22 March 2024

Media: Local Democracy Reporter

Topic: Infracore staff striking

Enquiry

Was at the strike this morning and just had a couple bits of response and couple questions please and thanks.

AWU Bay of Plenty organiser Toni Smith said every other BOP cco paid workers 9.93pc more and was why the 5pc increase offered was rejected.

"In ten days time we have the [new] minimum wage kicking in . . . some of these guys have been here for 14 years and are still on very low wages, $23.65. It's going to be in line with minimum wage very soon."

"They've gone through so many CEO's here. But they are still loyal to this company - why can't the company be loyal to them?"

"Every council has the same problems, the same issues, but all of these council's are paying $26 . . . toilet cleaners, cleaners, everything."

First Union organiser Phil Graham said the workers were struggling. "If they don't get to the current living wage . . . as we all know, the cost of living is escalating. It's going to create more poverty and hardship on families which naturally creates problems at home."

He said it could be easily resolved by moving forward with a living wage.

The union press release said: “We want the same level of respect from the employer and agreement not to try to further undermine collective bargaining with contractor labour or further misrepresentation of the Union position.” I asked the union what this meant and the reply was: This relates to feedback from members on meetings held with both union & non-union including discussions about bargaining & strikes while under good faith bargaining(confirmed by members)not on one occasion but again a second time after the unions expressly requested this behaviour on behalf of Infracore is inappropriate. Can this please be

• I was told workers are contractually obliged to not speak to media. Is this accurate and what is the reason why? Are council-controlled organisations allowed to do that?
• Has anyone spoken to any of the strikers today and if so what about?
• Have any services been impacted so far, i.e. burials, and is there any chance they will be going forward on strike days?

Subsequent from reporter:

Also this to put to you for response as well, please:

Signs held by some of the workers read: “Council-controlled poverty” and “overworked and underpaid”.

Response

See below regarding impact on services. The other matters should be put to InfraCore as the employer.

From General Manager Infrastructure and Environment, Stavros Michael:

We have noted no major impacts so far but are monitoring the situation and will reassess as required. Any major anticipated impacts will be communicated via appropriate channels.

InfraCore provided the following response, from CE Regan Fraser:

AWU Bay of Plenty organiser Toni Smith said every other BOP CCO paid workers 9.93pc more and was why the 5pc increase offered was rejected.

"In ten days time we have the [new] minimum wage kicking in . . . some of these guys have been here for 14 years and are still on very low wages, $23.65. It's going to be in line with minimum wage very soon."

Response:I have checked our system and I can confirm that there are 0 employees who have worked for InfraCore for 14 years or longer who are currently on a rate lower than $26 per hour.

First Union organiser Phil Graham said the workers were struggling. "If they don't get to the current living wage . . . as we all know, the cost of living is escalating. It's going to create more poverty and hardship on families which naturally creates problems at home."

He said it could be easily resolved by moving forward with a living wage.

Response:The unions current demand is for a minimum of $26 per hour AND pay parity for all rates above this. InfraCore does not have the ability to meet this. Based off their comments it seems that their main concern has now changed to just the lowest rate lifting to $26 per hour. We will engage with the unions again to explore what this could look like.

The union press release said: “We want the same level of respect from the employer and agreement not to try to further undermine collective bargaining with contractor labour or further misrepresentation of the Union position.” I asked the union what this meant and the reply was: This relates to feedback from members on meetings held with both union & non-union including discussions about bargaining & strikes while under good faith bargaining(confirmed by members)not on one occasion but again a second time after the unions expressly requested this behaviour on behalf of Infracore is inappropriate. Can this please be.

Response: I was concerned about this line as well. I have asked the question twice over the last 2 days as to what they mean so I could make sure it doesn’t happen again. I am still waiting for an answer that would allow us to take any action.

I was told workers are contractually obliged to not speak to media. Is this accurate and what is the reason why? Are council-controlled organisations allowed to do that?

Response:I am unaware of any such blanket clauses. The closest I have been able to find is a line in our employee handbook under professional integrity, responsibility and standards. It is “(NOT) making derogatory and/or inflammatory comments about InfraCore, employees, clients or suppliers via social media networking sites or any form of print or broadcast media.”

Has anyone spoken to any of the strikers today and if so what about?

Response: Not as far as I am aware.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Media: Local Democracy Reporter

Topic: Cancelled Rainbow Storytime event

Enquiry

want to offer the free speech union statements again for response - particularly the claim the council may have acted in an illegal manner.

Can I also ask if there was any specific information that was of concern regarding what was planned for the protest? And what it was?

Specifically what was it that tipped the council to cancel the event and how was this information passed to the council?

Did the council or library staff attempt to contact either the hosts or other libraries that have hosted the event as to how protests were handled in the past?

What would change, if anything, if the council were to host a similar event?

What library or council policies relate to holding what could be deemed as controversial events or material and its handling of protests?

How were these followed in relation to the Rainbow Storytime event?

I also have the below press release, highlighted sections of most interest and for request for response:

LIBRARY ASSOCIATION SUPPORTS SAFETY AT RAINBOW STORYTIMES

The library association is calling out disrupters of events in libraries all over the country during Pride Month and Rainbow Storytime events.

“It is not okay for people to aim their negative messages at library staff doing their job to ensure inclusive events for their community.

LGBTQ+ people are part of our communities,” says Ivy Guo, LIANZA president-elect.

Te Aka Mauri Rotorua Library cancelled its Rainbow Storytime events today due to security concerns.

Protestors also disrupted recent events at Christchurch’s Tūranga Library and Dunedin’s City Library during Pride Week Storytime.

“We expect tolerance and respect for all those in our library spaces and will do everything to assure the safety of library staff and those attending events.

These protests are against the intent of New Zealand’s Bill of Rights and Human Rights legislation.”

LIANZA (The Library and Information Association of New Zealand Aotearoa) say protestors calling these events ‘child abuse’, are misinformed.

“These are family-friendly events focused on book reading, song and dance, and are carefully managed by library staff,”

says Louise LaHatte, chair of the LIANZA Freedom of Information Committee.

“The only reason the events are subject to protests is because they are being delivered by Rainbow community members.”

“LIANZA is concerned for library staff and event safety because of these increasingly vocal protests.”

In New Zealand, there have been recent and increasing challenges to library content and activities on topics that include sex education and Rainbow community issues.

LIANZA has developed a toolkit and a series of professional development events to support libraries and their staff in these challenges.

Louise LaHatte said, “Access to representation, resources, and affirming experiences for Rainbow people helps the wider community to empathise with Rainbow whānau and their lived experience.”

LIANZA is asking councils, mayors, and communities to continue supporting libraries in delivering inclusive and diverse events and programmes.

“Libraries should be a dynamic part of community life for everyone, throwing a spotlight on topical issues to stimulate learning and the exchange of information,” says Ivy Guo

Response

We provided the following response:

Please see below. If you need to attribute you can attribute to ‘a Rotorua Lakes Council spokesperson’.

Re the claim the council may have acted in an illegal manner:

Council stands by its decisions.

Re Can I also ask if there was any specific information that was of concern regarding what was planned for the protest? And what it was?

There was clear and publicly announced intention by protest organisers to disrupt the event in order to prevent it from proceeding. Council made several attempts to contact the protest organisers to understand what that might entail, but received no response.

Specifically, Council sought to identify how to safely accommodate both groups and allow both points of view to be expressed freely. Without receiving any response [from protest organisers], we were not able to assess and adequately manage the level of risk to people’s safety.

Re the following questions:

• Specifically what was it that tipped the council to cancel the event and how was this information passed to the council?
• Did the council or library staff attempt to contact either the hosts or other libraries that have hosted the event as to how protests were handled in the past?

As is usual practice in terms of ensuring people’s safety for any events Council runs, due diligence was undertaken, including speaking to other libraries and the performers, to police and relevant staff across our organisation and using the LIANZA toolkit.

In assessing the level of risk and after thoroughly considering all factors, it was determined that the security resource that would be available would not be sufficient to ensure the safety of library and children’s health hub staff, clients and customers, event attendees, the performers and people using nearby facilities, given the lack of information about the intended protests. Public safety at council facilities is a key priority and we do not compromise on that.

Re What library or council policies relate to holding what could be deemed as controversial events or material and its handling of protests? How were these followed in relation to the Rainbow Storytime event?

General health and safety considerations apply for any events at the library and we may also, as we did in this case, use the LIANZA toolkit to support our approach to the management of an event. Public safety at our facilities is a priority for council.

Re What would change, if anything, if the council were to host a similar event?

We haven’t had the opportunity to hold a debrief yet. Any changes would come from that.

General

Rotorua Library will continue to be, as it has always been, a place that is inclusive and welcoming for all in our community, offering a diverse range of services, programmes and events. We are sorry that due to the safety concerns that emerged, we were unable to host this event as planned.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Media: Local Democracy Reporter

Topic: Lakeland Queen

Enquiry

I have the below comment from councillor Robert Lee I would like to seek response to. Will pop a couple questions in below too, many thanks.

“It is a sad day for Rotorua when the Lakeland Queen goes into liquidation. Many locals, national and international visitors have fond memories of this beautiful vessel which has graced our lake since 1987.

“The good news is that this may not be the last that Rotorua sees of this beautiful vessel. It appears that the Lakeland Queen jetty is considered "an existing structure" under the Te Arawa Lakes Settlement Act 2006. That means the jetty "may be used, occupied, accessed, repaired, maintained" without charge and without the consent of the Te Arawa Lakes Trust. This is very good news for any investor looking to purchase the Lakeland Queen from the liquidator.

“It appears that the Lakefront redevelopment has proceeded on a false premise, that the Te Arawa Lakes Trust had certain rights that don't apply in this case. It seems that Terry Hammond has been misled or at least misinformed about his rights and he has suffered significant losses as a result.

“I would like to know how it is that the redevelopment includes a walkway that extends into the usual pathway of the Lakeland Queen, interfering with the Lakeland Queen's access to its jetty. Council may now have to consider making alterations to that walkway in order to give effect to the Lakeland Queen's access rights. Council may also have to consider reestablishing the electricity, water and waste water services to the jetty that were taken away during the redevelopment.

“We were recently informed at Council that the redevelopment came in under budget so there should be funds available to remedy the situation.”

• How accurate is the above? (Please explain as specifically and in detail as possible)
• If the statements are correct, what actions would the council take to "remedy the situation"?
• Does anything supersede the act? I.e. are there powers that can override the act?
• How far under budget was the redevelopment?
• What happens to this money?

Response

We provided the following:

Please refer questions about the settlement act to TALT and/or the office of treaty settlements, Te Arawhiti.

From General Manager Infrastructure and Environment, Stavros Michael:

Regarding the boardwalk: It was designed to not interfere with the Lakeland Queen and part of construction included a barrier between the boardwalk and Lakeland Queen turning area.

Rotorua Lakes Council has done all it can to assist Mr Hammond. Please refer to information provided to you on previous occasions regarding this matter.

Re the lakefront redevelopment budget: We have worked hard to keep the project within budget. Any underspend is yet to be confirmed.