
Nostalgia NZ
If you read Right Now’s post above you’ll learn that only one of the three deaths that MUNZ and Kelly have frequently brought up actually occured on the wharf during stevedoring work and employed by the POT – that one death is very sad and tragic but industrial deaths in NZ in any industry are so rare as to be a statistical anomoly.
Supporters of the union have essentially made the point that the reforms sought by POAL are to bring it in line with the stevedoring practices of the POT and that would be a retrograde step because the more flexible work conditions in operation in Tauranga are UNSAFE – see three people were killed – end of story. The real story is that two of the deaths were not even close to being the responsibility of the POT and that the REAL overall safety record at POT is well below the national average. If this was merely tit for tat as you suggest then lets see the ACC figures for work related accidents at POAL.
The union sought an injunction but both parties have agreed to attend a judicial settlement conference and accordingly the Ports voluntarily agreed to put its redundancy process on hold. TVNZ apologized for an earlier story alleging an injunction.
One way or another, either by agreement by MUNZ, or by the use of independent contractors, the Auckland wharves will be run on similar lines to Tauranga so that the flow of customers to POT can be staunched. MUNZ and the CTU are doing their job – fighting for their members I get that – but they are wedded to an old model that is outdated and their dishonest and manipulative tactics have backfired. Once the POAL produced the independent auditors report confirming the $91k average pay essentially confirming what we knew all along, that the wharves are the last bastion of featherbedding labour practices (who else in NZ gets paid for 40 hours while working 28?), what ever support middle NZ might have had for the wharfies evaporated. The threats and bullying by MUNZ members, Kelly telling the media there were no illegal pickets when TV footage showed unrelated party trucks being turned away by picketers, the silly You Tube clips putting up kids as human shields for their cushy lifestyle – its all backfired and will end in tears for the union.
Vote:March 17th, 2012 at 9:16 am
kia
I appreciate the point made about the different personnel involved in the fatal accidents. Without diverting into that too much I know from experience that going in to high risk sites responsibility is never relieved from the site host, working on a cable tunnel 2 years ago there was a sub-contractor safety programme overlooked by the main contractors safety programme with ultimate responsibility to the employer’s safety programme – basically 3 sets of safety protocols and supervision.
I totally agree with reforms in Auckland and don’t see union claims that using similar practices to POT would be unsafe because the liability of safety would remain in the hands of staff and management at Auckland. Simply anything deemed unsafe wouldn’t be used but that doesn’t stop the progress of the reforms in my mind.
I read in Thursday Herald the temporary injunction extends to the judicial conference, but didn’t see the TVNZ story.
I’m not so sure munz are wedded to the old model, they’ve said they’re not and claim to have agreed to at least a large number of concessions POAL want. The port has and is changing. I don’t think anyone has done a very good job either munz, POAL, Gibson or Kelly. Disappointing at some of the apparent immaturity on both sides looking for a silver bullet. I objected at the time re the wisdom of having children on the picket line and letters being sent out to families by Gibson, for progress however all that needs to go out the window. Maybe on reflection both sides will question their tactics and need to use the media in particular ways because it seems to have deepened resolve rather than kept the Port working.
Vote:March 17th, 2012 at 9:50 am
Hi
Has whaleoil been hacked?
Can’t access the site?
Vote:March 17th, 2012 at 9:55 am
Ignore previous comment or delete it,, my computer playing up
Vote:March 17th, 2012 at 9:28 pm
Peter Freedman
There are 300 port workers out of a job. Thanks to the union that could be 151 OK with being out of work and 149 fighting with their work colleagues because they want to work.
You should write a book, tell the real inside story. Detail the real power struggle for union membership numbers and why.
Vote: