Gary Parlsoe

Unions besides themselves over Simon Bridges

Today starts the long convoluted select committee process over Simon Bridges’ Employment Relations Amendment Bill. The unions hate it with a passion and believe that the sky’s about to fall in and it’s some cunning plot to have the rich elite take over the world – all thanks to the Nats.

Chairing the Committee is Hamilton East MP David Bennett. This is his big chance to show he’s not afraid of the unions, and to not allow committee proceedings to be captured by whinging corrupt unions like the EPMU and SFWU.

In fact, this gives him and the other Nat MPs Mike Sabin, Chris Auchinvole, Cam Calder and Simon O’Connor a good opportunity to ask questions to the unions about how they’re ripping off their members.

Along with the EPMU and SFWU it is likely they will be prsented with a submission from The Maritime Union’s Gary Parlsoe who has also flown in to have a massive whinge about facilitation, seems he was happy to tell the Koru lounge this morning in a rather loud voice that he isn’t happy with the facilitator. He also spoke briefly with a EPMU bloke who he roundly criticised to his mates after her left, things could get tense between the unions at the select committee.  Read more »

The MacDoctor on the “Scab Bill”

I am glad the MacDoctor has taken up blogging again. His sage words are well worth a read. He gives us his opinion on Jami-lee Ross’ Employment Relations (Continuity of Labour) Amendment Bill.

The MacDoctor’s sole reaction to Jami-Lee Ross’ bill to remove Section 97 from the Employment Relations Act 2000 was one of astonishment. The MacDoctor had no idea that section 97 prohibited the use of temporary contract labour to mitigate a strike. US employers are allowed to hire permanent contract labour, which is, in the MacDoctor’s opinion, a bridge too far – but banning temporary labour? This is one of those hare-brained socialist laws that have caused the wanton destruction of businesses in Europe, especially in the UK. The MacDoctor’s astonishment is reserved for the fact that this is a member’s bill (and a junior member at that). Why on earth was it not on the agenda alongside the 90 probation law? It seems unbelievable that the removal of such a corrosive piece of legislation could have been left to the random chances of the ballot box.  Read more »