Kiwiblog

Already viewed more than 250,000 times. Pretty good.

The EPMU has said Air NZ strike attendants are striking over their poverty wages.

Air NZ has said the cabin crew could earn between $40,000 and $60,000 per annum for just 30 hours of week a work.

If Air NZ is correct, then the EPMU is saying a wage of up to $38.35 per hour is a “poverty” wage.

The 4.5% pay increase offered has been rejected as it does not meet the EPMU’s demands of a 26% increase in salaries and 70% in allowances. So they are striking over Easter – the time designed to cause maximum hassles for passengers.

Air NZ is doing well out of me this week.

I flew up to Auckland on Friday (for Foo Camp in Warkworth – will blog on soonish) and back to Wellington on Sunday. Then up to Auckland this morning for a couple of InternetNZ meetings with DIA and a members consultation meeting.

On the 7 am flight Thursday back to Auckland for a company board meeting, and then flying back to Auckland on Friday morning, staying up until Wednesday for various events.

Three flights within seven days is silly, but no avoiding it as have had to be back in Wellington between each trip.

At least I should keep my air points status!

Poneke, a dedicated transport wonk, says the initial details of the Air NZ Airbus crash are so disturbing that he recommends people avoid travelling on any Airbus model until they are sorted:

This is, as I said, deeply disturbing. Until this issue is fully sorted out and the computer issues resolved, I will not be going on any Airbus model again and will be advising everyone I know to follow suit. And I say this as someone who has always argued that flying in large passenger jets is incredibly safe. My faith in Airbuses is not that positive any longer.

Air NZ have done a very cute animated xmas tale. It lightly makes fun of the carbon police

On Wednesday last week, I had a very enjoyable day in Hawke’s Bay as a guest of the Air New Zealand Environmental Trust.

The Trust was set up by Air NZ, who gave it an initial donation. Passengers can also donate to the trust here, to offset the environmental impact of their flights. And yes our flights to Napier were offset!

The Trust invited several bloggers along, being very open about the fact they wanted to increase awareness of what they do.

There were three other bloggers there. Matthew and Waveney who are trying to live wastefree for an entire year. They talk about the day on their blog.

Carlin Archer from Ecobob was the other blogger, and he talks about the day here. He has the best collection of photos.

The highlight for me was Ruud Kleinpaste – the Bugman. His enthusiasm for biodiversity was infectious. He had fun showing off his katipo and his wetas.

So why was I there, amongst all these dedicated environmentalists? I certainly don’t walk the walk like they do. But I guess in someway I may be like the average Kiwi in that I do a bit – I do recycle most of the the rubbish, I use eco-friendly lightbulbs, I absolutely adore the outdoors, support the World Wildlife Fund through a monthly donation etc., and use public transport almost daily.

We spent the day at Greg and Rachel’s Mangarara Family Farm. This is the view from the House – their own private lake! Horseshoe Lake is a 30ha wildlife sanctuary on the farm.

The overall farm is 300 hectares and their aim is to restore as much of the original ecosystem as possible, so they are planing native forests and converting it to a sustainable beef and sheep station. The forests will also act as carbon sinks to help with offsetting greenhouse gas emissions. That’s a triple win with more native forest, a more sustainable farm and lower net carbon emissions for NZ.

The Air NZ Trust’s first project is a conservation programme involving more than 100 acres on Mangarara Station. It will financially contribute to the purchase and planting of 85,000 trees over the next three years.

It’s am ambitious challenge, especially as there has been no rain since mid August! So they took advantage of our presence to have us help water some of the saplings, using lake water.

We rode on the back of some sturdy farm vehicles to an existing area of native forest. For several kms there are plain fields only, and suddenly this little patch of wonderful greenery. It even has a small little bach out there, making it an ideal hideaway. We nailed some bamboo tubes (known as weta motels) to some of the trees, as they help attract wetas, which form an important part of the ecosystem. I got bitten by a weta when I was seven, so I had to overcome my natural genocidal instncts towards them

I really enjoyed the day learning more about the work of the trust at Mangarara, and meeting a lovely group of people. We have one of the greenest countries on Earth, but it will only stay that way people making a commitment to it.

Very sad news emerging that there were five of the seven people on board the Air New Zealand A320 which crashed in the Mediterranean today were Kiwis. The plane was being operated by the German XL Airways who had leased it for the last two years.

By coincidence it is 29 years to the day since the Erebus crash.

The dead Kiwis (the authorities say no survivors are expected) are an Air NZ pilot, three engineers and a CAA Inspector.

It seems the air craft just fell out of the sky and dropped 300 metres out of the sjy into the sea, and sank to 45 metres.

My thoughts and condolences go out to Air NZ and CAA staff, plus friends and families of the five Kiwis. Also to the families of the German pilots who also perished.

Fran O’Sullivan points out that the value of the Government’s stake in Air NZ is now only $912 million – less than the $1.034 billion the Government paid for its 76% stake, including a later rights issue.

The share price is now only $1.14 and was $3.12 a year ago. A sensible shareholder would have looked to sell down some of its stake to realise a profit on the purchase. But hey when you get to spend other people’s money you don’t worry about that so much.

Does anyone want to argue that 76% is the right stake for the Crown to own, instead of say 51%?

If we had sold 25% at the peak, then the $840 received would have almost covered cost of the remaining 51%.

So the 76% stake is now $1.6 billion less than a year ago. And add on the $1.5 billion going on Dr Cullen’s trains and you see where all the money is going.

The Herald have reported that the Labour Department says Air NZ is not breaking the law by paying Shanghai based staff less than the minimum wage on international flights.

The legal minimum wage is $12 an hour but the Labour department report said it was not applicable to Air NZ as “it would appear Chinese employment law applied to the agreement between Air New Zealand and the Chinese Air crew”.

But not quite that clear:

However, in a statement last night the Department of Labour corrected “an assertion” in a media release from Air New Zealand on the issue.

The statement was in response to a release from the airline that stated that the department had found that Chinese law applied to the agreement between Air New Zealand and the Chinese cabin crew.

“What we said in our briefing to Labour Minister Trevor Mallard was that “it would appear that Chinese employment law applied”, workplace deputy secretary Andrew Annakin said.

“This is an important point of difference, as the department cannot definitively determine what employment law applies in a particular factual situation, particularly outside New Zealand.”

It would be a very interesting test case if taken to court. If the staff worked in China, there would be no doubt Chinese law applied. But when on an international flight, the law of the air generally tends to point to the law of the country the aircraft is registered in. However I know that flights into the US also have US Federal Law apply, so definitely not clear cut.

The Herald has a story reporting Air New Zealand’s response to the story on pay rates for Shanghai based staff on Air New Zealand flights. The Herald also rebuts some of the responses, and provides further information such as the fact one of the Chinese air stewardesses put on the Chinese rates is in fact a NZ resident.

They keep saying they are subcontracted through Fasco, but I have been sent a copy of a pay slip, and it certainly looks like they are paid directly.

The pay rate per hour seems to work out to Y25 which is NZ$4.41.

I blogged last week on the news that Air New Zealand pay only NZ$6,240 a year to flight attendants on its Shanghai route, who are Shanghai-based. This is massively lower than the NZ minimum wage.

NZPA reports on the PM’s response yesterday:

Miss Clark pointed to market rates at work, saying for instance that while Shanghai staff were paid less, those based in London would be paid more than those based in New Zealand.

Her understanding was that airlines who based crews in Shanghai did not directly employ them. They were employed through a local government agency.

Air NZ paid “substantial taxes” to the Chinese government over and above the wages paid to Chinese workers.

Could you imagine the outrage if a National PM dismissed the fact people employed by Air NZ on the flights were being paid at around one quarter the minimum wage, by referring to the “market rates”? Around 20 unions would have condemned the Government by now, and protest marches would be planned up and down the country.

This also shows one of the problems with state ownership.  Because the Govt owns 80% of Air NZ, it feels it has to defend what they have done.  If they were not state owned, I’d suspect the PM would be far more critical.

The PM relies on the fact they are not employed directly, but sub-contracted.  Is this the same PM who pushed through a law specifically to stop sub-contracting leading to reduced terms and conditions?

I have no problems with market rates determining how much people get paid based on where they live.  We already have this with salaries higher in Auckland for example. But the issue is having those “market rates” at massively below  the NZ minimum wage.

Sure the NZ minimum wage does not apply to people working in China.  But if someone from China works in NZ, then it most certainly does apply. And I am not convinced being employed by Air NZ on board an Air NZ flight is different to being employed in NZ.

Incidentially the Chinese former cabin crew member (Crystal Zeng) who gave the Herald the story, posted a comment on the former thread, pointing out that the salaries being paid by Air NZ are in fact even less than the Chinese airlines pay.

The Herald reveals that Shanghai-based flight attendants are paid just one quarter of the salary of their NZ colleagues on board Government-owned Air NZ.

For staff actually working in Shanghai at check-in desks etc, of course they will be paid at local rates. But it does seem inequitable that staff on board the actual flights, doing the exact same job, get paid such a massive difference purely based on where they live.

Of course the cost of living in China is much much less, and I suspect even NZ$6,240 a year is a top tier salary in China. But the flight attendants also spent much of their time in NZ and have NZ work permits.

The incentive this gives Air NZ must also be to use as few NZers as possible on the Shanghai routes.

It will be very interesting to see if the rhetoric of the Government translates into any action.