In fact, the decision last week by the Government to increase the cap by 3000 to 19,000 is an acknowledgement of how essential these workers are. The staff needed during the peak seasons could not be found. Crops would go to waste and other jobs and export earnings would be lost.
The workers in Central Otago have been described by one orchardist as the "backbone" of his operations.
Nevertheless, this year has seen exploitative corners of the industry exposed. While it would seem to be in the interests of employers to look after such valuable staff, the Equal Employment Opportunities Commissioner produced a damning account of conditions in some places.
Dr Karanina Sumeo reported on circumstances akin to modern "slavery", bonding to unreasonable debts, slum-like accommodation and the denial of religious and cultural freedoms. Alleged in one case, in Central Otago, was an assault by an employer.
Dr Sumeo said fundamental human rights were being breached, and some of what she had seen warranted criminal investigation.
The media highlighted the likes of six men packed into one room near Blenheim with a single chest of drawers being charged $150 a week, unreasonable transport and laundry deductions and workers being charged for protective clothing.
Workplace Relations Minister Michael Wood said the Labour Inspectorate was investigating specific concerns. That report is due imminently.
The Government earlier committed to a "full review" beginning early next year. Mr Wood late last week announced eligibility for sick leave entitlements and an 0800 phone number for worker assistance.
Faith in the Labour Inspectorate is shaky after it earlier undertook investigations and found no wrongdoing.
Staff must be paid at least the minimum wage, $22.20 an hour, for a minimum of 30 hours work. They come from Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. There are per-country caps.
That level of payment is far above what most earn in the Pacific, and demand for places can be intense. There have been reports in Samoa, for example, of nepotism and cheating. While the scheme was supposed to be for the unemployed, many employed had joined. A recently completed review of various concerns was found by Samoa’s Cabinet to be unsatisfactory and has been shelved. A Cabinet subcommittee will now look for solutions.
One issue is the loss of those with professional and other vital skills from island nations, accentuating the Pacific’s "brain drain". Vanuatu, for its part, has just been looking at its employment policy. Valued hospitality workers are among those leaving.
Australia’s parallel Seasonal Worker Programme has also had issues, including accusations of exploitation.
In New Zealand, there has been criticism of the lack of clear guidelines and tighter standards for employers. More clarity would also improve Labour Inspectorate enforcement. It makes sense for these deficiencies to be rectified, so long as too much bureaucracy and red tape can be avoided. What, for example, are fair and proper wage deductions for various day-to-day costs?
Mr Wood’s suggestion of regional "roving workplace representatives" could also be picked up to ensure staff have somewhere safe to go with complaints. Failings could be spotted early. Pastoral care of staff far from home and family is important, and it might be that it needs to be provided independently of the employer.
Despite the criticisms, the scheme brings large monetary and economic advantages to individuals, Pacific communities and Pacific nations through the remittances. Despite the concerns, most employers will treat their staff properly and with respect and honour. It also continues to help bring prosperity to New Zealand’s economy and the recognised employers.
The Labour inspectorate needs to be firm and focused on making sure standards are upheld everywhere. The attention has highlighted the need to undertake the full review and make sure the scheme works well for all parties.
