This time, draft criminal conviction vetting and management of inappropriate conduct

FENZ is consistently refusing to consult the NZPFU in accordance with the NZPFU collective employment agreement.  The NZPFU collective agreement requires FENZ to consult on whether change should occur, not just the content of the proposed change and they must provide the reasoning behind the change and be motivated by a desire to reach consensus. 

Last Friday FENZ sent through a draft “Criminal Conviction Vetting Policy and a “Managing Inappropriate Behaviour and Conduct Policy” stating it was going to be distributed today (three days’ notice) to all and sundry. 

We responded notifying of a dispute on the basis that the NZPFU had not been consulted in accordance with the consultation clause.  There is a peace clause that preserves the status quo until the dispute is resolved.

FENZ has not responded to the dispute but today less than two hours before the policies were released to all personnel a brief response offering a “private briefing to unpack September’s consultation in more detail … as early as today”.  This is typical of the disingenuous conduct and language of FENZ.

FENZ is clearly attempting to undermine the consultation clause in the collective agreement at every opportunity and now are ignoring the disputes process when notified of a dispute.

• Both documents released today may directly impact on members’ security of employment and therefore affects the terms and conditions of employment.    

• The subject matter of these documents are very serious with possibly very serious outcomes.  There is a significant difference between pre-employment vetting and compulsory during-employment vetting.  There are restrictions on what an employer has to be told or should be privy to, and there must be a direct link with the employee’s ability to perform their duties. 

• Further, we do not have any information why these policies are now needed as it is our experience that our members do notify their managers if there is an issue which may impact on their employment or their ability to undertake their duties. 

• These polices appear to be founded on a premise of mistrust and to give the right of the employer to know and act on matters that are not within the circumstances of the employment.

The Union has now engaged legal support to address not only this breach of consultation but the myriad of breaches and disputes we have raised in recent times on similar issues.  For that reason we do not believe it is in the interests of our members to respond to these documents.  Further, due to the peace clause no changes can be implemented until the dispute is resolved.

In unity,
Wattie Watson
National Secretary