Covid-19: labor laws are not optional, they keep us safe from coronavirus

OPINION: Amid the public outcry surrounding the latest Covid-19 community case and subsequent precautions taken in our largest city, many abuses have been directed against the person who was reportedly forced to come to work ill and his employer. This is not a constructive response, but people are understandably frustrated and upset at being plunged into the Covid-19 mayhem again.

Equally disturbing is the widespread misunderstanding and lack of clear communication about New Zealand labor law and obligations.

We have seen this not only from employers, but also from some of our senior officials and business spokespersons. Having more clarity about legal obligations is key to preventing further outbreaks and directing people’s efforts to improve.

Following an exasperated call from Covid-19 Minister Chris Hipkins to ‘please be a good employer’, Business New Zealand CEO Kirk Hope was asked at RNZ National: “There are no real laws on this, it’s more of an obligation isn’t it? “

READ MORE:
* Coronavirus lockdowns have highlighted how employees respond to stress differently
* Covid-19: when and where to get tested for Covid-19 in Auckland, Wellington and across the country
* Coronavirus: the rights of employees and employers during the Covid shutdown
* Coronavirus prevention is not a free pass to violate labor rights

He replied, “Well, I think it’s a liability” and then described how bad business practices affect everyone.

You are right, it is a social and economic responsibility. But to answer the question more clearly, it is required by law. And employers who fail to meet this obligation risk harsh penalties.

If someone calls to work sick, it is not up to the employer to decide whether or not they can take available sick leave. According to the Holiday Law, the sick person determines it.

When the employer has reasonable grounds to believe that the provisions on sick leave are being abused, they can request a medical certificate.

That’s a fairly high threshold to meet, and the employer must pay for associated medical costs. In 2010, the National Government amended the law to allow this request after only one day of sick leave, instead of the previous threshold of three days.

It is a punitive provision that is impractical and may put the practices of GPs at greater risk.

Unions are seeking to have this amendment repealed to allow for sound public health practices based on trust.

If a working person does not have paid sick leave available, the employer’s first option should be to check if they qualify for the government-funded Covid-19 leave scheme.

This scheme subsidizes some employers to pay symptomatic people waiting for test results to stay home safely. Unions are campaigning for the leave plan to be urgently extended to cover all those with symptoms and awaiting test results, and for easier access by workers, rather than just employers being able apply.

The base sick leave must be increased to 10 days, for everyone, from the first day of work. This change could be made with the same urgency as was given to business support packages. Unions are working closely with the government to see this implemented.

However, if employers do not respect sick leave and instead treat it as ‘accommodation where possible’, increasing the leave will not be enough to keep Covid-19 out of our food outlets. , retail stores and public transport networks.

Employers should be aware that violations of the Holiday Law and labor regulations under the Labor Relations Law will be reported to the unions and the Labor Inspectorate. Fines of up to $ 20,000 are responsible only for Vacation Law violations.

Furthermore, an employer that forces someone to work with symptoms of Covid-19, or indeed any communicable disease, is forcing someone to do unsafe work. This also applies to that person’s co-workers and work contacts.

There have been high levels of public health advice on Covid-19 and clearly publicized risks. It could be argued in some circumstances that forcing work with Covid-19 symptoms is legally ‘reckless’ – risk to a person of death, serious injury, or serious illness. These actions could clearly cost the life of a vulnerable person.

The maximum penalties under the Health and Safety Act for recklessness are a $ 3 million fine for the business or five years in prison. Employers should know that violations of the Occupational Safety and Health Act will involve WorkSafe and are very serious indeed.

All workers have the right to reasonably refuse unsafe work under article 83 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act and article 19 (f) of the International Labor Organization C155 – Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981.

This includes colleagues of a person with Covid-19 symptoms who may be exposed to an infection. There are proper processes that people must follow in this circumstance.

Workers should raise the issue with their employer and their health and safety representative. Then, if it is not resolved, they should call their union for support and WorkSafe NZ to file a complaint.

Covid-19 transmission cases at work are an illustration of why we need trained health and safety representatives in all businesses, especially small employers.

For too long, it has been assumed in New Zealand that companies should only follow these laws to the extent possible based on their business model and that there will be no consequences for non-compliance.

The enormous power imbalance between employers and workers has allowed this, particularly when work is informal, precarious and poorly paid or there is discrimination based on age, gender or ethnicity. That imbalance now puts us all at risk. It is high time we strengthened the laws and their enforcement to keep everyone safe.

Melissa Ansell-Bridges is a secretary for the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions (CTU). She was previously a Director of Equity New Zealand.