Wharfies in Hong Kong are striking for a 17% pay rise. They make the POAL wharfies look reasonable…until you look at their pay rates.
They want their daily rate raised to HK$1600 or $246 per day…their monthly salary is reported as HKS21,000 or $3234 meaning they earn HK$252000 per annum or $38,798. Read more »
Ports of Auckland has been fined $40,000 for bringing in an Engineer while MUNZ was on strike. Garry Parsloe is all over it.
“We need an agreement that provides increased flexibility while providing security and certainty to our members to enable them to have time with their family and to work in a safe manner. It is time for the madness to stop and for the Port to be run by a management that values its workforce. Heads must roll – deliberate illegal actions by management compel a firm response from the Board and from the Council.”
He is trying to sheet home any financial costs resulting from his union’s strike actions onto POAL. He forgets that it was his union that went on strike in the first place…and he forgets that the engineer was called in because of OSH requirements.
This whole issue shows up the stupidity of that provsion int eh Employment Relations Act…POAL had to provide engineering skills, MUNZ was striking so POAL had to foly someone in from Australia…and as a result they have been fined.
What was POAL supposed to do, ignore OSH regulations and potentially cause an accident?
It just goes to show how lackadaisical Garry Parsloe, Helen Kelly and MUNZ are when it comes to safety…but then again when their own member throw twist locks under the wheels of straddle carriers you can;t really expect anything better.
So while Garry Parsloe is yelling form the roof tops about a fine for POAl perhaps he might also like to explain this:
Extract – 2005 MUNZ Financial Accounts for $340,000.00 Provision
Yep a cool $340,000.00 provision.
Just to give a quick recap – the Owl only uses information freely available in the public domain. The Owl is also happy to congratulate unions who are good operators for their members.
I have always been impressed with the Rail and Transport Maritime Union accounts and they recently filed a great surplus, good re-investment policies and very clear and precise accounts. Well done and the members should be pleased with their executive.
The recent wrangling over the inter-islander negotiations is part of business we can generally accept and the Owl knows the recent settlement there was a certain amount of “huff and puff” but overall a settlement is a settlement which means both employer and employee are happy.
NZCTU President Helen Kelly made a public announcement on their website yesterday stating she was happy the Len Brown was going to get more involved the dispute and sort this so called “crazy POAL/MUNZ situation” out.
Owl’s Observation
I agree with Helen Kelly because the Rail and Maritime Transport Union are clearly impressed with the Ports of Tauranga model that they have invested $404,287.00 in Ports of Tauranga shares. The value of their shares increased in $82,828.00 in their last financial year.
That is a 20% return/increase for union members. Fantastic investment!
What does Helen Kelly do – asks RMT Union to divest and stand in solidarity with MUNZ or banish RMT union from the NZCTU?
Wonder how the next press conference is going to look like when asked why affiliated members of the NZCTU are happy to invest in the Ports of Tauranga model and yet argue against POAL vision?
MUNZ calls to sack POAL CEO and Board – by the Owl
MUNZ have called for the Mayor to immediately sack POAL CEO and Board and appoint a moderate board.
Their press release says:
“Ports of Auckland workers at the meeting called on the Mayor of Auckland to sack the CEO and the Board and restore a moderate management who respects its workforce, says Mr Parsloe”.
Further points are made that they are protecting New Zealanders in their actions.
“They do this in the name of their families, the city of Auckland and New Zealand workers. The mayor and council can fix this if they want to.”
Owl’s Observation:
These statements are at odds with a press release issued late Friday by MUNZ which said which is yet to appear on MUNZ website:
“In the meantime we will be maintaining the integrity of the process of Facilitation and not commenting further while we work through the agreed process.”
This comment was because POAL updated their website with an up to date state of play on the facilitation process.
I did quantum maths at school.
“x” + Integrity = sacking (I can’t quite work what “x” equals?).
This needs to be resolved as a festering sore can become quite nasty.
The Owl has been digging into the Maritime Union’s affairs and it looks like they may well be in the same spot of bother that the Meatworkers Union is.
More importantly it may mean that Local 13 of the Maritime Union is an illegal union. They are collecting fees and only passing through capitation fees to the Maritime Union. Local 13 is not registered as a union and nor has it presented any accounts as required by law. My understanding is existing contracts and agreements are in the name of Local 13 and not in the name of the Maritime Union.
In my opinion Ports of Auckland should seek an immediate judgement from the courts on the validity of Local 13 continuing to negotiate and represent members at the Port.
The Owl’s findings are below:
MUNZ versus NZ Meat Workers Union
The Registrar Office has put the hard word on the NZ Meat Workers Union to file consolidated accounts and according to press releases this could add up to millions.
The issue lies around a word called “capitation” which means that all branches pay HQ a capitation fee of a set amount for the number of members each branch has.
I took the time to review other unions that have branches as well and the Maritime Union has the same set up.
2011 Accounts
Affiliation Fees $338,058.00
Registered Members according to Department of Labour Returns 2,580
Therefore average Capitation Fee $131.00
Annual Union Fees per member? At Local 13 the union fees depend on hours worked and are worked out at 1.5% of wages. That works out at between $10-$35 per week.
The majority of the Affiliation Fees comes from a branch called Seafarers $153,927.00
Owls Observation
The Owl has always said he doesn’t care what businesses spend their money on or what their business model is. What I do care about is process.
It looks like MUNZ has the same issue as the NZ Meat Workers Union and I wonder if the Registrar is taking the same hard line.
(Note: All information is available in the public domain and the Owl always apologises if incorrect.)
The Maritime Union has again been shellacked by the ERA. Remember when I blogged about Carl Findlay and his dodgy activities? Well the union sought to have his case used to slow down the negotiations toward a new contract on the wharves and the Emplyment Relations Authority has slammed them for it:
A second Employment Relations Authority ruling in as many weeks has gone Ports of Auckland’s way, with the authority ruling the port company was justified in giving a staff member a final warning.
It follows a decision earlier this month that the removal of two foreman’s roles at the port would not undermine current contract negotiations with wharfies or result in unsafe work practices, as the Maritime Union of New Zealand had claimed.
In the latest decision, the ERA said Ports of Auckland was within its rights to give stevedore Carl Findlay a final written warning for removing a letter from a manager’s office.
Findlay used a ruler to retrieve a letter written by another stevedore, Tamati Davie, from underneath stevedoring manager Jonathan Hulme’s locked office door.
The letter was in response to an investigation Hulme was conducting into whether Davie had passed on confidential Ports of Auckland information to the Maritime Union.
Davie put the letter under Hulme’s door but decided he wanted to add to his response so asked Findlay – who is vice president of the Auckland branch of the union – to get it back.
Findlay made no attempt to contact Hulme to ask for permission to retrieve it, the ERA said. Despite being confronted by a senior staff member who saw what he did, and receiving a text from Hulme the next morning asking for the letter back, Findlay did not return it, the authority said.
His actions did not constitute serious misconduct as the port company said, but were serious enough for the port to issue a written warning. Ports of Auckland acted in a “procedurally fair manner”, the authority said.
The Maritime Union is usually very quick to rush to the news media over any perceived slight to their domination ont he wharves. They will be very quiet over this judgment from the Employment Relations Authority (full judgment PDF):
Parties: Maritime Union of New Zealand Inc v Ports of Auckland Ltd Summary: BREACH OF CONTRACT – HEALTH AND SAFETY – Applicant claimed respondent’s proposal to disestablish two foreman roles would result in unsafe work practices in breach of collective employment agreement (“CEA”) – Authority found no tangible evidence indicating proposed change would compromise health and safety – No breach of contract – GOOD FAITH – Applicant claimed respondent’s failure to consult adequately over proposal breach of good faith – Found respondent explained to applicant effect of proposed changes on who would carry out foreman’s work – No breach of good faith – GOOD FAITH – BARGAINING – Applicant claimed respondent’s proposal undermined bargaining for new CEA – Found disestablishment of foreman roles operational matter rather than bargaining issue – Found bargaining not undermined by respondent pursuing matter not subject to collective bargaining for new CEA – No breach of good faith
This was nothing more than a shameless delaying tactic by the union. I note that costs have been reserved. I hope the union gets slammed for this.
Good luck reading about this anywhere but here.
Yesterday saw the beginning of the end of the Maritime Union’s dominance in the Ports of Auckland.
While MUNZ was having a BBQ to celebrate the end of their war, which they think is victory (their contract has run out as has the mandatory 12 month extension), a new union has been formed and signed a flexible work agreement with the Port.
Ports of Auckland has signed a collective agreement with new PortPro Union representing about 30 non-striking workers.
The agreement does not affect the ongoing dispute between the port and the Maritime Union, which is holding a barbeque in Auckland this afternoon to show the public its employment dispute is far from over.
PortPro was set up recently by former Maritime Union member Grant Lane, who wanted to offer non-striking stevedores an alternative.
PoAL ceo Tony Gibson, who is away in United States, says in a statement the agreement runs for two and a half years.
It offers workers a “flexible shift and roster system” similar to what has been in place at Port of Tauranga.
“If we can get a deal like this across all the port we will be able to compete with Tauranga on level footing,” the statement says.
PoAL spin doctor Matt Ball would not give specifics of the deal, but says it is similar to the one the Maritime Union has rejected.
Make no mistake this is the beginning of the end of the Maritime Union’s dominance down on the port. The damage their strike action caused has turned the port into a desert. There will be job losses, and the ones to go will be those on expired contracts i.e. Maritime Union staff. Garry Parsloe, mind, will still be getting paid as his workers get the sack.
The Maritime Union and their tame flunkies in the media all thought that they had won when they found they had a activist judge prepared to throw judicial precedent under the bus. The Port wisely withdrew from court action and circled the wagons…now Richard Pearson, who has dealt with far more fearsome people in ports around the world, has laid down a royal flush to Garry Parlsoe’s pair of twos.
The union stupidly spent all their energy focussing on demonising Tony Gibson and let Richard Pearson quietly work his magic in the background.
Watch the battle move to a new phase now, one which the Port will ultimately win, simply because they had patience and recognised that sometimes in a war you lose some battles.
As MUNZ and the NZCTU run around claiming underhand tactics (“ruse”) on the formation of the new PortPro Union is wanting to negotiate with the ports management (POAL) – a number of interesting issues come to mind.
I wrote many months ago about how Union members pay MUNZ to represent them – secure employment conditions and in particular provide a service. I made the observation that a Union member could indeed take the service provider (in this case MUNZ) to task if the failed to achieve their outcome.
I linked it to the classic contract wording of “offer and acceptance”.
PortPro is a new competitor on the wharf in “Unionland”. They saw an opportunity and decided to build a business around it. What are they offering? – I am assuming “Employment Service Advice”
The general public tends to use the word “Union” – but reality is that a “Union” is an “Employment Service Advice Agency”.
PortPro have 33 members (according to the NZ Herald Report) – or once again shall we call them 33 clients.
Most people in business know that getting 33 clients on day one is a major achievement. In my business I had to give away countless free products before I secured my first full paying customer.
More importantly PortPro is going to advise its clients how to get the best deal in the marketplace, best employment advice and overall secure long-term contracts. One would assume PortPro have sent out details about what they want to achieve and the services they provide. 33 people have decided to become customers or clients.
Even if MUNZ settles with POAL and holds the head collective agreement, the sharp point of this move by PortPro is there is a “new union on the block”. I cannot give a better example of what a “new competitor does” by referring you to the Telco industry – Telecom versus, Vodafone versus 2 Degrees.
There is also the classic story of Virgin Airways and British Airways when the new Virgin airline was set up.
Both examples went through very interesting court cases and parliament stages before the industries were deregulated or as some would say – more regulated.
Telecom spent years in court defending their position and then Parliament split Telecom up.
BAA and Virgin spent years in court with BAA defending strongly their position and then the aviation industry was overhauled by Parliament in England.
The Owl predicts that PortPro is the start of many new Unions to spring up which focuses on Employment Services (and Health and Safety – I do agree H & S is paramount, it is just whether you use it for political reasons) – there may even be a court battle and possibly intervention by Parliament.
For me the most interesting point and I think it will only be resolved in court will be if PortPro is allowed the freedom of speech on the wharf which the Unions have desperately sought in getting accountability on the wharf by the POAL Management and demanding good employer processes.
PortPro now challenges those assertions and tests whether a good employer will allow two unions to operate at one site. Many businesses have multi-union sites so precedence has been set.
There is a new union on the port, set up to provide competition against the old bully boy union thugs of the Maritime Union.
Ports of Auckland is to open negotiations today with a new union of non-striking workers, raising alarm in the Council of Trade Unions.
CTU president Helen Kelly suspects the creation of the new organisation, PortPro, is “a ruse” to sideline the established Maritime Union and set new working conditions while its dispute with the port remains unsettled.
That is denied by the company and PortPro chairman, veteran wharfie and former Maritime Union member Grant Lane, who said his purpose was purely to protect the positions of 33 stevedoring employees who worked through the earlier disruption and “had a gutsful” of the old union.
Port spokeswoman Dee Radhakrishnan said there had been no company involvement in setting up the new body, but it was legally obliged to respond to the group’s bargaining overtures.
Helen Kelly has stuck her nose on and suggested that a new union is highly suspicious…strange behaviour from a life long unionist to oppose a new union. Obviously she doesn;t think that the new union is militant enough or destructive enough to meet her tough standards.
Maybe the 33 workers who have joined the new union are just simply fed up with the intransigence of Garry Parsloe and the Maritime Union.
