Transcript
SAM HUGGARD: Well unions and our allies in civil society are a little bit concerned at what is shaping up to be quite an important meeting on Pacific labour mobility this is the first of its kind, this meeting in Christchurch this week. One of the key things we would think it would be useful to have there would be the representatives of labour both New Zealand and Australia but also in particular the representatives of workers in the Pacific to feed into this process. To make sure that any discussions and agreements that are reached are genuinely taking into account the needs of workers.
KOROI HAWKINS: And why aren't you being involved it seems such a given thing that you should have workers at the table?
SH: One of the difficulties with these talks of agreements and PACER-Plus is no different to others that we are familiar with like the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement is that they tend to be negotiated largely in secret and largely by the ministers or heads of states. And there is a very minor role for civil society organisations, unions, health practitioners and others. We tend to find out information after the deals been reached rather than during it. And so and unfortunately PACER-Plus is not different to this, it has been very difficult to get clear information about what is going to be in the arrangement and likewise with the labour mobility talk getting a clear steer as to what the purpose and agenda of that is as well.
KH: And how protected or unprotected are Pacific workers in the various seasonal work schemes?
SH: Both New Zealand and Australia have variations of the recognised seasonal employment. And the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions supported that when it came in, in the mid 2000s on the condition that the Pacific workers would be well treated and not under cut in terms of wages. That there be an industry approach to building up the capacity and skills of the horticulture and viticulture industry. We have felt a little bit let down to be fair by some of those industries and the employers in those industries. And so we want a focus to make sure that workers are really aware of their rights and information both pre-departure from their home country but also better ability to get organised and be supported in New Zealand to make sure they are getting paid properly for what they do and it is a genuinely developmental opportunity for those workers.
KH: Isn't that the appeal of it though? Having people coming from lower economies who are happy to work for what to them might seem as a lot of money at your lower standards?
SH: We need to make sure that our migration settings achieve two things. One to ensure that New Zealand workers have every opportunity to carry out the work but also most importantly that any worker who is working in New Zealand has good standards of living and good conditions. And so any job that is paid at the minimum wage, be it in horticulture or be it in other industries like care and support or hospitality or retail. We want to see improvement to working conditions across the board and it is no different in some of the industries where RSE is a key employer.
KH: And the meetings this week, what are they about do you know at all and what to expect?
SH: We have had some limited information about the purpose of the meeting I understand that the talks are being held due to reluctance from some countries for including binding labour commitments in the PACER-Plus trade talks. You know ironically we actually support that position in a way. We don't think that workers and humans are commodities that can be part of trade deals. We would want to see a much stronger development focus to migration and that is best generally done bilaterally between countries. So we don't support the inclusion of labour deals and trade agreements. But equally we want to make sure that where these talks are taking place such as here in Christchurch that there is a very pro-worker approach to them. You know it is not just meeting the needs of employers but it is also meeting the needs of Pacific workers and making that paramount of the concern.
KH: I understand the Pacific countries will be pushing for expansion to other sectors, outside of agriculture and viti-culture as you put it, into maybe fisheries and construction. Is this something New Zealand unions would oppose?
SH: We would want to take a really close look at it and we would want to have a sense that there is a definite skills gap or a need for that but probably a preference would be to, rather then having it through the lens of sort of trade agreements and trade deals, taking a very developmental approach on it and looking up what New Zealand can do to boost the capacity, education, skills transfers and so on of Pacific workers and so where it was, where we were bringing supporting workers to work in construction for example. We would want to do that in a way that is making sure that is very strong support for rebuilding construction capacity and in host countries as well. Not just about meeting the needs of New Zealand employers but it is actually about developing society and infrastructure in the Pacific.
KH:Do seasonal workers have a union of their own, are they protected under some sort of union?
SH: Unfortunately in New Zealand there is no New Zealand unions who are active in the horticulture and viticulture industry and this is one of the issues is that there is not a logical union for them to join. In Australia it is a little bit better in that there is a union called the national union of workers who have been doing some fantastic work in the primary industries in recent years and were part of exposing some of the poor conditions through a very important four corners report. But it is a glaring omission from the New Zealand union point of view that there just isn't many active unions in the farming and horticulture and agriculture space.