Kim Webby

I was eight years old in 1972 when the Equal Pay Act came into force.  According to the Act, it was “to make provision for the removal and prevention of discrimination, based on the sex of the employees, in the rates of remuneration of males and females in paid employment.” In other words, women were finally going to get a fair go on payday.

Back in 1972, Labour came into power under Prime Minister Norman Kirk, Tāme Iti, erected a tent embassy in the grounds of Parliament.  For two weeks in February, John Lennon’s song, “Imagine” was the number one selling song in Aotearoa.

Imagine if 53 years later, we actually did have pay equity.  In 1972, my eight-year-old brain was astonished that women earned less than men for doing the same or similar jobs.  To me, it was a no-brainer and back then I had no idea that I would most likely spend the rest of my working life earning less than men.

Then last week, it got even worse.  It felt as if we were on a game of pay equity Snakes and Ladders and we rode that big, long snake right back to the bottom of the board.

Has this Government forgotten as, Emerson so elegantly portrayed it in his Sunday newspaper cartoon, that back in 1893 women got the right to vote in New Zealand. And by the way, we are 51 percent of the population.

Workplace Relations Minister Brooke van Velden can spin the story as much as she likes, women have been trodden on for so long that we know what it feels like.  We know when it happens to us.

Her reported comments, stating “the changes we’ve progressed will stamp out sex-based discrimination, in a workable and sustainable way,” are frankly laughable, if the situation wasn’t so sad.

The legislative changes, rushed through parliament under urgency, effectively toss out 33 current claims of pay inequity by female dominated workforces.

The amendments to the law also make it much harder to make a pay claim in the first place. Instead of having 60 percent of a workforce predominantly women, such as with nursing or primary teaching, the threshold now rises to 70 percent, and it must have been that way for a decade.

The government also now demands further “clarity” on the use of comparators, that is comparing a female dominated job with the skills and training required in a similar male dominated role.

The amendments state that employers must being able to meet their pay equity obligations in a way that is sustainable for their business, for example through phasing in settlements.

Brooke van Velden’s press release notes that pay equity claims have been concentrated in the public sector and rising.  Crown costs of all settlements to date total 1.78 billion per year.

$1.78 billion  is a lot of money, but it’s not as much as the $2.9 billion tax break landlords will receive over four years. And yes, some women are landlords too, but the majority of women are not.

Act leader David Seymour crowed that Ms van Velden had saved the Budget, which will be delivered on May 22.  Are women simply the sacrificial lamb?

This pay equity debacle is not only sad for women, it’s a kick in the backside for democracy.  The legislation passed through Parliament under urgency, with no time for cross party debate, no select committee hearings, just deal done. It’s a deal that totally sucks for women.