The Importance Of Employment Relations Act 2000

1042 Words3 Pages

One of the most prominent forms of legislative and institutional frameworks within NZ include Employment Relations Act 2000 (ERA). The establishment of ERA is considered a shift towards decentralization of E.R in New Zealand. The main objective of E.R is to promote trust-building and goodwill at workplace to improve the E.R. Hence, it encourages productive E.R relation by promoting collective bargaining. Furthermore, it recognises the inherent inequality of power between the employer and the employee. Moreover, mediation is encouraged as a primary source of conflict resolution in ERA (Rasmussen, 2009). Additionally, it provides institutional framework for the collective employment agreements (CEAs) and individual employment agreements IEAs …show more content…

Subsequently, ERA faced diverse reactions from the key actors in E.R. In contrast to Employment Contracts Act, ERA was welcomed less enthusiastically by the employers. Therefore, employer groups reacted strongly to show their resistance towards the establishment of ERA. As noted by Independent (cited by Rasmussen & Ross, 2004) the headlines in media stated Unionism as the enemy of the freedom and free speech and that ERA would take NZ back to the 1930’s. Yet, Proponents of ERA argued that the employer groups were scared of opposition rights to be given to the unions and employees (Rasmussen & Ross, 2004). However, the resistance dwindled soon as ERA proved to be of little or no good to improve the power imbalance between the employees and the employer (Geare, Edger & Honey, 2011). Furthermore, the years that followed the establishment of ERA saw a sudden decline in union membership. Thus, ERA was not being very successful in promoting Collective bargaining (Thickett, Walsh & Harbridge, 2004).Therefore, when the 2004 Amendment Act was passed, these groups resisted again but this time in favour of keeping the original form of …show more content…

Additionally, the Amendments Act gave automatic coverage to the union members under the CEA and promoted multi-employer collective bargaining by increasing employee’s rights to strike (Blumenfeld et al., 2011). Despite the theoretical accuracy of ERA, its practical achievements are criticised as the employers still enjoy more powerful position than the employees under the ERA (Geare et al., 2011). For instance, the Amendment of 90 days trial period to ERA, offers the employer with the power of dismissing the employee without having the risk of taken to court for personal grievances. According to New Zealand Council of Trade Unions (NZCTU) (2010), there are many cases where the employees were terminated unjustly during the 90 day trial period. For example, a worker at the take note stationary at Waikanae was fired 5 minutes before the end of the 90th day of her job. Moreover, the employer’s power to influence the employee in opting the individual bargaining under ERA hinders it from making prominent positive changes in E.R in

Open Document