Cut, gut and run: National's sharp turnaround on equal pay

Poor process underlines bad faith from the government, as the ghost of the Employment Contracts Act lingers

Extraordinary scenes in Parliament last week, with the Government deciding to gut the Equal Pay Act with the minimal amount of scrutiny possible.

Thanks to the abuse of a Parliamentary urgency motion, it only took the government around 30 hours to change the law. No select committee process. No opportunity for the general public to have a say, let alone those affected by the legislation.

Fewer workers will be able to argue that their work is undervalued, or has historically been undervalued, because the work was predominantly performed by female employees. Men working in these occupations will be affected too.

Thanks to the boast by ACT leader David Seymour that the Minister of Workplace Relations, Brooke Van Velden, had “saved the Budget for the Government”, we know the government aims to balance the books by cutting the future incomes of low paid workers.

In announcing the changes, ACT party minister Brooke Van Velden claimed the current Act allowed comparisons between occupations she deemed inappropriate.

A particular gripe of the minister was the attempt by social workers to compare themselves with air traffic controllers. During the debate in the house it was good to see the Labour MP Dr Duncan Webb challenge the minister on this point.

"This is a really good example of exactly where the problem lies, because, in fact, if you look at the careers.govt.nz website, there's actually a useful framing of the qualifications needed for various roles and what the pay expectations might be. Whereas social workers are required to be a registered social worker under the current regime, which requires a professional Bachelor's degree, which I understand is actually four years in social work, for an air traffic controller it may require—so it's not even compulsory, but it "may" require—a level 6 qualification. The pay indications are $52,000 to $92,000 for a social worker, and if you go over to an air traffic controller, it is, in fact, $140,000 to $228,000 for an occupation which doesn't actually require—although some of them will have it—a degree-level qualification. That's the example the Minister used to suggest that those disparities are in some way justifiable, and, to be perfectly honest, it beggars belief that she could think that, where there are clear comparators where you can say, "There's a mismatch here and something needs to be addressed." - Dr Duncan Webb

Even if one believes air traffic controllers should be paid more than social workers, it is hard to see how an $88,000 difference in starting pay can be justified. An element of sex-based discrimination is likely, as men have traditionally "manned" the control towers while social work evolved from voluntary charitable work traditionally undertaken by women.