Further matters to consider re:

The Community Wage should be understood in the context of the Treasurer Winston Peter's Budget speech [bracketed comments added].

To receive the Community Wage (CW) the recipient must take part in "organised activities which will benefit job-seekers". The definition of such activities is decided by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Work and Income Agency (WIA) of the Department of Social Welfare. Coercion to fit these activities seems likely.

CW recipients must take part "satisfactorily" - again judged by the CEO of the WIA.

The range of organised activities available for the CW recipient to engage in may be quite limited in a particular region. But the CW recipient cannot appeal against a placement, and again is likely to be subject to coercion.

The Human Rights Act is being amended in a Bill, expected in the House this month, to permanently subordinate that Act to other legislation. This means that a number of situations will arise where discrimination will not be illegal. One example is where an exemption of the Department of Social Welfare from the provisions of the Act will enable discrimination against someone on the grounds of their employment status - so unemployed people will legally be able to be treated differently from employed people. We note that article 23 of the UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights begins with the statement - "Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment."

There is serious risk for organisations which take on CW recipients. Current Sickness Beneficiaries will all become CW recipients, and although they must inform the organisation of their health problem it may not be sufficiently understood to meet the obligation of Occupational Safety and Health (OSH). The organisation has to ensure that activities the CW recipient undertakes are appropriate. Again, ACC applies to both paid and "volunteer" workers, but there is a question as to the interpretation of "volunteer" (which is not the same as unpaid). So the legal position is not clear for either the organisation or the CW recipient.

None of the provisions of the Employment Contracts Act applies to CW recipients as these people are deemed "participants" not employees. So there is no provision for minimum wage, holidays or sick leave.

A Widow or Domestic Purposes Beneficiary (DPB) will be required to be in "work" when the youngest child is six. Even this age can be further lowered simply by regulation, i.e. Parliament will not need to be consulted and hence there is less chance of public accountability.

Students who do not receive any (means-tested) Student Allowance are no longer eligible for the Emergency Unemployment Benefit outside term-time. This will add to their burden of debt (nationwide, students owed over two billion dollars as at 31 March 1998). Employment will be difficult to find, and many may not be able to return to their studies.

The CW rules includes training as "organised activity which will benefit the job-seeker", but the 15 hours in training or education exemption has been repealed from the "work" test provisions. Thus DPB and Widows could be required to leave training/education and go into employment-related activity.

The coercion inherent in the information on the CW above is highlighted by the following experience. Last month a DPB recipient was told, during a "work test" interview with Income Support Services, that she would have to be in 15 hours "work" by 15 February next. Her voluntary commitment of 12 hours to a Women's Refuge would not qualify as "work" for the "work test".

-------------------------------

WEA believes that nothing less than a re-definition of what we call "work" will cope with the way in which society is changing. Much of what people contribute to society is neither recognised nor valued because work is currently defined too narrowly by economic criteria. We believe this is also very much a Treaty issue as the Maori word mahi is often translated as "work". Our understanding of mahi is that labours of love are included and it is not just about earning an income. It is about the dignity of the person and decisions made about the personal use of time.

We know that there is a world wide problem in relation to addressing unemployment. Much of it is due to structural changes beyond the control of the unemployed who in this country are being treated as if guilty and personally responsible for their situation. The United Nations Development Programme Principal Technical Adviser's address to the 1997 UNESCO Adult Education conference "Adult Education and Jobs, or Sustainable Livelihoods" noted that of the 3 billion people in the world who are 15 years or over only 400 million of them have "Jobs" in the industrialised sense. Most - 2.6 billion of the 3 billion - are outside the range of existing labour market policy. Further information is available on the WEA's work to date on this matter.

Finally and urgently: