How to make sick pay and holiday pay more equitable
Analysis: As the Government reviews the Holidays Act, we would urge them to consider how they could build more equity in their approach to sick pay and public holidays.
Currently each employee in Aotearoa New Zealand receives 10 days of sick pay per year once they have been working for their organisation for six months, up to a maximum accrual of 20 days. Some organisations offer more days per year or longer accruals or both, as part of their enhanced benefits.
The draft bill proposes shifting from an annual entitlement to an accruals system, using pro-rata pay, but this could go further.
Positively, accruing paid sick leave on a pro-rata basis from the day we started our first job makes access to paid leave more immediate.
If we add to this removal of a maximum accumulation and manage it in a centralised government system (a little like ACC but with individual accrual) transferrable between jobs, we could create more equity in the sick pay system for employees and employers. This could be managed in the IRD system.
When an employee changes job, their accrued sick leave moves with them, and while the dollar value may not equate directly if they move to a higher earning job it is still better than beginning accrual again.
Regardless of how many hours or days a week a person works, currently everybody receives 10 days annually from each job they work.
A part-time employee may also be working more than one job and so could technically have double or triple the number of sick days a full-time worker has. Though this probably only occurs in a minority of cases, it does create inequity in the system. Accrual based on hours worked can negate this anomaly.
By creating a system where sick leave is centralised, it puts employers on an even playing field. All employers pay the pro-rata amount in their pay runs per employee into the employee's centralised pot, rather than only paying when an employee is sick. Employees would earn their sick leave not at 10 days a year, but at a percentage of their pay equivalent to 10 days per year (about 4 percent).
Imagine taking this a step further and enabling families to combine sick pay, so that employees can better balance the workload when there is a need to care for a child or an older person.
Therefore, all employers contribute to sick pay, whether their employees are sick or not, which may decrease indirect discrimination. This potentially takes pressure off employers when people are sick for longer as their pay is already accrued.
We know that sometimes employees see their sick leave as an extension of their annual leave, but unlimited accrual and the associated benefits of being able to have paid leave if you are sick for an extended period could discourage this thinking.
Similarly, some employers may discourage their employees from taking sick leave, particularly if this results in a direct replacement cost. Accrual can resolve this issue as it is paid from the employees' pot, not the employer's pocket.
The flipside is that employees may try to save their sick pay by not taking time off when they are sick, in case they are ever in a long-term sickness situation. This would have to be carefully managed.
Although discrimination based on characteristics such as gender or disability is illegal in New Zealand, we do know that indirect discrimination often occurs. People are not chosen for a role because they may cost their employer more in sick leave. This may help to negate this.
The current stand down of six months before being able to access sick pay means those more likely to change jobs, who are also often more vulnerable workers, have less access and a higher likelihood of it being reset. Some employees may experience multiple points in time where they do not have access to sick pay.
Part-time workers are more likely to change jobs and have precarious employment. This means that although they might technically have access to more paid sick in the current model, they may not get the opportunity to use it.
In terms of public holidays, these are currently given to an employee who works on the day on which they fall. Although in theory this makes sense when we look at a standard 8.30am to 5pm, Monday to Friday working week, it can also create unfairness.
A classic example is a full-time hairdresser who traditionally works Tuesday to Saturday, missing out on five of our 12 public holidays in 2024, essentially getting five fewer paid days off work a year.
'Mondayisation' has privileged those who work traditional working weeks. So how can we address this in the Holidays Act reform?
I propose that public holidays should also be pro-rated. Therefore, if you work five days a week you would receive 12 public holidays a year. Someone who works two days a week would receive two fifths of their public holidays per year, or four days.
This would be added to annual leave, but they would still be expected to take each public holiday they work off, and use annual leave if needed. Although this might feel unfair to a person who works part-time on a Monday, it puts more fairness in the system.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsroom
34 minutes ago
- Newsroom
Cabinet frets over funding for Māori foreshore claims
Public funding for Māori claims to rights over areas of coastline could face further tightening, despite blunt cuts in 2024 being found to have seriously breached the Treaty of Waitangi. Treaty Negotiations Minister Paul Goldsmith says the $13m set aside in this year's Budget followed a potential blowout a year ago to $30m – but a coming wave of court hearings and direct negotiations still presents problems for the Government. He has told MPs the Government is now 'turning our mind to the whole framework to see if there's a better way' to arrange financial support for resolving claims under the Marine and Coastal Areas (Takutai Moana) Act. The last cuts for 2024/25 put caps on funding, reduced claimants' lawyers maximum pay rates to those in the legal aid system and forced some to cover the work pro bono (for free) to keep hearings going. Cabinet refused the projected additional funding despite Goldsmith and Māori Development Minister Tama Potaka recommending a further $19m to cover the claimant costs for that year. The Waitangi Tribunal found the way the funding limits were imposed last year breached the Treaty by insufficient consultation, prejudice to the cases before the courts and lacked analysis of legal or treaty implications. It said there are hundreds of court claims and also hundreds of bids for direct negotiations to come, but the direct negotiations had essentially never started and had little chance without funding. The cuts caused 'confusion and disruption to scheduled hearings.' The increase in costs should have been predictable for both past and present governments and officials because Māori had entered the legal process years ago, building cases towards High Court hearings. Preparing for and appearing in court cases was a higher cost than initial research and interlocutory phases. Those cases were starting to hit the courts as part of the normal progression of legal action. 'The escalation of hearings in the High Court is a natural consequence of the Crown's regime, the number of applications filed and the High Court fulfilling its judicial function of determining applications before it.' The $12m in applicant funding for 2024/25 was 'demonstrably insufficient'. Separately the Government introduced a bill in 2024 to amend the MACA Act to tighten criteria by which iwi, hapū and whānau can prove continuous, exclusive use under tikanga (custom) of coastline and waters since 1840. The amending bill would send unresolved court cases for Customary Marine Title (CMT) back to the High Court for re-hearing under its new provisions. In parallel, the Supreme Court set out alternative criteria in a November judgment which would also tighten possibilities of successful claims, and that has seen the Cabinet put the amending law on hold for seven months so it can decide which way to proceed. When Goldsmith appeared before Parliament's Māori affairs select committee as part of Scrutiny Week, MPs quizzed him on the Government's response to the Supreme Court decision, the fate of its amendment bill and its view on the Waitangi Tribunal criticism over the funding cuts. Green MP Steve Abel suggested the now stalled amendment bill would have worsened Goldsmith's budget problem over funding claims under the MACA Act because it would make Māori go back to court for repeated hearings, with a big double-up in costs. The minister answered: 'Based on the legislation we had introduced there was going to be a cost to potentially rehear elements of cases that were underway. The Government is still considering that. 'There's going to be an extra cost and we recognised that but our view was that those costs were justified.' He told Labour's Ginny Andersen the primary budget pressure point for the Government for agency Te Tari Whakatau (successor of Arawhiti – the Office of Crown Māori relations) was 'the payments for claimants for Takutai Moana. The demand is high and our ability to meet the demand is constrained.' Andersen asked if the cost blowout calculated in 2024 impacted the decisions the coalition took in pushing the MACA amendment bill. 'No, we felt the Court of Appeal had come up with a threshold materially different from what the Parliament had expected. 'The cost of the process we are going through at the moment is very high. The first step was to put some budgetary restraint around that as part of a much broader restraint government-wide.' The Waitangi Tribunal's findings on the cuts to the MACA Act funding scheme said 'the Crown does not suggest that the increase in costs incurred by applicant groups weren't actual or reasonable. 'When we consider the claims in this context, we acknowledge that this is an expensive regime. However it is the regime the Crown created. Māori have participated in the regime in good faith. 'The Crown accepts their costs have not been unreasonable. The Crown is concerned that its own regime costs more that it would like, a problem not caused by the applicants.' Despite this the $12m budget amount in 2024 was around 38 percent of what was projected for that financial year. 'Cabinet offered no reason for this decision. There is no evidence that Cabinet undertook a Treaty-compliant balancing exercise as part of this decision. 'This context highlights the serious nature of the [Treaty] breaches by the Crown. 'We find that the Crown has not acted reasonably or in good faith. It has not actively protected Māori interests in relation to this important taonga and not exercised good government.' The tribunal report said funding caps and lawyer rates could prejudice claimants by raising the risk senior counsel walked away from helping. 'We are extremely concerned at such a rudimentary approach being taken to applicant funding under the Act.' In another part of the report, tribunal members observe: 'The only inference we can draw is that this was a purely fiscal decision, but one made without any evidence that the additional funding would affect the economy, not any apparent consideration of how it would impact Māori rights and interests. 'This is not a Treaty-compliant balancing exercise,' the wrote, then concluding the Crown's decision 'breached the principles of partnership, good government, and active protection.' Tribunal members seemed perplexed at how the former Te Arawhiti officials had been unable to anticipate – even though it should have known in 2021 and 2022 – the surge in claimant costs as MACA Act claims moved to the court action phase. 'The Crown should have been on notice from this point that the High Court pathway was gathering momentum which would likely result in a significant increase in demand on the funding scheme.' The agency also had a significantly flawed modelling system to calculate how much would be needed each month, ignoring that some claimants would be involved in more than one case with overlapping Takutai Moana interests. The late identification of the problem had a significant impact, the report says, and the time pressure it put officials under in 2024 'was created by the Crown failing to properly identify earlier the growing pressure on the funding scheme.' The tribunal reiterated its concern over the lack of progress on the alternative Crown Engagement Pathway, in which 387 applications across 20 different coastline areas seek direct negotiations with ministers via Te Tari Whakatau. There has been no successful determination over the years and no chance now for applicants to seek financial assistance 'The Crown Engagement Pathway is effectively suspended at present.' It had advice for the Government for future funding decisions: 'When making decisions, the Crown cannot only consider fiscal matters. It must also consider, in good faith, Māori interests and the potential impacts of any decisions on Māori. 'Such decisions should not be made in isolation.'
Scoop
7 hours ago
- Scoop
Don't Steal The Super South's Last Govt Head Office
Press Release – Dr Colin Meurk ONZM Unless the South Island leaders stand up to be heard on this issue now, the govt will get away with further undermining balanced and shared regional development that is resilient and supports meaningful, respectful nationhood, says Dr Colin Meurk … 'Time is running out.' That from one of Aotearoa's leading ecologists and environmental academics, Dr Colin Meurk ONZM. Dr Meurk has written to MPs, iwi contacts, academics, and local Councillors, highlighting dire consequences of losing the last Government head offices to the North Island. 'In mid-March, Government announced that the Crown Research Institutes (CRIs) will be amalgamated into three new Public Research Organisations (PROs) by early October. It's clear that there's lobbying to get the head offices located in the 'golden triangle' (Auckland, Tauranga, Hamilton). This seems to be confirmed by an evasive answer to a recent question at Parliament during Scrutiny Week, related to where the headquarters will be,' he says. The amalgamation of Manaaki Whenua-Landcare Research, Plant & Food, Scion and AgResearch into the so-called Bioeconomy PRO, officially commences on July 1st. Currently, the head offices of Manaaki Whenua and AgResearch are located in Lincoln near Christchurch, but the CEOs of those organisations and other Government science advisors all reside in the North Island. 'Removing our last head offices is just not on and would be a symbolic kick in the guts for the South Island,' says Dr Meurk. 'Te Waipounamu is thriving and a key part of the national representation of bioscience and agriculture. Not having a head office here in the South will negatively affect our status, voice, career pathways, and importance as well as the strength and resilience of the overall sector, nationally, not to mention the administrative funding into the local economy which will be shredded from local offices of the new PRO.' Dr Meurk says that it's misguided for a Minister of Science and Innovation, Dr Shane Reti, to state that the amalgamation is designed to 'maximise the value of Government funding and drive economic growth'. Business as usual is almost certainly unfit for looming crises that will demand critical, multi-lensed, outside-the-square science and innovation. 'I see this as continued hollowing out of the South Island,' he says. 'The south is experiencing unprecedented growth and popularity, yet government is failing to grasp the opportunities in our unique public research sector and leadership that is already well-established at Lincoln and the wider region. Climate and geo-tectonic risk, especially up north, demands government infrastructure be regionally spread; we must not put all our governance eggs in one basket.' 'Our Prime Minister is in China right now promoting Aotearoa as a place for students including agricultural students, to study. It seems totally counter-intuitive that the last head office here should be disconnected from the centre of New Zealand's agricultural and tourism enterprise, and our affordable living,' says Meurk. 'I'm somewhat surprised that South Island leaders have not voiced more concern. Unless they stand up to be heard on this issue now, the government will get away with further undermining balanced and shared regional development that is resilient and supports meaningful, respectful nationhood,' he says. Dr Meurk ONZM is standing in the 2025 local body elections for Environment Canterbury in Ōpuna – Christchurch West Additional Over the past 33 years, the South Island had at least two central Government Head Offices (HO) – for Crop & Food and Landcare Research CRIs. A decade or so ago, Crop & Food was amalgamated with Hort Research to form Plant & Food, and their head office was moved to Hamilton/Auckland. Meanwhile, AgResearch's head office was moved to Lincoln. In mid-March the Government announced that the Crown Research Institutes (CRIs) will amalgamate four Crown Research Institutes (CRIs) to form three new and more focused Public Research Organisations (PROs) in early October. Legislation to formally establish the PROs will follow in 2026. There are plans underway to locate the head office to Hamilton, likely supported by Plant & Food, the CEO of Landcare Research, the interim chief of the PRO, and Sir Peter Gluckman (key Science advisor to Government) who are all based in the North Island. 'The cards are stacked to further hollow out the South unless concerted joint pressure is exerted by Councils and Iwi of the South.' Colin Meurk Lincoln University This unique University has experienced significant growth in student numbers over the past few years. In 2025, Lincoln is ranked within the top 25% of universities globally in the QS World University Rankings. Specific numbers for qualifications conferred show a 22% increase in 2025, with 1,613 qualifications conferred compared to 1,320 in 2024. In 2024, numbers exceeded 5,000 students for the first time. This was a 21% increase in student headcount in 2024 compared to 2023. The university's strong performance is attributed to a robust portfolio of relevant research. Research Income: External research income has increased, rising by 8% to $35 million. Factors Contributing to Growth: Lincoln University's growth is linked to its focus on land-based and environmental subjects, strong industry connections, and high graduate employment rates, which are currently at 84%, according to The Press. Vice-Chancellor Professor Grant Edwards has said that the strong growth signals Lincoln University's increasing influence in shaping the future of the land-based sectors in Aotearoa and globally. Canterbury University In the top 1% of world universities. Student numbers approaching 25 000 and upsurge in overseas students.
Scoop
8 hours ago
- Scoop
Don't Steal The Super South's Last Govt Head Office
'Time is running out.' That from one of Aotearoa's leading ecologists and environmental academics, Dr Colin Meurk ONZM. Dr Meurk has written to MPs, iwi contacts, academics, and local Councillors, highlighting dire consequences of losing the last Government head offices to the North Island. 'In mid-March, Government announced that the Crown Research Institutes (CRIs) will be amalgamated into three new Public Research Organisations (PROs) by early October. It's clear that there's lobbying to get the head offices located in the 'golden triangle' (Auckland, Tauranga, Hamilton). This seems to be confirmed by an evasive answer to a recent question at Parliament during Scrutiny Week, related to where the headquarters will be,' he says. The amalgamation of Manaaki Whenua-Landcare Research, Plant & Food, Scion and AgResearch into the so-called Bioeconomy PRO, officially commences on July 1st. Currently, the head offices of Manaaki Whenua and AgResearch are located in Lincoln near Christchurch, but the CEOs of those organisations and other Government science advisors all reside in the North Island. 'Removing our last head offices is just not on and would be a symbolic kick in the guts for the South Island,' says Dr Meurk. 'Te Waipounamu is thriving and a key part of the national representation of bioscience and agriculture. Not having a head office here in the South will negatively affect our status, voice, career pathways, and importance as well as the strength and resilience of the overall sector, nationally, not to mention the administrative funding into the local economy which will be shredded from local offices of the new PRO.' Dr Meurk says that it's misguided for a Minister of Science and Innovation, Dr Shane Reti, to state that the amalgamation is designed to 'maximise the value of Government funding and drive economic growth'. Business as usual is almost certainly unfit for looming crises that will demand critical, multi-lensed, outside-the-square science and innovation. 'I see this as continued hollowing out of the South Island,' he says. 'The south is experiencing unprecedented growth and popularity, yet government is failing to grasp the opportunities in our unique public research sector and leadership that is already well-established at Lincoln and the wider region. Climate and geo-tectonic risk, especially up north, demands government infrastructure be regionally spread; we must not put all our governance eggs in one basket.' 'Our Prime Minister is in China right now promoting Aotearoa as a place for students including agricultural students, to study. It seems totally counter-intuitive that the last head office here should be disconnected from the centre of New Zealand's agricultural and tourism enterprise, and our affordable living,' says Meurk. 'I'm somewhat surprised that South Island leaders have not voiced more concern. Unless they stand up to be heard on this issue now, the government will get away with further undermining balanced and shared regional development that is resilient and supports meaningful, respectful nationhood,' he says. Dr Meurk ONZM is standing in the 2025 local body elections for Environment Canterbury in Ōpuna – Christchurch West Additional Over the past 33 years, the South Island had at least two central Government Head Offices (HO) – for Crop & Food and Landcare Research CRIs. A decade or so ago, Crop & Food was amalgamated with Hort Research to form Plant & Food, and their head office was moved to Hamilton/Auckland. Meanwhile, AgResearch's head office was moved to Lincoln. In mid-March the Government announced that the Crown Research Institutes (CRIs) will amalgamate four Crown Research Institutes (CRIs) to form three new and more focused Public Research Organisations (PROs) in early October. Legislation to formally establish the PROs will follow in 2026. There are plans underway to locate the head office to Hamilton, likely supported by Plant & Food, the CEO of Landcare Research, the interim chief of the PRO, and Sir Peter Gluckman (key Science advisor to Government) who are all based in the North Island. 'The cards are stacked to further hollow out the South unless concerted joint pressure is exerted by Councils and Iwi of the South.' Colin Meurk References Lincoln University This unique University has experienced significant growth in student numbers over the past few years. In 2025, Lincoln is ranked within the top 25% of universities globally in the QS World University Rankings. Specific numbers for qualifications conferred show a 22% increase in 2025, with 1,613 qualifications conferred compared to 1,320 in 2024. In 2024, numbers exceeded 5,000 students for the first time. This was a 21% increase in student headcount in 2024 compared to 2023. The university's strong performance is attributed to a robust portfolio of relevant research. Research Income: External research income has increased, rising by 8% to $35 million. Factors Contributing to Growth: Lincoln University's growth is linked to its focus on land-based and environmental subjects, strong industry connections, and high graduate employment rates, which are currently at 84%, according to The Press. Vice-Chancellor Professor Grant Edwards has said that the strong growth signals Lincoln University's increasing influence in shaping the future of the land-based sectors in Aotearoa and globally. Canterbury University In the top 1% of world universities. Student numbers approaching 25 000 and upsurge in overseas students.
