New Zealand based Crest Clean is currently considering an appeal after a ruling by the Christchurch Employment Court in the matter of Doran vs Crest Commercial Clean Limited. The contractor, in a 22 June announcement, claimed ‘it is a direct result of the poorly drafted Part 6A of the Employment Relations Act 2000’.
“The decision is not only disappointing for both employers and employees but continues the uncertainty when businesses undertake an employee transfer under Part 6A of the Act,” commented Grant McLauchlan, managing director of Crest Commercial Cleaning.
“We are of the view that this decision actually supports the call for a repeal of Part 6A. Rather than ‘vulnerable workers’ it should read ‘vulnerable businesses’,” said McLauchlan.
“Part 6A is not working for either employees or employers. The legislation fails in one of its main objectives, to provide meaningful protection to the most vulnerable employees. It now adds urgency to the need for Parliament to address the problems this part of the legislation has created,” added McLauchlan.
“Part 6A is creating vulnerable business by removing their ability to control their own destiny and places unfair limits on their ability to increase productivity and innovation. The legislation is anti-competitive in that it obliges businesses to employ workers who elect to transfer from a previous employer to a new employer on the same terms and conditions.
“This legislation results in significant lost productivity gains for our clients as it prevents them from fully implementing best practice cleaning and hygiene techniques that improves productivity and reduces absenteeism,” McLauchlan stated.
According to the press release, ‘the Government is the largest customer to the $1 billion NZ commercial cleaning industry so ironically by default they are denying themselves productivity gains by preventing innovation’.
“ThisEmployment Courtdecision should send shockwaves through Parliament with the only way to remedy this is by repealing of Part 6A of the Employment Relations Act 2000. It is also completely unacceptable for both parties to have had to wait for over 50 weeks for a decision on this matter,” claims McLauchlan.
“If the Government really wants to help struggling business then it would repeal this part of the legislation.”