MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4379621191 · doi:10.1353/iur.2021.a838110

Progress and contradictions: New Zealand's new sectoral bargaining framework

2021· article· en· W4379621191 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel Blackburn

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Union Rights · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLabor Movements and Unions
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésRatificationFreedom of associationHuman rightsPolitical scienceTrade unionOpposition (politics)LegislatureInternational tradeLaw and economicsLawEconomicsPolitics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

8 | International Union Rights | 28/2 FOCUS | A CHANGING POST-PANDEMIC WORLD FOR LABOUR In 2018 I worked with the NZCTU’s legal advisor to co-author a submission to the UN’s Universal Periodic Review of New Zealand, which took place the following year. It was an interesting project to be involved with, because the violations of trade union rights in New Zealand are obviously less severe than many of the situations ICTUR normally responds to, but it was nonetheless an example of a country in which a very strong trade union framework had been dismantled, with sweeping and lasting impacts on the world of work. Does the new sectoral bargaining framework herald an effective tack back to a robust labour rights system? New Zealand remains one of very few countries in the world not to have ratified the most fundamental international instrument on trade union rights, ILO Convention No, 87. Historically, this peculiarity had come about not because of opposition to trade unionism, but conversely because New Zealand believed that its 1930s-era compulsory trade union system was superior to – and would be incompatible with – the post-war liberal trade union rights model of ‘freedom of association’1. The New Zealand Government thus refrained from ratification of the ILO instrument and only ratified the UN’s two core human rights Covenants (the ICCPR and the ICESCR) with formal reservations against the freedom of association principles. But the reservations New Zealand lodged were specifically worded to apply to ‘existing legislative measures’ in 1978, and were intended to protect a compulsory union membership system that ended decades ago. As ICTUR and the New Zealand Trade Union Council wrote in 2018 submissions to the UN Universal Periodic Review, ‘this once principled stance has simply become an embarrassing anachronism’ that ‘sends the wrong message about New Zealand’s commitment to freedom of association and the protection of that right’2. For most of the 20th Century registered trade unions enjoyed monopoly bargaining rights and a system of compulsory unionism, until the dramatic changes wrought by the Employment Contracts Act (ECA) of 1991, which remained in force until 2000. The Act supported individual bargaining and individual contracts rather than collective agreements and curtailed the grounds on which strike action could lawfully be initiated. Membership in NZCTU-affiliated unions halved over the decade. The fall was attributed to the ECA but also widespread privatisation and high unemployment. National bargaining was terminated in several sectors, and by 1993 there had been a 45 percent fall in the number of workers covered by collective agreements. In 1994 the ILO ruled that the ECA breached ILO Conventions 87 and 98, but the Government ignored the ruling. According to the NZCTU the ECA encouraged the growth of ‘poor quality jobs’, with an increase in casual and part-time work and exploitation of vulnerable workers by bad employers. It had also led to a ‘collapse of trust and good will’ in industrial relations. In elections in Nov. 1999 the Labour Party returned to office and introduced the Employment Relations Act (ERA). The ERA retained a focus on individual contracts and a workplace bargaining model, giving registered unions the exclusive right to negotiate collective agreements and introducing a new legislative concept (based on Canadian models) of good faith negotiations in collective bargaining. The NZCTU regarded the Act as only a moderate improvement that ultimately failed in many of its stated objectives. Following the National party’s return to power in 2008 a raft of reforms were introduced, which the NZCTU denounced as an attack on union membership, exercise of union rights, collective bargaining and, therefore, wages and conditions. For all the praise that the country’s current Prime Minster and Labour Party leader Jacinda Ardern earned internationally as a ‘liberal beacon’, and ‘the anti-Trump’3, the problems for New Zealand’s workers and unions have as yet remained structurally unchanged since the 1990s. Just this year NZCTU leader Richard Wagstaff reported that ‘at least 30 percent of New Zealand’s workers – over 635,000 people – are in insecure work. We believe it may well cover 50 percent of the workforce. 95,000 workers have no usual work time, 61...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,020
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,251
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,499

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0200,016
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0110,041
Communication savante0,0220,017
Science ouverte0,0040,012
Intégrité de la recherche0,0080,013
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0220,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,017
Tête enseignante GPT0,313
Écart entre enseignants0,296 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Union RightsMême sujetLabor Movements and UnionsTravaux en français237 207