So Human Rights Commissioner Judy McGregor has done the "Undercover Boss" thing, and found out that workers in the Aged Care sector are underpaid; the Herald reports:
John Key says the difference in pay between aged-care workers in the community and those at hospitals is a problem, but fixing it would come at a high cost to the Government.Equal Employment Opportunities Commissioner Judy McGregor released the Caring Counts report yesterday, saying aged-care workers were paid too little compared with similar jobs in places such as hospitals.The report recommended phasing in pay increases over three years until community-based workers were paid the same as those paid directly by district health boards.It also recommended introducing a "five-star" ranking system to assess the quality of aged-care facilities - a step Ms McGregor said would improve consumer choice and public accountability - and making voluntary safety standards compulsory.The Prime Minister said the issue of pay inequality between workers at privately run facilities and DHB staff was a long-standing problem. However, rectifying it would mean higher subsidies and the Government had limited resources.He said one of the "handbrakes" on the system was that providers were limited in how much they could increase charges.The report followed a year-long inquiry during which Ms McGregor worked undercover in aged-care facilities for a week in January.
Dr McGregor has raised a very valid issue. But we can't help but wonder; why did the previous government not address it, given that the inequality has been in the system for many, many years, not just from November 2008?
We reckon that it's an especially valid question, especially given that the majority of Aged Care workers are represented by the Service and Food Workers' Union, whose former national secretary Darien Fenton became an MP in 2005 at a time when Labour was in power, and the economy was strong.
12 comments:
And it's far easier to blame the previous guys, than it is to do something about the problem for which you've assumed responsibility.
"It's Laaaaaaaabour's faaault!"
The easiest way to solve the inequality would be to reduce the wages of the DHB workers. If 95% of workers (unionized no less) are willing to do it for $X, then that is the market salary. Having said that they probably should be paid more but using the (possibly overpaid) government employees as the benchmark isn't the best measure. We have over 6% unemployment remember.
My daughter, who has gone to Australia to earn her living of course, funded her degree by working in a nursing home, rather than taking out a student loan.
I think the real problem is that Human Rights EEO commissioners a vastly overpaid.
@ Andrei; you could just be right.
@ Robert - Labour used to be the party of the working man/woman. Perhaps Helen Clark and co were so focused on things like the Electoral Finance Act, Climate Change, social enginnering and dfending Winston Peters that they actually forgot their key constituency.
And don't forget that the SFWU spent a considerable sum of money campaigning for Labour in 2005; in excess of $230,000. I doubt that they felt it was money well spent.
But yes; you're quite right. It's National's problem to sort out now, because previous governments (plural intentional) have had this in the too-hard basket since the late 1980's, ironically when Helen Clark was the Minister of Health!
"Labour used to be the party of the working man/woman."
The Nats claim to be that too, and they've been in charge for four years now. Stop blaming the previous administration for the current one's faults. Why are the Nats so anti-worker?
Absolutely irrelevant to Aged Care Robert; blog about it yourself.
Keeping - yes, that list of harms done by National to education was disturbing. You were right to delete it before any of your readers could see it. I was responding to Judge Holden's question,
"Why are the Nats so anti-worker?"
My, "Why are the Nats so anti-teacher?" seemed appropriate enough.
I'd be happy to re-post the list, should anyone here request it.
If the money's that bad (the stories I hear are horrendous) and the conditions that poor why don't people refuse the work?
There is no shortage of work for anyone prepared to operate an idiot stick in paradise - get a job here instead.
"...why don't people refuse the work?"
The sector's largely reliant on cheap labour from developing countries. The workers are on long term visas and can't move employer. The government conveniently ignores the fact that the only reason there's a domestic labour shortage is because it underfunds the sector, and is therefore happy to see the workforce made of of guest workers without the right to access the health system themselves. And the best thing is when we're done with them we can deport them! All very ethical.
"All very ethical" indeed Judge Holden; and it's been going on like that for close to 25 years.
Stop your bleating Robert. You've had any number of warnings in the past for posting links that are irrlevant to the topic in hand.
bsprout comments here from time to time. And unlike you, he's actually open to reasonable debate, rather than trying to ram his agenda down people's throats, including mine. You could learn something from him...
Post a Comment