MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379621191 · doi:10.1353/iur.2021.a838110

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

2021· article· en· W4379621191 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Union Rights · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRatificationFreedom of associationHuman rightsPolitical scienceTrade unionOpposition (politics)LegislatureInternational tradeLaw and economicsLawEconomicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from 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...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it