Well, well, well – 90 day right to fire doesn’t create jobs after all
It’s funny whenever I used to bring up the 90 day right to fire policy, there would be a flood of National supporters claiming that it was working, turns out they were wrong, the thing simply makes it cheaper for the boss man to abuse workers…
90-day trial periods do not boost employment, research finds
The controversial trial period allowing workers to be easily sacked within their first 90 days on the job has failed to boost employment, research has found.
Treasury-funded research conducted by Motu found no statistically significant increasing in hiring by employers following the introduction of the 90-day trial periods in 2009.
Motu Fellow Isabelle Sin said the research used “data from every firm and every person in New Zealand” to assess the law changes’ effect.
“The main effect of the policy was a decrease in dismissal costs for firms, while many employees faced increased uncertainty about their job security for three months after being hired,” Sin said.
…so another workers right busting neoliberal myth put to bed. The problem is that the average National voter doesn’t care if policy actually stands up to scrutiny, they hate left wing people and values and the perception that it somehow damages them is all a National voter cares about. That the policy works is secondary to the spite it might cause.
We can see this mindset across almost every National Party policy – state housing, homelessness, welfare and private prisons – those who are seen as failing deserve to suffer as far as your average National voter is concerned.
I just heard the story on Radio NZ.
Well, well, well, it seems National has been found out yet again bullshitting to the public. All in the name of job creation, of course, but in reality a further erosion of workers rights.
spiteful bastards
Give National, ACT, United Future and Maori Party 90 days to fix the Housing Crisis, Homelessness and gap between rich pricks like Key and his mates and those living in cars and on the streets?
90 days then on your bikes – see ya later!
So it hasn’t created any new jobs?? None at all?? The Nats have some explanations to make
Especially when Radio New Zealand caught out Michael Woodhouse telling porkies this evening that the 90 Day Trial law wasn’t intended to create new jobs. So Radio New Zealand checked and lo and behold, the Nats had indeed claimed that very thing, that the 90 Day law would create new jobs
Lying hounds
Oh no, he was telling the truth when he said it wasn’t intended to create any new jobs. He just forgot he wasn’t supposed to say that. 😉
My letter to Guyon Espiner standing in at RNZ Checkpoint tonight, yes this Deceptive lying of every National MP now is endemic.
Dear Guyon Espiner Checkpoint for John Campbell,
Listening to your interview of Michael Woodhouse today 17/6/16 was saddening , as the minister tried to just cover the subject with double speak after you asked if he had any proof that the 90 day plan worked to get more employment for people, he clouded the issue saying MBIE had several policies on this issue.
MBIE uses “cherry picking” to glam all studies as they at MBIE did to our Gisborne Napier rail viability study, as we found it lacked any Ministry of Transport studies to qualify this as a balanced study and instead only had road contolling agency studies which promoted road use and not rail!!!
See how cherry picking studies by MBIE works?
Thank you Guyon for asking the hard questions of these cherry picking studies operator Ministers, from using MBIE rubbish.
Grateful RNZ watcher listener every day.
Or…you could do more than read the Herald spin and actually read the report.
“However, within the construction and wholesale trade industries, which report high use of trial periods, we estimate a weakly significant 10.3 percent increase in hiring as a result of the policy.”
http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/wp/2016/16-03
Isn’t it amazing what you find out when you do some actual homework!
“Quelle surprise?!”
Next we are informed the earth is not really that flat, as the government had thought it was.