July 15, 2026 • 34 mins
This week on Ask the Expert, employment lawyer Gareth Abdinor joined the Afternoons team to answer more workplace-based questions.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
You're listening to a podcast from News Talk ZEDB. Follow
this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Gareth Abdnor is an employment, workplace and information expert and
director of Abdenor Employment Law. He joins us about once
a month to answer all your questions, and this segment
has been so popular that this week we've got him
in for an hour and he joins us right now, Gareth,
get a to you.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
Good.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
Hey guys, how you doing very good?
Speaker 4 (00:36):
So eight hundred and eighty ten eighty you got a
question for Gareth? Give us the ring. And you're dealing
with a lot of redundancies at the moment around AI,
Is that right, Gareth?
Speaker 5 (00:45):
Yeah, increasingly. I mean we kind of knew that this
would be coming, but I've been a bit surprised at
how quickly it's happening. Lots of people losing their jobs
and being replaced by computers and robots.
Speaker 4 (00:59):
Yeah, but you know, we're also finding out that AI
isn't what it was cracked up to be, and a
lot of companies are getting buyers remorse. People jumped in
there and they don't actually realize what a human is
really doing in their job, especially encoding. It's interesting. I've
been looking to this a lot about They've got rid
a lot of coders and then found out that the
slot that AI pumps out and all the decisions and
(01:23):
the little nuances that a human brings to it. So
you might have a whole lot of people that are
that are losing their jobs now, but I'm hopeful for
the future that humanity will be appreciated.
Speaker 5 (01:33):
I mean, the other thing that I'm dealing with, there's
a lot of clients so ask AI to help them
with their employment dispute, and most of the time it's yeah,
I don't think I'm going to be redundant anytime soon.
Speaker 4 (01:50):
Well, well, the thing from a legal perspective, AI isn't
legally responsible for what it does, and so you know,
and for nearly everything that you do as a human,
you have to have someone that is responsible for the output.
And so if you just use AI then and you
put it out there, you're still responsible when you use
it or not. Yeah, so if you fire all that
(02:12):
slopout then and it gets it wrong, yeah.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
You know you can't go Yeah, talk to chet GPT.
They said it was okay, it doesn't matter. Yeah, right,
if you had a question for Gareth. Now is your opportunity.
He's not with us long oh eight, one hundred and
eighty ten eighty. If you've got an issue in your workplace,
or if you're an employer and you're a bit confused
about some legislation, he is the man to chat to
or some situation. He is a man to chat to
(02:36):
right now. Nine two ninety two is the text number
as well. A couple of texts coming through this one
says get a Gareth wanted some advice on how to
navigate by here. We gave potential redundancy while on maternity leave.
Is that legal? And what are my options?
Speaker 3 (02:52):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (02:53):
This is This is one that comes up quite often
because there are a lot of misunderstandings out there. You
can still be made redundant while you're on parental leave,
but you can't be made RedANT because you're on parental leave.
So as long as there's a genuine business reason, you know,
(03:16):
all of the usual principles apply. It needs to be
about the role, not about the person. And you know,
if you happen to be on parental leave, they still
need to consult with you, They still need to give
you an opportunity to provide feedback. But yes, potentially your
position could be disestablished and you could be made redundant.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
Okay, keep those text questions coming through on nine two
nine two.
Speaker 4 (03:40):
This is an interesting one. The first question I have,
there's only one question come through, but it starts with
the first question I have is with regards to teams
chats within a team of four, can a team leader
take a line from that chat and give that to
his boss purely to gain favor in nothing else? He
has said a lot worse than what I said in
(04:01):
the team chat, says this text. So if you're having
a guess to paraphrase it, understand what the question is Gareth,
because I think what he says, you're within work, you
say a whole stuff. But if if you're at the job,
is everything that you say in your job owned by
the the employer in a way.
Speaker 5 (04:22):
Well, I think you should be very careful when you're
in a teams meeting. You should be working on the
basis that there's a very high possibility that it's it's
being recorded in some way, whether or not it's been
recorded through the team's app. And yes that that could
(04:43):
have ramifications. Of course, I'm interested in the passing it
on to curry favor. What does that mean? You know,
if there's any sort of backlash, well you should get
the opportunity to to give the whole context, give the
other side of the discussion. Yeah.
Speaker 4 (05:01):
If I was an employer and someone came to me
with something from Teams and they said, lookay good, this
is copied and paste this from the transcript from Teams.
This is what he's says, slaking you off in the Teams,
I think I would maybe look down on the person
doing that as much as the other person.
Speaker 6 (05:17):
Totally.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
Yeah, your brown nosed tattletale.
Speaker 4 (05:19):
Yeah, yeah, interesting, exactly exactly.
Speaker 2 (05:24):
Gareth Abdnor is with us. He's an employment lawyer and
director of Abdena Employment Law So, oh, one hundred and
eighty ten eighty is that number to call. This is
your chance. He's not with us long and it is
free advice. This text here is not a question.
Speaker 4 (05:37):
It's a follow up on the previous text that we
read out that happened to me on a WhatsApp thread.
We were all slagging off our manager. One of the
guys in the chat screen grab what I said and
sent it to the guy I was called in for
a chat, but the guy had closed the chat down,
so I couldn't show that everyone would have been doing it.
Guy was like, it didn't smack him in the head dirty.
Speaker 5 (05:58):
So I question is, what are you thinking doing it
in writing? I'm you know, I'm a realist. Occasionally people
are going to off their manager, but jeez, don't put
it in writing.
Speaker 2 (06:12):
Yeah, how far does that go? Gareth? I mean, if
there's you know, just for an example here, there's a
WhatsApp chat situation happening that's kind of semi related to work,
but you also use it for personal stuff. I mean,
can the boss get access to that?
Speaker 5 (06:26):
Yeah, potentially, I mean, especially if one of the people
in the chat decides to give them a copy of it.
Speaker 2 (06:32):
That's a good point.
Speaker 5 (06:34):
Most most employment agreements or IT policies these days have
a provision in them that if you're posting something on
social media or in other communications that you're sharing the
third parties that can be linked back to work or
relates to work in some way, there can be work consequences.
(06:55):
So you know, often often people will have a social
media profile that has their name on it doesn't necessarily
say where they work. But they make some comments that
reflect poorly on their employer. It's pretty easy to google
where someone works these days, and that can have consequences.
(07:18):
I think people should be very very careful before they
put something on social media that their employer might be
unhappy with. And if you're going to slag a few boss,
do it the old fashioned way, do a burbery and.
Speaker 4 (07:32):
Then deny and I deny it.
Speaker 2 (07:35):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (07:35):
But also, like this person is saying everyone was slagging
off the boss, it might not be the case. Sometimes people,
ever doesn't perspect perspective of what's going on, You might
have been anyone that was slagging the boss off. This
Texas says, can I record a meeting where I don't
feel safe with what's happening? Will I get in trouble
for recording the meeting if I don't tell them? That's
(07:57):
an interesting one. So you're worried about what happened in
the meeting, and you flick your phone on and voice
recorded or something.
Speaker 5 (08:03):
And what I often find is that people say they
recorded it because they didn't safe, but actually they recorded
it because they wanted to. They wanted to set someone up.
If you record a meeting and don't tell the other
side that you're recording it, that can be seen as
a breach of good faith, So there could be consequences. Now,
(08:26):
if you're genuinely not feeling safe, is recording the meeting
actually the best way to protect yourself? Why haven't you
raised those concerns in another way? So it's not it's
not always a bad idea, but it does come with
some real risks.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
Okay, Hamish, you're on with Gareth.
Speaker 7 (08:47):
Well, thanks for taking a call. Guys, welcome to my
health Hey, okay, so yeah, this is a question to
spout my wife. She's she's currently employed, but A isn't
getting any key receiver I remember, and was never signed
up with key Receiver when she was employed.
Speaker 6 (09:07):
Yes, so.
Speaker 5 (09:10):
For quite a while now it has been compulsory to
actually go through that process when someone is employed. There
are some exceptions, certain types of employees don't have to
be enrolled in key we saver I suggest the first
step is that she should raise this with her boss
(09:30):
if she does want to be enrolled in it, and
and get onto that asap. If she thinks that she
should have been enrolled or it should have been raised
with her and it wasn't she's potentially got a claim,
but you're going to have to be able to prove that.
I would definitely be dealing with it sooner rather than later.
Speaker 7 (09:52):
Okay, ruddy. Yeah, because originally she was employed on a
residence visa and then left the job and then came
back and got reemployed, re employed in twenty twenty one,
so I would have thought she should have been start.
Speaker 5 (10:09):
Yeah, so I would look back and see what the
position was in twenty twenty one. This is something that
has changed a few times, and you know that was
a while ago. So actually making the case now that
something should have happened back then, that may be tricky,
but but worth a chat.
Speaker 7 (10:30):
Excellent, Okay, thanks, So how guys all good?
Speaker 2 (10:32):
We'll good, Yeah, we'll'll be stamish.
Speaker 4 (10:33):
Big push for compulsory KIWI sover isn't there coming out? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (10:39):
Yep, yep, some big changes there.
Speaker 3 (10:41):
Oh.
Speaker 2 (10:41):
One hundred and eighty ten eighty is the number to
call if you've got an issue at work or you've
got some questions regarding your employees now as your opportunity.
Gareth abdena employment lawyer, is with us.
Speaker 4 (10:52):
Here is an interesting one, Gareth, I have a situation
where my employee has been convicted on criminal charges at
charges and has been remanded in custody awaiting sentencing. Wow,
the charges mean it will be a multi year sentence.
How do I go about terminating his employment? As employment
contract covers misconduct in the worst workplace, but doesn't say
(11:12):
anything specifically about criminality outside of work. So many different
situations than your.
Speaker 5 (11:18):
Professional Yeah, you know, I I think you've you've got
a good case that criminal conduct committed outside the workplace
still affects the workplace. You've You've got a whole lot
of possibilities there. It's conduct that could reflect negatively on
(11:40):
the employer. But you know, as a more practical issue,
if the persons going inside for a couple of years,
is it reasonable to keep that position open for them?
And I suspect not. You know, you can't just go
and terminate someone's employment in those conditions. You may actually
(12:01):
have to at least put it to them and give
them an opportunity to respond, perhaps through the defense lawyer
if they have one. So there are a few complexities there,
but generally you're not expected to keep a role open
for someone if they are going to jail for a
couple of years.
Speaker 2 (12:22):
Keep those teas coming through on nine two nine to two.
Speaker 4 (12:25):
Hi, guys, Gareth can a supervise a slash boss? Keep
asking when you are going to retire? Isn't that agism
and illegal?
Speaker 8 (12:35):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (12:36):
And this one comes across my desk quite often because
it's quite a difficult position for employers as well, where
you've got someone who is passed the retirement age. You
suspect that they're going to be retiring soon, and you
want to plan for that. You know, you're not trying
to push them out the door, but you do want
(12:57):
to have a succession plan in place. So how do
you deal with it? I don't think asking someone if
they've got any plans to retire is discrimination or is
an issue. I think it's a legitimate question to ask someone.
But if you keep asking it over and over again.
Speaker 2 (13:15):
Yeah, that's a problem.
Speaker 4 (13:18):
So what once every two and a half months or
something day about time you've put your feet up, you know,
every morning when you walk in the door, when are
you going to retire?
Speaker 3 (13:30):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (13:31):
I mean, I don't think there's any fixed rules on
how often doing it every day? That's that's definitely crossing
a line. Maybe a couple of times a year would
be fine.
Speaker 4 (13:42):
Yeah, keep asking sounds like a lot?
Speaker 2 (13:44):
Yeah, yeah, definitely right.
Speaker 5 (13:46):
You know you could also say you could say to someone, hey,
I know you pass the retirement age. I'm happy for
you to keep working. It's going great now, but I
would like to have some time to plan. So if
you do have thoughts about when you want to retire,
you know, I really appreciate it if you give me
(14:07):
a heads up.
Speaker 2 (14:08):
Yep, Harry, welcome to the show. Yes, hello, Hello, you're
on with Gareth.
Speaker 6 (14:15):
Yeah, Gerrek, how are you good? Afternoon?
Speaker 5 (14:18):
To ask how can we help?
Speaker 6 (14:21):
Yeah, I got a question to ask if it's exactly
right or no, I'm in doubt. I work for a
company for ten years and the KEYY say, what I
signed on was my deduction of three percent, and actually
he directed six percent of my pay and was paying
his share of three percent.
Speaker 5 (14:38):
Is it possible, wow, in anything's possible. If you're concerned
that the correct deductions haven't been made, I would take
that up with your employer and ask for a breakdown
of your pay. It is possible that they have done
that accidentally.
Speaker 6 (14:59):
And no, but it's it was done for nearly ten
years and I have commented.
Speaker 5 (15:04):
On that it could still be an accident. Accidents do happen,
and sometimes people make an accident that continues for a
long period of time. If if you've agreed, Yeah, I
can't comment on your particular case without seeing all of
the documents, but yes, it is possible that that has happened.
(15:27):
If that's not something you agreed to, that's an issue
that your employer is going to have to sort out
with you then. So the first thing to do is
to raise it with them, make sure you do it
in writing so that you've got a record of it.
Speaker 6 (15:41):
Good quit you with them on the table. And then
they said, oh, no, that's that's that's what we are
paying from your pay. Yeah, we're not paying you. You're
paying for your pick, so not us.
Speaker 2 (15:56):
So I'll just singing in my head around it.
Speaker 4 (15:58):
So you so six percent if your pay was going
towards Kiwi Saber and they were saying that was covering
their three percent and your three percent?
Speaker 2 (16:06):
Is that right?
Speaker 6 (16:07):
Urrh yes, discorrect right?
Speaker 4 (16:09):
And you raised that and what did they say? They say,
that's the way it's supposed to go.
Speaker 5 (16:13):
Yes, And if that's what's happened, you've you've potentially got
grounds for a claim against them, and you can wreck
you can claim that three percent that they didn't pay,
but you're going to have to have someone go through
the documents and make sure that that is actually the case.
(16:33):
So you know, if this has happened for ten years,
it sounds like you've potentially missed out on a large
amount of money, and it'd be worth it'd be worth
engaging a loyal or representative to look at this for you.
Speaker 6 (16:47):
Yeah, that's what I wanted to ask you. Gary, is
going to be correct for my company to doing.
Speaker 5 (16:53):
That or Yeah, as I say, if that's what they've
actually done, you've potentially got grounds for a claim. But
I can't tell you that without looking at all of
the documents, et cetera. So you're going to have to
engage someone to do that for you.
Speaker 2 (17:10):
For the best, Starry, Yeah, sounds like you need to
seek some professional advice there and pay them. Hans, how
are you?
Speaker 9 (17:16):
Yes, good afternoon, Thanks for taking my call. And a
friend of mine got called in on her day off.
What's a normal rate? Were scheduled day off for her
to come into work for a fire drill. But probably
and they're probably going to pay for about like one hour,
(17:38):
but the text are like half an hour they drive
to work, half an hour they come back from work. Now,
years and years and years ago, I knew there was
a rule that you could not employ somebody for less
than four hours. Now, I'm not sure what the situation
is at the moment. Is it legal for her employer
to call her in on a day off for a
(18:01):
fire drill and just only to pay for let's say,
like half an hour or an hour.
Speaker 5 (18:07):
I have to say that is a very bizarre situation,
and I have never come across something like that in
all of my years of doing this. I can't imagine
why someone would have to come in on their day
or four fire drill.
Speaker 3 (18:24):
I've never heard of that operation altogether.
Speaker 9 (18:28):
Right, more staff than what you normally would have.
Speaker 5 (18:31):
Yeah, very weird that that is quite strange. And you know,
depending on the type of job, perhaps there's some sort
of requirement, but nothinggiver, right, I mean, I still I
still can't see why she would have to come in
(18:51):
on her day to do that. It seems very odd
to me.
Speaker 4 (18:56):
Does she does she work? Does she normally work weekends
or something? Hands?
Speaker 6 (19:01):
No?
Speaker 9 (19:02):
No, no, normally it was on a Friday, and normally
first day and Fridays are her scheduled days.
Speaker 4 (19:10):
Off, right, I see, So I guess retirement village you
kind of need to do practice.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
The help out with the residents, help out.
Speaker 4 (19:19):
Getting people out. It's not the same as a normal
workplace because a lot of people need to get gets,
you know.
Speaker 5 (19:25):
But if there was a real fire, surely there would
be enough curis there to help the residents, you know.
I mean, the whole thing just doesn't make sense. And
of course I don't know if they have a contractual
right to require her to come in on her day off.
That really depends on what's in the employment agreement. Sometimes
(19:48):
you can ask someone to come in, but that could
be an availability issue, and if you're not paying them
compensation to be available, then they can potentially refuse to
come in.
Speaker 9 (20:01):
Yeah, that probably would pay her, but probably only for
like one hour. And like forty years ago, I was
aware that like we could not employ somebody for less
than four hours because like it takes people time to
get ready for work, it's time for them to go
to work.
Speaker 5 (20:20):
The things. Things have definitely changed since then, and people
can can work for less than four hours and can
get paid for less than four hours. I think the
bigger issue here is do they have a contractual right
to require her to come in on her day off?
And if so, was it reasonable to require her to
(20:42):
do that?
Speaker 4 (20:42):
And it's not much of a test if you drive
there knowing it's going to happen and then.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
You arrive numbers very weird.
Speaker 6 (20:51):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (20:51):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (20:51):
We're joined by Gareth Abdnall, employment lawyer and director of
Abdenall Employment Law. He is here for about another fifteen minutes.
So if you've got an issue in your workplace of
your employer, who's got a curly question? Now is your opportunity?
Oh eight hundred and eighteen eighty is that number?
Speaker 5 (21:06):
Mark?
Speaker 3 (21:08):
Hey go, thanks for taking my call. I've got a
little workplace in christ Church with about twenty employees and
we've got one that's stopped talking to us, and he's
also refusing to take any breaks and it appears that
he's working to rule, trying to trip us up. If
(21:28):
that makes sense. Can we force him to take his
breaks like his morning tea, in his afternoon tea. He's
just working through the whole day and he says nothing
to no one.
Speaker 5 (21:40):
Yeah, I think this is a situation that you're right
to be concerned about. If someone's not taking breaks, often
that so that they can set up a claim later
that they've they've they haven't been provided breaks, be the
stress and overworked and see it's an unsafe workplace. Now,
(22:02):
if he's not taking his breaks, you should raise that
with him. Make sure that there's a written paper tree.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
I love that.
Speaker 5 (22:09):
And if he persists doing that, then it sounds like
it's grounds for disciplinary process and it may be that
you wishue him with warnings and if he keeps doing it,
then he might get dismissed. I guess when someone starts
behaving that why, I often wonder what else is going on?
(22:32):
You know, what other issues are there, and so I'd
be thinking about that as well. You know what has
prompted this? Is it something in the workplace or is
it something out the workplace? But definitely that's a red
flag when someone's not taking their breaks. Generally there's a
(22:52):
reason why and it's not good.
Speaker 3 (22:56):
Yeah, so we can't just there is a bit of
background which I'm it would take too long to go
through on this, but this has recently started and we
we kind of feel he's trying to trap us.
Speaker 5 (23:12):
Yeah, and there's no issue with you giving reasonable instructions
to your employees, one of which could be it's time
to take a break now, and if they ignore those instructions,
most employment agreements say that repeated ignoring of instructions is
(23:32):
misconduct or serious misconduct and could result in disciplinary process
and getting sacked.
Speaker 3 (23:39):
So in which case we just have to follow the
acknowledged process. That's right with his refusal to take instruction, Yeah, definitely.
Speaker 5 (23:50):
But it's something that I think you should actively manage
because if you let them get away with it, then
there may be a claim coming shortly afterwards.
Speaker 3 (24:05):
Actively manage as in, let him continue not to take breaks.
Speaker 5 (24:09):
No, tell him to take his breaks, and keep a
record of when he refuses. Okay, all right, okay, all right,
good luck with that one.
Speaker 6 (24:19):
Yeah, it's great.
Speaker 2 (24:20):
Thank you very much, Mark, and thank you for your call. Oh,
eighte hundred and eighty ten eighty. If you've got a question.
Speaker 4 (24:25):
This Texas has been working at a place for twenty years.
They have just realized that they have underpaid the warehouse
workers fifteen minutes a day. They were giving us an
unpaid lunch break for thirty minutes, but making it forty
five minutes unpaid. Can we get back pay for this?
Speaker 5 (24:41):
Yeah, well I would be expecting some back pay. With
payment issues, generally, there's a six year period that you
can go back, and you know, if I'd been underpaid
for fifteen minutes for an extended period of time, I'd
be wanting some back pay. And it's not unusual too. Well,
(25:06):
it's not common, but I do see this from time
time to time, where there is a genuine error in
payment and the employer does make good. Now, they may
not be able to afford to pay all of the
back pay that's go wing immediately, but as long as
they do that over a reasonable period of time, that
(25:27):
seems like a fair outcome.
Speaker 4 (25:29):
It's interesting because the tar should be back day. This
is we've been working at place for twenty years. They
have just realized that they have underpaid the warehouse workers.
So the employer has worked has realized it. It's not
like the employees have gone to them exactly.
Speaker 5 (25:44):
The fact that the employer has communicated this in some
way says to me that they are going to do
the right thing.
Speaker 4 (25:53):
Imagine coming to work one day and finding out that
you've underpaid your workers by fifteen minutes for the last
twenty years, and.
Speaker 5 (26:00):
They wouldn't be a good day. It wouldn't be a
good day to be the payroll manager, would it.
Speaker 2 (26:05):
Yeah, they're going to take a cut on that one
for sure. Quickly, the stixser says, Hi, Gareth, my company
has just been brought by another company. I have been
told employment agreements just roll over, just checking is this correct?
Or do we need new employment contracts?
Speaker 3 (26:21):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (26:21):
It really depends on the nature of the business sell
and purchase. Sometimes it just continues with a different name. Now,
you don't need a whole new employment agreement if you
go from company and now a company A to company
B with all of the same terms and conditions. Of course,
sometimes there is a substantive change and your conditions will
(26:45):
change and you'll be offered a new employment agreement and
if you don't agree to it, then you might be
made redundant. In this case, it seems like everything's staying
the same, so you don't need a new agreement.
Speaker 2 (26:57):
Great, right back very shortly. But oh, one hundred and
eighty ten eighty is the number to call if you've
got a question for Gareth ebdenal employment lawyer. It is
seventeen to four news Talk said by Auckland.
Speaker 1 (27:08):
He notices first for what's happening in and around our city.
Speaker 10 (27:12):
There's not much that's free anymore, but this is. If
your clubs, school or nonprofit organization has an event planned,
share it with Auckland's biggest radio audience right here on
news talks edb's free community notice board. So let's spread
the word together. Head to newstalksedb dot co dot nz
forward slash community and submit your notice now caring.
Speaker 1 (27:32):
For our community right here in Auckland News Talks EDB.
Speaker 2 (27:37):
New Zealand's biggest EV and hybrid event is coming to Auckland.
Speaker 5 (27:41):
Test drive, evs and hybrids all in one place at
the New Zealand Ev and Tech Expo presented.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
By Driven, one weekend only.
Speaker 10 (27:48):
November thirteenth to fifteenth, Auckland Showgrounds.
Speaker 11 (27:52):
Hey may cause he gets a hand moving house Sure
mate mates and no show World Moving and Storage are
your best mates on moving day, on time and with
their own truck.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
Called oh eight hundred and four World.
Speaker 12 (28:07):
When you've been in this has twenty three decades, you've
seen changeable markets. At Southern Coss Partners that experience shapes
everything we do. Our first mortgage investments are securitive of
property with monthly interest payments, so your money works for you.
We're in New Zealand owned business built on experience, consistency
and careful decision making, longevity, security, and that little bit
extra each month. Learn more at Southern Cost Partners dot
(28:30):
Cota NZ.
Speaker 1 (28:30):
Southern Cross Partners Limited his license to provide peer to
peer lending services under the Financial Markets Conduct at twenty thirteen.
Speaker 8 (28:37):
Danny didn't think he needed a DVS system.
Speaker 2 (28:39):
The whole house was damped, so I've got to dehumidify
his sort it.
Speaker 8 (28:42):
But it didn't sort the whole house, did it? Danny
n only one room.
Speaker 2 (28:46):
It was just too noisy.
Speaker 8 (28:47):
So Danny got DVS Home Ventilation and its fresh air
in daily a rout technology went to work making his
whole home dryer and condensation free. Say yes to DVS.
Your healthy home isn't complete without it.
Speaker 2 (29:07):
Hi, I'm all this.
Speaker 13 (29:08):
A few years ago, Dad bought me a puppy without
getting pat insurance always finding, so I drew up the
puppy and it heard him. I'll never forget Dad's face
when he got that big eight doAnd dollars that bill. Sorry, Dad,
make sure you get affordable pasurance today. Phone patternure on
eight hundred three sixty seven Triple four Phone.
Speaker 2 (29:29):
Sure eight hundred three six seven Triple four. The big stories,
the big issues.
Speaker 8 (29:39):
The big trends and everything in between.
Speaker 1 (29:42):
Matt Heath and Tyler Adams Afternoons us talk, zi'd be.
Speaker 2 (29:45):
It is fourteen to four and we are joined by
Gareth Ebdenor, a director of Ebdenor Law and an employment lawyer,
taking your calls and questions. This is free advice.
Speaker 3 (29:54):
I e.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
One hundred and eighty teen eighty is the number two call.
A couple of teacks coming through. But let's have a
check to Caleb. Get a Caleb. You're on with Gareth. Hey,
here's going very well. Would you quish?
Speaker 3 (30:07):
Hey?
Speaker 14 (30:08):
My friend he's a building apprentice. He's been doing it
for a little over two years now and his boss
is still claiming to only have to pay him an
apprentice wage, which is around it is like eighteen dollars
an hour. I had a little research into this, but
it seems like two years seems far too long to
be on an apprentice wage, especially that low nowadays.
Speaker 5 (30:33):
Yeah, I guess my question would be, how is your
friend progressing through his apprenticeship? And while I don't deal
with a lot of apprenticeship issues, I do occasionally get
called in where someone's not passing their modules, not making
(30:58):
appropriate progress, and the business wants to terminate the apprenticeship.
That's the only thing I could think of without actually
drilling into the detail of it. If they're actually making
the appropriate progress, then that does sound a bit odd,
and it sounds like it'd be worth looking into a
(31:20):
bit further.
Speaker 14 (31:22):
Okay, that's perfect, all right, really all I needed.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
Oh the best, Caleb, Thank you very much. Rachel, what's
your question?
Speaker 15 (31:30):
Hi there, Garris. So, I was teaching between twenty ten
and twenty fourteen, and during this time my employer didn't
put the q WE Save contribution into my key we
favor account. I think around twenty twenty my accountant pointed
this out to me. I hadn't noticed it, but I
(31:51):
was having a baby and it was just too hard basket.
So I haven't done anything about it. Is it too
late to claim it back?
Speaker 5 (31:59):
Well, I'd always be inclined to give it a go,
but I think generally if you're claiming unpaid wages, and
I think this would fall into the unpaid wages category.
Generally there's a six year limit to that. But but
you know, I mean paying key we savor. That's a
(32:22):
that's a statutory thing as well as a contractual thing.
So I'd be inclined to raise it with them and
see what they're going to do about it.
Speaker 15 (32:33):
Sure, so even if legally they're not obliged to pay
back after six.
Speaker 2 (32:37):
Years, they might still do it.
Speaker 15 (32:39):
Possible that, Yeah, they have a good relationship with them,
they might do.
Speaker 5 (32:42):
That definitely, you know, And I think a lot of
this will depend on why it wasn't paid back at
the time. You know, as I said earlier on in
the show, mistakes do happen. And if they can say
it should have been paid, it wasn't paid and you've
got a good relationship, I think, you know, there's a
reasonable chance that even if they're not legally required to,
(33:06):
they'll actually do the right thing. Give it a go,
see how they respond.
Speaker 2 (33:12):
Thank you well, Kurb, Thank you very much. Rachel Graham.
We've got about sixty seconds, So what's your question. Very briefly, Hello,
I'm a.
Speaker 9 (33:20):
Warehouse supervisor and I work by myself and they have
put into security cameras as health and safety.
Speaker 6 (33:26):
Is that legal or not?
Speaker 5 (33:30):
Generally, putting in security cameras for health and safety reasons
and for security reasons is legal. It depends on whether
they're recording audio and video. If they're just recording video,
that's usually fine as long as they let you know
and you do appear to know about it. If they're
going to record video audio as well, that's more intrusive
(33:52):
and they would really need to be able to justify that.
Speaker 9 (33:56):
And you're able to work by yourself in the warehouse.
Speaker 5 (34:00):
Yeah, I think if you're working by yourself in the warehouse,
having cameras in place to make sure you haven't had
an accident as most probably a good thing. I'd be
quite happy with that.
Speaker 2 (34:11):
Thank you very much, Graham and Gareth, thank you very much.
We've got so many texts that we may get to
next time, and a lot of callers who didn't get
through as well, but really appreciate your time as always.
You have a great afternoon and we'll see you back
in about a month's sign.
Speaker 5 (34:24):
Thanks guys.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
Thank you. That is Gareth Abdenall employment, a lawyer, workplace
and information expert, Director of abdenor employment Law. If you
want to get a hold of him. His website is
Abdenortlaw dot z, and the content of the segment is
general in nature and not legal advice. Any information discussed
is not intended to be a substitute for obtaining specific
professional advice and shouldn't be relied upon as such.
Speaker 1 (34:47):
For more from News Talks B listen live on air
or online, and keep our shows with you wherever you
go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio
You're listening to a podcast from News Talk ZEDB. Follow
this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Gareth Abdnor is an employment, workplace and information expert and
director of Abdenor Employment Law. He joins us about once
a month to answer all your questions, and this segment
has been so popular that this week we've got him
in for an hour and he joins us right now, Gareth,
get a to you.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
Good.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
Hey guys, how you doing very good?
Speaker 4 (00:36):
So eight hundred and eighty ten eighty you got a
question for Gareth? Give us the ring. And you're dealing
with a lot of redundancies at the moment around AI,
Is that right, Gareth?
Speaker 5 (00:45):
Yeah, increasingly. I mean we kind of knew that this
would be coming, but I've been a bit surprised at
how quickly it's happening. Lots of people losing their jobs
and being replaced by computers and robots.
Speaker 4 (00:59):
Yeah, but you know, we're also finding out that AI
isn't what it was cracked up to be, and a
lot of companies are getting buyers remorse. People jumped in
there and they don't actually realize what a human is
really doing in their job, especially encoding. It's interesting. I've
been looking to this a lot about They've got rid
a lot of coders and then found out that the
slot that AI pumps out and all the decisions and
(01:23):
the little nuances that a human brings to it. So
you might have a whole lot of people that are
that are losing their jobs now, but I'm hopeful for
the future that humanity will be appreciated.
Speaker 5 (01:33):
I mean, the other thing that I'm dealing with, there's
a lot of clients so ask AI to help them
with their employment dispute, and most of the time it's yeah,
I don't think I'm going to be redundant anytime soon.
Speaker 4 (01:50):
Well, well, the thing from a legal perspective, AI isn't
legally responsible for what it does, and so you know,
and for nearly everything that you do as a human,
you have to have someone that is responsible for the output.
And so if you just use AI then and you
put it out there, you're still responsible when you use
it or not. Yeah, so if you fire all that
(02:12):
slopout then and it gets it wrong, yeah.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
You know you can't go Yeah, talk to chet GPT.
They said it was okay, it doesn't matter. Yeah, right,
if you had a question for Gareth. Now is your opportunity.
He's not with us long oh eight, one hundred and
eighty ten eighty. If you've got an issue in your workplace,
or if you're an employer and you're a bit confused
about some legislation, he is the man to chat to
or some situation. He is a man to chat to
(02:36):
right now. Nine two ninety two is the text number
as well. A couple of texts coming through this one
says get a Gareth wanted some advice on how to
navigate by here. We gave potential redundancy while on maternity leave.
Is that legal? And what are my options?
Speaker 3 (02:52):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (02:53):
This is This is one that comes up quite often
because there are a lot of misunderstandings out there. You
can still be made redundant while you're on parental leave,
but you can't be made RedANT because you're on parental leave.
So as long as there's a genuine business reason, you know,
(03:16):
all of the usual principles apply. It needs to be
about the role, not about the person. And you know,
if you happen to be on parental leave, they still
need to consult with you, They still need to give
you an opportunity to provide feedback. But yes, potentially your
position could be disestablished and you could be made redundant.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
Okay, keep those text questions coming through on nine two
nine two.
Speaker 4 (03:40):
This is an interesting one. The first question I have,
there's only one question come through, but it starts with
the first question I have is with regards to teams
chats within a team of four, can a team leader
take a line from that chat and give that to
his boss purely to gain favor in nothing else? He
has said a lot worse than what I said in
(04:01):
the team chat, says this text. So if you're having
a guess to paraphrase it, understand what the question is Gareth,
because I think what he says, you're within work, you
say a whole stuff. But if if you're at the job,
is everything that you say in your job owned by
the the employer in a way.
Speaker 5 (04:22):
Well, I think you should be very careful when you're
in a teams meeting. You should be working on the
basis that there's a very high possibility that it's it's
being recorded in some way, whether or not it's been
recorded through the team's app. And yes that that could
(04:43):
have ramifications. Of course, I'm interested in the passing it
on to curry favor. What does that mean? You know,
if there's any sort of backlash, well you should get
the opportunity to to give the whole context, give the
other side of the discussion. Yeah.
Speaker 4 (05:01):
If I was an employer and someone came to me
with something from Teams and they said, lookay good, this
is copied and paste this from the transcript from Teams.
This is what he's says, slaking you off in the Teams,
I think I would maybe look down on the person
doing that as much as the other person.
Speaker 6 (05:17):
Totally.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
Yeah, your brown nosed tattletale.
Speaker 4 (05:19):
Yeah, yeah, interesting, exactly exactly.
Speaker 2 (05:24):
Gareth Abdnor is with us. He's an employment lawyer and
director of Abdena Employment Law So, oh, one hundred and
eighty ten eighty is that number to call. This is
your chance. He's not with us long and it is
free advice. This text here is not a question.
Speaker 4 (05:37):
It's a follow up on the previous text that we
read out that happened to me on a WhatsApp thread.
We were all slagging off our manager. One of the
guys in the chat screen grab what I said and
sent it to the guy I was called in for
a chat, but the guy had closed the chat down,
so I couldn't show that everyone would have been doing it.
Guy was like, it didn't smack him in the head dirty.
Speaker 5 (05:58):
So I question is, what are you thinking doing it
in writing? I'm you know, I'm a realist. Occasionally people
are going to off their manager, but jeez, don't put
it in writing.
Speaker 2 (06:12):
Yeah, how far does that go? Gareth? I mean, if
there's you know, just for an example here, there's a
WhatsApp chat situation happening that's kind of semi related to work,
but you also use it for personal stuff. I mean,
can the boss get access to that?
Speaker 5 (06:26):
Yeah, potentially, I mean, especially if one of the people
in the chat decides to give them a copy of it.
Speaker 2 (06:32):
That's a good point.
Speaker 5 (06:34):
Most most employment agreements or IT policies these days have
a provision in them that if you're posting something on
social media or in other communications that you're sharing the
third parties that can be linked back to work or
relates to work in some way, there can be work consequences.
(06:55):
So you know, often often people will have a social
media profile that has their name on it doesn't necessarily
say where they work. But they make some comments that
reflect poorly on their employer. It's pretty easy to google
where someone works these days, and that can have consequences.
(07:18):
I think people should be very very careful before they
put something on social media that their employer might be
unhappy with. And if you're going to slag a few boss,
do it the old fashioned way, do a burbery and.
Speaker 4 (07:32):
Then deny and I deny it.
Speaker 2 (07:35):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (07:35):
But also, like this person is saying everyone was slagging
off the boss, it might not be the case. Sometimes people,
ever doesn't perspect perspective of what's going on, You might
have been anyone that was slagging the boss off. This
Texas says, can I record a meeting where I don't
feel safe with what's happening? Will I get in trouble
for recording the meeting if I don't tell them? That's
(07:57):
an interesting one. So you're worried about what happened in
the meeting, and you flick your phone on and voice
recorded or something.
Speaker 5 (08:03):
And what I often find is that people say they
recorded it because they didn't safe, but actually they recorded
it because they wanted to. They wanted to set someone up.
If you record a meeting and don't tell the other
side that you're recording it, that can be seen as
a breach of good faith, So there could be consequences. Now,
(08:26):
if you're genuinely not feeling safe, is recording the meeting
actually the best way to protect yourself? Why haven't you
raised those concerns in another way? So it's not it's
not always a bad idea, but it does come with
some real risks.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
Okay, Hamish, you're on with Gareth.
Speaker 7 (08:47):
Well, thanks for taking a call. Guys, welcome to my
health Hey, okay, so yeah, this is a question to
spout my wife. She's she's currently employed, but A isn't
getting any key receiver I remember, and was never signed
up with key Receiver when she was employed.
Speaker 6 (09:07):
Yes, so.
Speaker 5 (09:10):
For quite a while now it has been compulsory to
actually go through that process when someone is employed. There
are some exceptions, certain types of employees don't have to
be enrolled in key we saver I suggest the first
step is that she should raise this with her boss
(09:30):
if she does want to be enrolled in it, and
and get onto that asap. If she thinks that she
should have been enrolled or it should have been raised
with her and it wasn't she's potentially got a claim,
but you're going to have to be able to prove that.
I would definitely be dealing with it sooner rather than later.
Speaker 7 (09:52):
Okay, ruddy. Yeah, because originally she was employed on a
residence visa and then left the job and then came
back and got reemployed, re employed in twenty twenty one,
so I would have thought she should have been start.
Speaker 5 (10:09):
Yeah, so I would look back and see what the
position was in twenty twenty one. This is something that
has changed a few times, and you know that was
a while ago. So actually making the case now that
something should have happened back then, that may be tricky,
but but worth a chat.
Speaker 7 (10:30):
Excellent, Okay, thanks, So how guys all good?
Speaker 2 (10:32):
We'll good, Yeah, we'll'll be stamish.
Speaker 4 (10:33):
Big push for compulsory KIWI sover isn't there coming out? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (10:39):
Yep, yep, some big changes there.
Speaker 3 (10:41):
Oh.
Speaker 2 (10:41):
One hundred and eighty ten eighty is the number to
call if you've got an issue at work or you've
got some questions regarding your employees now as your opportunity.
Gareth abdena employment lawyer, is with us.
Speaker 4 (10:52):
Here is an interesting one, Gareth, I have a situation
where my employee has been convicted on criminal charges at
charges and has been remanded in custody awaiting sentencing. Wow,
the charges mean it will be a multi year sentence.
How do I go about terminating his employment? As employment
contract covers misconduct in the worst workplace, but doesn't say
(11:12):
anything specifically about criminality outside of work. So many different
situations than your.
Speaker 5 (11:18):
Professional Yeah, you know, I I think you've you've got
a good case that criminal conduct committed outside the workplace
still affects the workplace. You've You've got a whole lot
of possibilities there. It's conduct that could reflect negatively on
(11:40):
the employer. But you know, as a more practical issue,
if the persons going inside for a couple of years,
is it reasonable to keep that position open for them?
And I suspect not. You know, you can't just go
and terminate someone's employment in those conditions. You may actually
(12:01):
have to at least put it to them and give
them an opportunity to respond, perhaps through the defense lawyer
if they have one. So there are a few complexities there,
but generally you're not expected to keep a role open
for someone if they are going to jail for a
couple of years.
Speaker 2 (12:22):
Keep those teas coming through on nine two nine to two.
Speaker 4 (12:25):
Hi, guys, Gareth can a supervise a slash boss? Keep
asking when you are going to retire? Isn't that agism
and illegal?
Speaker 8 (12:35):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (12:36):
And this one comes across my desk quite often because
it's quite a difficult position for employers as well, where
you've got someone who is passed the retirement age. You
suspect that they're going to be retiring soon, and you
want to plan for that. You know, you're not trying
to push them out the door, but you do want
(12:57):
to have a succession plan in place. So how do
you deal with it? I don't think asking someone if
they've got any plans to retire is discrimination or is
an issue. I think it's a legitimate question to ask someone.
But if you keep asking it over and over again.
Speaker 2 (13:15):
Yeah, that's a problem.
Speaker 4 (13:18):
So what once every two and a half months or
something day about time you've put your feet up, you know,
every morning when you walk in the door, when are
you going to retire?
Speaker 3 (13:30):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (13:31):
I mean, I don't think there's any fixed rules on
how often doing it every day? That's that's definitely crossing
a line. Maybe a couple of times a year would
be fine.
Speaker 4 (13:42):
Yeah, keep asking sounds like a lot?
Speaker 2 (13:44):
Yeah, yeah, definitely right.
Speaker 5 (13:46):
You know you could also say you could say to someone, hey,
I know you pass the retirement age. I'm happy for
you to keep working. It's going great now, but I
would like to have some time to plan. So if
you do have thoughts about when you want to retire,
you know, I really appreciate it if you give me
(14:07):
a heads up.
Speaker 2 (14:08):
Yep, Harry, welcome to the show. Yes, hello, Hello, you're
on with Gareth.
Speaker 6 (14:15):
Yeah, Gerrek, how are you good? Afternoon?
Speaker 5 (14:18):
To ask how can we help?
Speaker 6 (14:21):
Yeah, I got a question to ask if it's exactly
right or no, I'm in doubt. I work for a
company for ten years and the KEYY say, what I
signed on was my deduction of three percent, and actually
he directed six percent of my pay and was paying
his share of three percent.
Speaker 5 (14:38):
Is it possible, wow, in anything's possible. If you're concerned
that the correct deductions haven't been made, I would take
that up with your employer and ask for a breakdown
of your pay. It is possible that they have done
that accidentally.
Speaker 6 (14:59):
And no, but it's it was done for nearly ten
years and I have commented.
Speaker 5 (15:04):
On that it could still be an accident. Accidents do happen,
and sometimes people make an accident that continues for a
long period of time. If if you've agreed, Yeah, I
can't comment on your particular case without seeing all of
the documents, but yes, it is possible that that has happened.
(15:27):
If that's not something you agreed to, that's an issue
that your employer is going to have to sort out
with you then. So the first thing to do is
to raise it with them, make sure you do it
in writing so that you've got a record of it.
Speaker 6 (15:41):
Good quit you with them on the table. And then
they said, oh, no, that's that's that's what we are
paying from your pay. Yeah, we're not paying you. You're
paying for your pick, so not us.
Speaker 2 (15:56):
So I'll just singing in my head around it.
Speaker 4 (15:58):
So you so six percent if your pay was going
towards Kiwi Saber and they were saying that was covering
their three percent and your three percent?
Speaker 2 (16:06):
Is that right?
Speaker 6 (16:07):
Urrh yes, discorrect right?
Speaker 4 (16:09):
And you raised that and what did they say? They say,
that's the way it's supposed to go.
Speaker 5 (16:13):
Yes, And if that's what's happened, you've you've potentially got
grounds for a claim against them, and you can wreck
you can claim that three percent that they didn't pay,
but you're going to have to have someone go through
the documents and make sure that that is actually the case.
(16:33):
So you know, if this has happened for ten years,
it sounds like you've potentially missed out on a large
amount of money, and it'd be worth it'd be worth
engaging a loyal or representative to look at this for you.
Speaker 6 (16:47):
Yeah, that's what I wanted to ask you. Gary, is
going to be correct for my company to doing.
Speaker 5 (16:53):
That or Yeah, as I say, if that's what they've
actually done, you've potentially got grounds for a claim. But
I can't tell you that without looking at all of
the documents, et cetera. So you're going to have to
engage someone to do that for you.
Speaker 2 (17:10):
For the best, Starry, Yeah, sounds like you need to
seek some professional advice there and pay them. Hans, how
are you?
Speaker 9 (17:16):
Yes, good afternoon, Thanks for taking my call. And a
friend of mine got called in on her day off.
What's a normal rate? Were scheduled day off for her
to come into work for a fire drill. But probably
and they're probably going to pay for about like one hour,
(17:38):
but the text are like half an hour they drive
to work, half an hour they come back from work. Now,
years and years and years ago, I knew there was
a rule that you could not employ somebody for less
than four hours. Now, I'm not sure what the situation
is at the moment. Is it legal for her employer
to call her in on a day off for a
(18:01):
fire drill and just only to pay for let's say,
like half an hour or an hour.
Speaker 5 (18:07):
I have to say that is a very bizarre situation,
and I have never come across something like that in
all of my years of doing this. I can't imagine
why someone would have to come in on their day
or four fire drill.
Speaker 3 (18:24):
I've never heard of that operation altogether.
Speaker 9 (18:28):
Right, more staff than what you normally would have.
Speaker 5 (18:31):
Yeah, very weird that that is quite strange. And you know,
depending on the type of job, perhaps there's some sort
of requirement, but nothinggiver, right, I mean, I still I
still can't see why she would have to come in
(18:51):
on her day to do that. It seems very odd
to me.
Speaker 4 (18:56):
Does she does she work? Does she normally work weekends
or something? Hands?
Speaker 6 (19:01):
No?
Speaker 9 (19:02):
No, no, normally it was on a Friday, and normally
first day and Fridays are her scheduled days.
Speaker 4 (19:10):
Off, right, I see, So I guess retirement village you
kind of need to do practice.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
The help out with the residents, help out.
Speaker 4 (19:19):
Getting people out. It's not the same as a normal
workplace because a lot of people need to get gets,
you know.
Speaker 5 (19:25):
But if there was a real fire, surely there would
be enough curis there to help the residents, you know.
I mean, the whole thing just doesn't make sense. And
of course I don't know if they have a contractual
right to require her to come in on her day off.
That really depends on what's in the employment agreement. Sometimes
(19:48):
you can ask someone to come in, but that could
be an availability issue, and if you're not paying them
compensation to be available, then they can potentially refuse to
come in.
Speaker 9 (20:01):
Yeah, that probably would pay her, but probably only for
like one hour. And like forty years ago, I was
aware that like we could not employ somebody for less
than four hours because like it takes people time to
get ready for work, it's time for them to go
to work.
Speaker 5 (20:20):
The things. Things have definitely changed since then, and people
can can work for less than four hours and can
get paid for less than four hours. I think the
bigger issue here is do they have a contractual right
to require her to come in on her day off?
And if so, was it reasonable to require her to
(20:42):
do that?
Speaker 4 (20:42):
And it's not much of a test if you drive
there knowing it's going to happen and then.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
You arrive numbers very weird.
Speaker 6 (20:51):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (20:51):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (20:51):
We're joined by Gareth Abdnall, employment lawyer and director of
Abdenall Employment Law. He is here for about another fifteen minutes.
So if you've got an issue in your workplace of
your employer, who's got a curly question? Now is your opportunity?
Oh eight hundred and eighteen eighty is that number?
Speaker 5 (21:06):
Mark?
Speaker 3 (21:08):
Hey go, thanks for taking my call. I've got a
little workplace in christ Church with about twenty employees and
we've got one that's stopped talking to us, and he's
also refusing to take any breaks and it appears that
he's working to rule, trying to trip us up. If
(21:28):
that makes sense. Can we force him to take his
breaks like his morning tea, in his afternoon tea. He's
just working through the whole day and he says nothing
to no one.
Speaker 5 (21:40):
Yeah, I think this is a situation that you're right
to be concerned about. If someone's not taking breaks, often
that so that they can set up a claim later
that they've they've they haven't been provided breaks, be the
stress and overworked and see it's an unsafe workplace. Now,
(22:02):
if he's not taking his breaks, you should raise that
with him. Make sure that there's a written paper tree.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
I love that.
Speaker 5 (22:09):
And if he persists doing that, then it sounds like
it's grounds for disciplinary process and it may be that
you wishue him with warnings and if he keeps doing it,
then he might get dismissed. I guess when someone starts
behaving that why, I often wonder what else is going on?
(22:32):
You know, what other issues are there, and so I'd
be thinking about that as well. You know what has
prompted this? Is it something in the workplace or is
it something out the workplace? But definitely that's a red
flag when someone's not taking their breaks. Generally there's a
(22:52):
reason why and it's not good.
Speaker 3 (22:56):
Yeah, so we can't just there is a bit of
background which I'm it would take too long to go
through on this, but this has recently started and we
we kind of feel he's trying to trap us.
Speaker 5 (23:12):
Yeah, and there's no issue with you giving reasonable instructions
to your employees, one of which could be it's time
to take a break now, and if they ignore those instructions,
most employment agreements say that repeated ignoring of instructions is
(23:32):
misconduct or serious misconduct and could result in disciplinary process
and getting sacked.
Speaker 3 (23:39):
So in which case we just have to follow the
acknowledged process. That's right with his refusal to take instruction, Yeah, definitely.
Speaker 5 (23:50):
But it's something that I think you should actively manage
because if you let them get away with it, then
there may be a claim coming shortly afterwards.
Speaker 3 (24:05):
Actively manage as in, let him continue not to take breaks.
Speaker 5 (24:09):
No, tell him to take his breaks, and keep a
record of when he refuses. Okay, all right, okay, all right,
good luck with that one.
Speaker 6 (24:19):
Yeah, it's great.
Speaker 2 (24:20):
Thank you very much, Mark, and thank you for your call. Oh,
eighte hundred and eighty ten eighty. If you've got a question.
Speaker 4 (24:25):
This Texas has been working at a place for twenty years.
They have just realized that they have underpaid the warehouse
workers fifteen minutes a day. They were giving us an
unpaid lunch break for thirty minutes, but making it forty
five minutes unpaid. Can we get back pay for this?
Speaker 5 (24:41):
Yeah, well I would be expecting some back pay. With
payment issues, generally, there's a six year period that you
can go back, and you know, if I'd been underpaid
for fifteen minutes for an extended period of time, I'd
be wanting some back pay. And it's not unusual too. Well,
(25:06):
it's not common, but I do see this from time
time to time, where there is a genuine error in
payment and the employer does make good. Now, they may
not be able to afford to pay all of the
back pay that's go wing immediately, but as long as
they do that over a reasonable period of time, that
(25:27):
seems like a fair outcome.
Speaker 4 (25:29):
It's interesting because the tar should be back day. This
is we've been working at place for twenty years. They
have just realized that they have underpaid the warehouse workers.
So the employer has worked has realized it. It's not
like the employees have gone to them exactly.
Speaker 5 (25:44):
The fact that the employer has communicated this in some
way says to me that they are going to do
the right thing.
Speaker 4 (25:53):
Imagine coming to work one day and finding out that
you've underpaid your workers by fifteen minutes for the last
twenty years, and.
Speaker 5 (26:00):
They wouldn't be a good day. It wouldn't be a
good day to be the payroll manager, would it.
Speaker 2 (26:05):
Yeah, they're going to take a cut on that one
for sure. Quickly, the stixser says, Hi, Gareth, my company
has just been brought by another company. I have been
told employment agreements just roll over, just checking is this correct?
Or do we need new employment contracts?
Speaker 3 (26:21):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (26:21):
It really depends on the nature of the business sell
and purchase. Sometimes it just continues with a different name. Now,
you don't need a whole new employment agreement if you
go from company and now a company A to company
B with all of the same terms and conditions. Of course,
sometimes there is a substantive change and your conditions will
(26:45):
change and you'll be offered a new employment agreement and
if you don't agree to it, then you might be
made redundant. In this case, it seems like everything's staying
the same, so you don't need a new agreement.
Speaker 2 (26:57):
Great, right back very shortly. But oh, one hundred and
eighty ten eighty is the number to call if you've
got a question for Gareth ebdenal employment lawyer. It is
seventeen to four news Talk said by Auckland.
Speaker 1 (27:08):
He notices first for what's happening in and around our city.
Speaker 10 (27:12):
There's not much that's free anymore, but this is. If
your clubs, school or nonprofit organization has an event planned,
share it with Auckland's biggest radio audience right here on
news talks edb's free community notice board. So let's spread
the word together. Head to newstalksedb dot co dot nz
forward slash community and submit your notice now caring.
Speaker 1 (27:32):
For our community right here in Auckland News Talks EDB.
Speaker 2 (27:37):
New Zealand's biggest EV and hybrid event is coming to Auckland.
Speaker 5 (27:41):
Test drive, evs and hybrids all in one place at
the New Zealand Ev and Tech Expo presented.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
By Driven, one weekend only.
Speaker 10 (27:48):
November thirteenth to fifteenth, Auckland Showgrounds.
Speaker 11 (27:52):
Hey may cause he gets a hand moving house Sure
mate mates and no show World Moving and Storage are
your best mates on moving day, on time and with
their own truck.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
Called oh eight hundred and four World.
Speaker 12 (28:07):
When you've been in this has twenty three decades, you've
seen changeable markets. At Southern Coss Partners that experience shapes
everything we do. Our first mortgage investments are securitive of
property with monthly interest payments, so your money works for you.
We're in New Zealand owned business built on experience, consistency
and careful decision making, longevity, security, and that little bit
extra each month. Learn more at Southern Cost Partners dot
(28:30):
Cota NZ.
Speaker 1 (28:30):
Southern Cross Partners Limited his license to provide peer to
peer lending services under the Financial Markets Conduct at twenty thirteen.
Speaker 8 (28:37):
Danny didn't think he needed a DVS system.
Speaker 2 (28:39):
The whole house was damped, so I've got to dehumidify
his sort it.
Speaker 8 (28:42):
But it didn't sort the whole house, did it? Danny
n only one room.
Speaker 2 (28:46):
It was just too noisy.
Speaker 8 (28:47):
So Danny got DVS Home Ventilation and its fresh air
in daily a rout technology went to work making his
whole home dryer and condensation free. Say yes to DVS.
Your healthy home isn't complete without it.
Speaker 2 (29:07):
Hi, I'm all this.
Speaker 13 (29:08):
A few years ago, Dad bought me a puppy without
getting pat insurance always finding, so I drew up the
puppy and it heard him. I'll never forget Dad's face
when he got that big eight doAnd dollars that bill. Sorry, Dad,
make sure you get affordable pasurance today. Phone patternure on
eight hundred three sixty seven Triple four Phone.
Speaker 2 (29:29):
Sure eight hundred three six seven Triple four. The big stories,
the big issues.
Speaker 8 (29:39):
The big trends and everything in between.
Speaker 1 (29:42):
Matt Heath and Tyler Adams Afternoons us talk, zi'd be.
Speaker 2 (29:45):
It is fourteen to four and we are joined by
Gareth Ebdenor, a director of Ebdenor Law and an employment lawyer,
taking your calls and questions. This is free advice.
Speaker 3 (29:54):
I e.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
One hundred and eighty teen eighty is the number two call.
A couple of teacks coming through. But let's have a
check to Caleb. Get a Caleb. You're on with Gareth. Hey,
here's going very well. Would you quish?
Speaker 3 (30:07):
Hey?
Speaker 14 (30:08):
My friend he's a building apprentice. He's been doing it
for a little over two years now and his boss
is still claiming to only have to pay him an
apprentice wage, which is around it is like eighteen dollars
an hour. I had a little research into this, but
it seems like two years seems far too long to
be on an apprentice wage, especially that low nowadays.
Speaker 5 (30:33):
Yeah, I guess my question would be, how is your
friend progressing through his apprenticeship? And while I don't deal
with a lot of apprenticeship issues, I do occasionally get
called in where someone's not passing their modules, not making
(30:58):
appropriate progress, and the business wants to terminate the apprenticeship.
That's the only thing I could think of without actually
drilling into the detail of it. If they're actually making
the appropriate progress, then that does sound a bit odd,
and it sounds like it'd be worth looking into a
(31:20):
bit further.
Speaker 14 (31:22):
Okay, that's perfect, all right, really all I needed.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
Oh the best, Caleb, Thank you very much. Rachel, what's
your question?
Speaker 15 (31:30):
Hi there, Garris. So, I was teaching between twenty ten
and twenty fourteen, and during this time my employer didn't
put the q WE Save contribution into my key we
favor account. I think around twenty twenty my accountant pointed
this out to me. I hadn't noticed it, but I
(31:51):
was having a baby and it was just too hard basket.
So I haven't done anything about it. Is it too
late to claim it back?
Speaker 5 (31:59):
Well, I'd always be inclined to give it a go,
but I think generally if you're claiming unpaid wages, and
I think this would fall into the unpaid wages category.
Generally there's a six year limit to that. But but
you know, I mean paying key we savor. That's a
(32:22):
that's a statutory thing as well as a contractual thing.
So I'd be inclined to raise it with them and
see what they're going to do about it.
Speaker 15 (32:33):
Sure, so even if legally they're not obliged to pay
back after six.
Speaker 2 (32:37):
Years, they might still do it.
Speaker 15 (32:39):
Possible that, Yeah, they have a good relationship with them,
they might do.
Speaker 5 (32:42):
That definitely, you know, And I think a lot of
this will depend on why it wasn't paid back at
the time. You know, as I said earlier on in
the show, mistakes do happen. And if they can say
it should have been paid, it wasn't paid and you've
got a good relationship, I think, you know, there's a
reasonable chance that even if they're not legally required to,
(33:06):
they'll actually do the right thing. Give it a go,
see how they respond.
Speaker 2 (33:12):
Thank you well, Kurb, Thank you very much. Rachel Graham.
We've got about sixty seconds, So what's your question. Very briefly, Hello,
I'm a.
Speaker 9 (33:20):
Warehouse supervisor and I work by myself and they have
put into security cameras as health and safety.
Speaker 6 (33:26):
Is that legal or not?
Speaker 5 (33:30):
Generally, putting in security cameras for health and safety reasons
and for security reasons is legal. It depends on whether
they're recording audio and video. If they're just recording video,
that's usually fine as long as they let you know
and you do appear to know about it. If they're
going to record video audio as well, that's more intrusive
(33:52):
and they would really need to be able to justify that.
Speaker 9 (33:56):
And you're able to work by yourself in the warehouse.
Speaker 5 (34:00):
Yeah, I think if you're working by yourself in the warehouse,
having cameras in place to make sure you haven't had
an accident as most probably a good thing. I'd be
quite happy with that.
Speaker 2 (34:11):
Thank you very much, Graham and Gareth, thank you very much.
We've got so many texts that we may get to
next time, and a lot of callers who didn't get
through as well, but really appreciate your time as always.
You have a great afternoon and we'll see you back
in about a month's sign.
Speaker 5 (34:24):
Thanks guys.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
Thank you. That is Gareth Abdenall employment, a lawyer, workplace
and information expert, Director of abdenor employment Law. If you
want to get a hold of him. His website is
Abdenortlaw dot z, and the content of the segment is
general in nature and not legal advice. Any information discussed
is not intended to be a substitute for obtaining specific
professional advice and shouldn't be relied upon as such.
Speaker 1 (34:47):
For more from News Talks B listen live on air
or online, and keep our shows with you wherever you
go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com