My Pacific heart senses that with the Government’s recent changes to the pay equity legislation that extinguished 33 claims for low paid mainly female workers, we are in a full-blown class war. We are seeing authoritarianism from the top as if we as a nation had forgotten the destruction classism and elitism cause, and think we are immune to it.
Thinking about the legislation’s impacts on fundamental human rights, as a Samoan woman and mother to three part-Irish children – Samoans and Irish know exactly how it feels when one’s inherent dignity, power, and sense of self-determination feel dismissed and trampled on – I read the Office of the Attorney-General’s assessment of the draft Pay Equity Amendment Bill in relation to New Zealand’s Bill of Rights Act.
Among the carefully crafted tone and words that most women who have been denied pay equity would struggle to easily absorb – mainly because they’re busy working to survive, and like most of us, are not legally trained, I noted in particular these statements that affirmed my class war fear:
“The changes made by the Bill can be expected to have the effect of tightening access to the pay equity process and pay equity settlements. I have considered whether the combined effect of these changes may discriminate on the basis of sex by making it more difficult for a person to access a non-discriminatory rate of pay or to take steps to maintain pay equity. For example, the higher threshold for raising a claim, the nullification of review clauses, the requirement to wait 10 years post-settlement before raising a claim, and the removal of the Authority's ability to order back pay could result in a person experiencing a period of discriminatory pay that would be more difficult to remedy.”
“Cool,” I thought, there is recognition of the obvious…but then it was followed by a look at whether the Bill breached section 19 of the Human Rights Act. Section 19 (s. 19) says people have the right to be free from discrimination, including discrimination because of their sex.
The Attorney-General’s assessment said that on balance, the changes to pay equity law did not breach s. 19, “…because anyone who lost out because of the new law could still take court proceedings in order to obtain an effective remedy, for example, seeking a remedy in the High Court for a breach of s. 19 of the Bill of Rights Act.”
That’s bit like saying to a sister, aunty, cousin, mum, grandma on an unjust wage for years who will be denied backpay but still hoping for some pay equity: “Hey sis, with all that abundant income to spread around, you could always just go to court, it’s free!”.
The Bill of Rights Act commentary gets weirder. In the next paragraph it says: “Pay inequity is a systemic issue rather than a matter of direct discrimination by an employer.”
Contrary to this statement, it is commonly known that systemic discrimination is a collection of action and decisions made by humans - about how and who to recruit, renumerate, and promote.
It is the valued contribution of supported, safe, properly renumerated respected workers that enable the prosperity of businesses and public services so that we all benefit and profit, not just the rich few at the expense of the many who are underpaid.
As Dame Ranjna Patel, a sister and successful entrepreneur said in an interview about wealth, “You've got to know when you've got enough."
We have fought for generations to be better, and this cannot be realised when those with influence and power choose not to lift our most vulnerable women up over other “strategic priorities”.
The pursuit of profit and power paid for by women and their dependents, cannot ever be acceptable for Aotearoa New Zealand.
Saunoaamaalii Karanina Sumeo is a former Human Rights Commissioner, who had responsibility for Equal Employment Opportunities. She has a background in child protection, policy, women’s rights, community development, Pacific issues, employment, and human rights.
This is an opinion piece and the views expressed in it do not necessarily reflect the views of the PSA.
