JUST VOTE

Your vote has never been this importantAs a New Zealander, it’s vital to think about voting in a way that counts.

Our lives are affected by the decisions made by our politicians – we’ve laid out for you ten key issues to think about as you make your decision

on where to place your vote in the 2014 election.

DYING ON THE JOBDecades of deregulation have made our workplaces downright dangerous

The 2010 tragedy at Pike River Mine laid bare the appalling truth about New Zealand work environments: they some of the worst death and injury rates of any developed nation.

Every year in New Zealand workplaces…

75people

arekilled

400people are seriously injured

1 in 10people

are injured

200,000make ACC

claims

600-900 people die each year from work-related diseases, such as asbestos*-related illnesses

vDID YOU KNOW that New Zealand has not banned imports of products with asbestos? Other countries have.

The cost of workplace

accidents is at least $3.5 billion yearly

Four in every 100,000 workers

die from workplace injury in NZ every year

NEW ZEALAND’S LOW-WAGE ECONOMYHow the policies of the past thirty years have driven us there

While GDP* per person has risen substantially over the last 30 years, our average wages have barely risen. The lion’s share of growth gains have gone to capital, not labour. *Gross Domestic Product

36

34

32

30

28

26

24

22

Real average hourly wage compared to productivity gains

1989 2013

If hourly wage had followed productivity gains

How it actually rose against CPI*

From 1986 to 2013, our measured labour productivity rose 58%, while the average hourly wage rose just 18% after inflation. The cost of labour to the employer has decreased 6.6% over the past two decades. Employers could afford to pay more. (*Consumer Price Index)

Sharing the GDP

The 1991 Employment Contracts Act dismantled the awards system and changed the balance in the workplace, which made collective wage bargaining extremely difficult. You’re twice as likely to get a pay increase if you're on a collective agreement.

Employers could afford to pay more

and have been abdicating

paying higher wages.

The positive effects of higher wages

Higher wages and fair treatment

Better motivated workers – more effort and thought into work = more productivity

Employers make the most of investment into workers = spending money on equipment and working methods

Effect of increased spending power of workers creates more demand for goods and services

This would be possible with better labour laws

Pre ’80s

Today

Income to shareholders,

investors, lenders

60%40%

50% 50%

Income to wage and salary earners

HO

UR

LY W

AG

E

Cleaner. Casual worker.Varying hours. Can find out on the day if he has work. Employed by a large corporate commercial cleaning contracting company. Has had to take a second job. Company lost a contract one month and he had no work for a week with no pay. On minimum wage. Only has work for 45 weeks of the year. Work is often restructured.

Glenda, 1980s Samuel, 2014

Cleaner at the local school. Employed directly by the school. Rostered a month ahead. Works 40 hours a week. Belongs to union. Has standard holidays. Paid extra for overtime and weekend work. Has had job for five years, with three wage increases. Paid 52 weeks of the year.

Why was job security better in the past?Workers’ rights have eroded over the past three decades. Only 20% of the workforce belongs to a union now, compared to 70% in the 1980s.

The current government

wants to bring in a raft of changes that will remove guaranteed meal

breaks, allow companies to walk

away from pay negotiations and

remove automatic collective

agreement coverage for new

workers.

WORKERS’ RIGHTSWhy insecure work exists and why it’s a problem

In 2012, at least 30% of the workforce were insecure or unemployed. It’s thought the true numbers could be as high as 40-50%.

Insecure work is any job that denies workers stability and control of their work situation.

Insecure work is characterised by:

Uncertainty over how long the job lasts or when it can be terminated

Limited worker control over hours, tasks, or safe work practices

Low or fluctuating pay

Limited access to sick leave, domestic leave or other benefits

No or limited chance to gain skills

Lack of rights or protection

Lack of union representation

Occupations especially affected:

Cleaning and

catering

Education and

training

Retail

Care of the elderly

Core Public Sector

Many insecure

workers have multiple jobs and struggle to make ends

meet.

HIGH UNEMPLOYMENTOur labour market is sick

Statistics show our GDP has grown, but unemployment hardly falls. Why aren’t we converting our economic growth into more jobs?

Here’s our current situation

154,000unemployed

– that’s 6% of our workforce

254,000jobless

96,000under-

employed

30%-50%in insecure work

+unsafe working

conditions

50k

45k

40k

35k

30k

25k

GDP per capita and average wage

1965 2014

GDP per capita

Real wage

New Zealand went from a high-wage economy to a low-wage economy. Workers’ rights to bargain have been eroded by changes in legislation.

Between 1982 and 2012

GDPper

personup 52%

WAGESup 11.5%

Growth in the economy has gone not to wages but to investors, shareholders and lenders.

34

29

24

19EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS

ACT 1991

INCOME GAPAre you getting your fair share?

Growing income inequality means that many people are missing out on a fair share of the income generated in the eonomy.

50% increasefor the top 10%

8% decreasefor the bottom 10%

Between 1982 and 2012, after housing costs, there was a 50% increase in disposable income for the top 10% of income earners and an 8% decrease for the bottom 10%. The gains from economic growth over these 30 years went mainly to the rich.

Disposable income after housing costs, 1982–2012

1953 2011

500k

400k

300k

200k

100k

Average real pre-tax income in 2011 dollars

Top 1%

Bottom 90%

In New Zealand, the top 1% received 11 times the 2011 income of the bottom 90%.

NBR rich listWhat are they worth?

1986 - $12 billion2013 - $60 billion

TOP 10%

Real incomes1982

Real incomes 2013

76% rise

$59.7k

$105.1k

BOTTOM 10%

16% rise

$12.1k

$14k

The increasing gap

Meanwhile…One in four

children in New Zealand live in poverty

Benefits – are we looking

after Kiwis in need?

In 2011, New Zealand had the

lowest benefits paid, compared to

average wages, in around

33 OECD members. For example, we ranked last for a

two-earner couple with children on two-thirds of the average wage.

What has caused the increasing rise in income inequality?

Employment Contracts Act – enabled employers to hold down wages

Harsh cuts In benefit levels

The recession has had a greater impact on those on lower incomes

Tax cuts received by those on higher incomes

Globalisation

National’s tax cuts come at a cost

Greater inequality

Poorer schools

Poorer hospitals

Inadequatepublic

transport

Privatisation of roads and

prisons

Slack workplace regulations

TAXESTaxes – the price we pay for a civilised society

Taxes pay for the things we all need. Tax cuts, more often than not, end up as cuts to essential services. The end result is even more disparity between the haves and the have-nots.

NZ is almost alone among developed

countries

NO capital gains tax

NO tax on capital transactions

NO tax on deceased

estatesNO

tax on gifts

Did you know?New Zealand has

lower tax for high income earners

than most OECD countries?

33%New Zealand

42%OECD

average

49%Australia

Our taxes are already low – in fact, on average they are the third

lowest in the OECD!

$15m

$14m

$13m

$12m

National’s plan for health and education

2014 2018

Here are National’s forecasts for two key government services over the next four years if it wins the electiontaking into account inflation and population growth. It plans to used money saved by cutting back on essential services to fund tax cuts.

Health down by $1.8 billion

Education down by $0.5 billion

National’s planned cuts

GSTcreates a big chunk of revenue, but hits the least well-off

the most

SQUEEZING PUBLIC SERVICESStarving our public services

The amount our government spends on public services is already low by international standards. And under National, there are more cuts coming.

2013 SOCIAL SPENDING AS A PERCENTAGE OF GDPWe rank low by international standards.

Public services cover things like

ESTO

NIA US

NEW

ZEA

LAND UK

GERM

ANY

SPAI

NFR

ANCE

GREE

CE

Health Education Housing Benefits Social assistance

Our health system is ill!

Extra costs+

Ageing population+

More expensive treatments

Underfunding of $700 million

over the past three years

Unmet health needs for 25%

of New Zealanders

Free education?Yeah, right.Kiwis pay $360

million a year in “voluntary”

donations as well as fundraising to help prop up the education

systems.

Do we help those in need?

Benefits were cut by up to 25%

in 1991 and have never been increased since,

except for inflation adjustments.

Now a quarter of our children live in poverty, the majority in

households which depend on state

support.

Budget cuts on the horizon

Bill English want to “cut core Crown spending” to just 25% of GDP – down from 35% in 2009. In that case, these cuts would only be the beginning…

Health

x12.3%

Early Education

x6.9%

Primary

x7.5%

Secondary

x3.1%

Tertiary

x8.7%

Social Welfare

x6%

A QUARTER OF NEW ZEALAND CHILDREN LIVE IN POVERTY

2 OUT OF 5 OF THEM ARE FROM HOUSEHOLDS WHERE AT LEAST ONE ADULT IS IN FULL TIME WORK OR SELF EMPLOYED

HOUSING HIKESIt’s getting harder for us Kiwis to buy our own homes

House buying is increasingly out of reach of many New Zealanders, as prices soar and incomes stagnate, while those renting or in state housing face equally severe problems.

House price to disposable income ratioOur house-price-to-average-net-income ratio is further above its long term average than in any other developed country (except Belgium).

1980

2013

The average house used to cost 2

times the yearly average net income – manageable for

most people. Now a house costs 5 times

the average yearly income.

International standards say we shouldn’t spend more than 30% of our incomes on housing.

But 27% of Kiwis spend more than that.

And 40% of that group have unmanageably high housing costs.

Public housingOnly 69,000 (4%) of our housing is state housing. Fewer than we had in 1992, and the population has grown by almost a third. (Public housing in some Western European countries is as much as 20%)

SELLING OFF OUR ASSETSAnd why we’re all worse off

The National Government’s determination to push ahead with selling off state-owned assets was driven by two things: pure ideology, and vested interests in the financial sector with close ties to the National Party.

Selling off our assets – a financially smart idea?

Not according to Treasury figures…

Taxpayers worse off by $145 million each year

Genesis Energy

Meridian Energy

Mighty River

Power

Air New Zealand

Rembember the sales?

NZ RAIL Asset-stripped and run down costing $4 billion to fix

TELECOM Huge profits paid out to new owners, competition stymied, govt left to fund broadband

AIR NZ Bankrupted by private owners

Who were the winners? Not the “mums and dads”

Dams were built to save Kiwis money. Now the sales line

the pockets of private enterprise.

NZ Rail was built using our taxes, for efficient and

economical goods and passenger

transport, keeping big trucks off the roads.

Kiwibank was started as real

competition to the big Australian banks and brought back the idea

of local branches.

They were built with our taxes, for the common good.

ROCK STAR ECONOMY?We’re singing the wrong tunes

There’s been talk of New Zealand’s “rock star economy” in the financial media, but if you look five years beyond the Christchurch construction boom and ask what will sustain our jobs and living standards, there’s nothing there.

The songs we’re being sung are broken records

“The Market Knows Best”

“Government Can’t Pick

Winners (so don’t even try to think about it)”

“Inflation Targeting is All You

Need”

“China Will Keep Us Afloat”

“Budget Surpluses

Are All That Matters”

“Beneficiaries Are Lazy”

20 years of:• deregulation• an unsustainable exchange rate• low-wage policies• union busting• uncontrolled overseas borrowing• shrinking government =growth rate of income per capita stuck at 1% or below each year

The neoliberal legacy:• reliance on agriculture• shrinking manufacturing sector• shameless price-gouging in electricity,

gas and telecommunications• rise in huge personal fortunes

(after looting public assets)

What did we get? The reality is different to the songs we've been hearing…The main

effect of neoliberalism

in New Zealand has

been a radical change in who benefits from the economy – and not the

promised faster

economic growth.

115

110

100

95

90

85

80

1980 2012

NZ per capita GDP in US$ relative to OECD average

OECD average

New Zealand

Authorised by Helen Kelly, NZCTU, Level 7, 178 Willis Street, Wellington

Download a pdf: www.union.org.nz/election2014/full-infographic.pdf