Ports of Auckland fined $40,000 for illegal actions against its workforce

The Employ­ment Rela­tions Author­i­ty has fined the Ports of Auck­land $40,000 for ille­gal­ly employ­ing strike break­ing con­trac­tors dur­ing indus­tri­al action at the Port ear­li­er this year.

Ports of Auck­land Lim­it­ed (POAL) broke the law when they employed an over­seas engi­neer at the cost of $10,000 a week to under­take the work of MUNZ mem­bers.

In addi­tion, local con­trac­tors were ille­gal­ly used to car­ry out engi­neer­ing work at the Port.

At the time when the mul­ti­ple breach­es of the Employ­ment Rela­tions Act took place in Feb­ru­ary and March 2012, MUNZ mem­bers were on strike and locked out in their bat­tle to stop man­age­ment con­tract­ing out their jobs.

In her deci­sion released yes­ter­day, Employ­ment Rela­tions Author­i­ty Mem­ber Anna Fitzgib­bon said “It is my view that POAL was aware of s97 [edi­to­r­i­al note: Sec­tion 97 of the Employ­ment Rela­tions Act regard­ing the Per­for­mance of duties of strik­ing or locked out work­ers] but in order to keep the port oper­at­ing dur­ing the strike, made cal­cu­lat­ed deci­sions to breach the pro­vi­sion.”

In decid­ing the breach of the Act was delib­er­ate and seri­ous, she imposed penal­ties totalling $40,000 against POAL.

Mar­itime Union of New Zealand Nation­al Pres­i­dent Gar­ry Parsloe says the ERA deci­sion places POAL man­age­ment in an unten­able posi­tion.

“Instead of focussing on set­tling a fair col­lec­tive agree­ment, the Port embarked on an unprin­ci­pled plan to sack their entire steve­dor­ing work­force and replace them with con­tract­ed labour.”

He says that now in addi­tion to all the costs of the dis­pute, Auck­land ratepay­ers are con­tin­u­ing to pay for POAL man­age­men­t’s delib­er­ate­ly unlaw­ful actions.

“Ulti­mate­ly the costs of POAL’s actions impact on the return to the peo­ple of Auck­land.”

Mr Parsloe says this week at the Auck­land Coun­cil Account­abil­i­ty and Per­for­mance Com­mit­tee, the so-called Coun­cil Con­trolled Organ­i­sa­tion Auck­land Coun­cil Invest­ments Ltd (ACIL) indi­cat­ed that they were not respon­si­ble for mon­i­tor­ing the costs of the dis­pute.

“Some­one must hold POAL to account for the costs of this dis­pute. Who is respon­si­ble?”

Despite con­tin­u­al legal find­ings against them, POAL man­age­ment are con­tin­u­ing (with the sup­port of the Board) to try to remove employ­ment secu­ri­ty from port work­ers, includ­ing by demand­ing a col­lec­tive agree­ment that removes all cer­tain­ty of ros­ter­ing and even the cur­rent guar­an­tee of every third week­end off.

This dis­pute has gone on for too long and has cost too much it is time for POAL to set­tle a fair and bal­anced col­lec­tive agree­ment with us, says Mr Parsloe.

He says MUNZ mem­bers at the Port sim­ply want to have an agree­ment that pro­vides job secu­ri­ty, not sign an agree­ment that allows their jobs to be con­tract­ed out.

“We need an agree­ment that pro­vides increased flex­i­bil­i­ty while pro­vid­ing secu­ri­ty and cer­tain­ty to our mem­bers to enable them to have time with their fam­i­ly and to work in a safe man­ner. It is time for the mad­ness to stop and for the Port to be run by a man­age­ment that val­ues its work­force. Heads must roll – delib­er­ate ille­gal actions by man­age­ment com­pel a firm response from the Board and from the Coun­cil.”

ERA Deter­mi­na­tion 12 Decem­ber 2012