Why we train health and safety reps

Sadly those that don’t want workers to be trained in health and safety are attacking the courses the CTU runs for health and safety rep training, ironically including the Minister of ACC. This blog is a rather boring “on the record” blog setting out how the contract is run in preparation for any further attacks.  They might not happen over night, but they will happen!

Workers Denied Access to Information

The  NZ Logger magazine has published attack after attack on us since about August of last year.  You have to read them to believe them.  Industry players and Editorials suggesting we are the problem in forestry safety!  One even suggested UNIONS were exploiting workers in the industry through our safety campaign. I contacted the Editor to ask for a right of reply.  It was written with minor changes and expected to appear this month. Now they won’t run it…. Have a look at it yourself.

Health and Safety Rep Training – a cut by any other name

I couldn’t give a rats arse about Jordan Williams and his new little Act campaigning vehicle against the State, but I do care about health and safety and the manner in which some of the media have run his latest little ruse against training health and safety representatives in the workplace is a disgrace. Judith Collins has used it as a cover to announce the end of worker health and safety training by unions beyond this year, leaving workers unable to access the powers under the Health and Safety Act to issue hazard notices and represent their workmates.

On Pike

The decision announced today (but made when?) to withdraw the charges against Pike CEO Peter Whittall cannot be left to rest. When did […]

Pike River – Charges against Peter Whittall withdrawn

The charges that Peter Whittall faced concerning the Pike River deaths have been withdrawn.  And he and the then directors of Pike River are paying $3.4 million compensation to the victims families.  While it is pleasing for the families to receive some compensation for their loss does the sanctity of our justice system require that the prosecutions should have continued?

Tin ear or cold heart?

Since he came to office, John Key’s government has spent over $350 billion (and borrowed over $50 billion). It has handed out taxpayer largesse to casinos, rich sailors, finance companies, and international corporations. So, why the blunt refusal to pay just $3.4 million to the Pike families and lean on the shareholders to get the cash back? Tin ear or cold heart?

The right thing to do

David Cunliffe has pledged that the next Labour government will pay the court-ordered compensation owed to the families of the disaster’s victims, and […]

Key refuses to pay compensation for Pike River

John Key this week ruled out any Government contribution to compensation ordered to be paid by Pike River to the deceased miners’ families despite a strong suggestion by Judge Farrish that this should occur.  Now that the photo opportunities have finished and the effect of the corporate PR spin has worn off the Government’s handling of the issue appears to be deeply cynical and totally unjust.

“The problem gambler”: Key & SkyCity

Brand Key – CEO of NZ Inc, speculator, gambler, spinmeister – epitomises the “neoliberal revolution”.  Gambling & other consumerist addictions are blamed on the individual. A court case against SkyCity shows the contradictory links between gambling, smoking, corporate influence & “insatiable consumerism.”

Fool’s gold

In its submission on the Pike River bill, New Zealand’s second largest mining company has told Select Committee that workers can’t be trusted to look after their own health and safety, and everything’s just fine the way it is.

But at the same time one of their mines has been partially closed due to a safety hazard.

Fairness at work and a living wage

fairness-at-work-thumb-3The Government has been warned that the Employment Relations Amendment Bill is likely to breach ILO conventions.  Bridges has responded by saying that the breaches “may not be significant”.  Why is it that the Government gets all hard core when dealing with beneficiaries legal obligations but is so casual when it deals with its own obligations?