AREAS OF POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE FOR NEW ZEALAND AND AUSTRALIAN EMPLOYERS
Presenteeism: When workers are present but not wholly functioning
What happens when you have an employee who is physically “on the job”, but is unwell or emotionally...
Time to read: 3 mins
We are seeing more Australian businesses either establishing a small footprint in New Zealand to “test the water”, coming into New Zealand following an acquisition or alternatively making decisions to sell direct, rather than rely on a New Zealand distributor. So, what are the human capital elements that Australian companies need to consider and where do the key differences lie?
Essentially there are two key factors:
WHAT’S DIFFERENT IN NEW ZEALAND?
The first question Australian companies need to ask is: “what don’t we know about New Zealand employment law?”. This question arises regularly from companies who are well versed in operating across borders and dealing with legal differences yet it is surprising how often this fundamental question is not asked when it comes to their Kiwi cousins. It is not unusual to see Australian employment agreements used in New Zealand that do not meet some of our fundamental requirements around employment protection provisions, dispute resolution procedures, payment for public holidays and so forth. The table below illustrates where differences in employment law can emerge.
Australian companies entering or operating in New Zealand should take advice from New Zealand based advisers before entering into employment agreements, to ensure they start on the right foot.
SAME OR DIFFERENT AS AUSTRALIA?
Australian companies need to consider the philosophical approach to take regarding employees in New Zealand. At a macro level, we see two choices being made: a decision to ensure consistency between their Australian and New Zealand employees by applying the same employment conditions (e.g. superannuation, restraints of trade, car allowances and leave); or making a conscious decision on having New Zealand employees’ conditions reflect the New Zealand market. The most frequent choice is to “harmonise” conditions, which sounds relatively easy but can, in fact, be quite complex. Australian employment agreements and policies simply transplanted into New Zealand can be wrong in law, can incur unnecessary costs for the Australian owner, and can leave New Zealand employees confused with policy decisions. At the end of the day, neither choice is right or wrong, as both have their advantages, but it is important to do this thinking up front to avoid problems.
As in most areas of business, any Australian entity entering or operating within New Zealand should never assume anything even though, to all intents and purposes, we might look and sound the same. Due diligence and getting the right advice is fundamental to success.
AREAS OF POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE FOR NEW ZEALAND AND AUSTRALIAN EMPLOYERS
For further advice regarding cross-border human resources considerations, please contact HR Consultants Chris Wright (chris.wright@bakertillysr.nz), Baker Tilly Staples Rodway Auckland or Andrea Stevenson (andrea.stevenson@bakertillysr.nz), Baker Tilly Staples Rodway Hawke’s Bay
– Report by Chris Wright, Kate Julian and Anika Scholz
DISCLAIMER No liability is assumed by Baker Tilly Staples Rodway for any losses suffered by any person relying directly or indirectly upon any article within this website. It is recommended that you consult your advisor before acting on this information.
Our website uses cookies to help understand and improve your experience. Please let us know if that’s okay by you.
Cookies help us understand how you use our website, so we can serve up the right information here and in our other marketing.