RSE Review: Protecting the people in our migrant labour scheme

In the intervening months, as horticulture and viticulture operators clamoured for more workers in the field, the Recognised Seasonal Employer (RSE) scheme has been under the spotlight, including through a labour Inspectorate investigation into one contractor and an ongoing review of the scheme.

Q&A with Equal Employment Opportunities commissioner Saunoamaali'i Dr Karanina Sumeo

em>What are your concerns when it comes to the RSE scheme?

My primary concern is that there are people coming to our country on the RSE scheme who are being, and will continue to be, exploited by employers. I am concerned about the wellbeing of these people, their families and communities. I worry that the expectations of businesses are so basic that it is legal to have four adult men sharing a small room for months with minimal storage space, no privacy and no heating. How can it be just, fair or decent to deduct so much from wages that an employee who works a full week only ends up with $200 or $300 in their hand after tax to live on until the next pay?

There is almost a sense that ‘they’ have no entitlements outside what’s in the employment contract. This is most likely to be in English, so not the first language of the worker, and at times it gets altered once the worker arrives in Aotearoa, without the money to get back on the plane. I know many people working under the RSE scheme will not complain because they need to go home with substantial savings, but that is not good enough. I am concerned that those who exploit RSE workers do not recognise that they are people with inherent dignity, who are born free and equal like the rest of us. RSE providers can create their own mini society in which the employees may not enjoy the same rights and freedoms as others. This is not only illegal, but also inhuman and a violation of fundamental human rights.

These people come here with hopes for fair and decent wages, and dignified working and living conditions. Instead, we have some people leaving in debt, with poor health, and who are psychologically and emotionally scarred. The system has allowed exploitation to take place and it is the primary responsibility of our business owners to uphold and respect their human rights.

Is there enough enforcement of the rules, as they stand?

No, and there appears to be a need for a more effective system and more people to do the actual monitoring and enforcing. Access to justice is not guaranteed. I worry that the collective accountability failings in our immigration, human rights, workplace monitoring, and justice systems enable exploiters to continue profiting from their acts. Workers who are socially, economically and legally vulnerable in a foreign land are unlikely to challenge power. The low number of convictions related to worker abuse, even though concerns are widely known in Aotearoa and in Pacific communities, raises concerns about access to justice for victims, and a lack of remedies and appropriate compensation.

What changes would you like to see made via the government's RSE Review?

I would like respect for human rights to be at the core of the review, including equity of benefits, and a worker-centred approach. Government needs to consider the lack of minimum standards that allow employers to deprive their employees of their dignity and to ensure the review focuses on protecting that. I cast my mind to examples like an employer not allowing their employee to go to the beach on their day off, for fear that they may abscond. I think of the workers who are part of the machinery of creating our world-famous export wine, but who themselves are prohibited from consuming alcohol. I think of the 18 men who are living in a cold, mouldy, four-bedroom house, paying $2,400 per week, who are banned from having visitors. These restrictions are not placed on other employer-employee relationships, so why are they allowed to persist in the RSE scheme?

I’d also like to see businesses take on a greater active role by setting clear standards for their industries and respective business partners, and to hold dodgy entities to account.

Are there examples of principles we could follow?

In June 2011, the United Nations Human Rights Council adopted the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. These principles provide a global standard for addressing and preventing human rights breaches associated with business activity. Lots of businesses are using the principles and we can now see real benefits for companies that embed human rights considerations into their core business practices. I’d like to see all our businesses, including those involved in using the labour of RSE workers, to apply these principles in their operations without waiting on government to improve rules and enforcement.

How important is it that the review considers the voices of Pacific nations and workers?

It’s hugely important to remember that without the RSE scheme and workers, New Zealand would lose billions in annual export earnings that could destroy businesses, co-dependent local economies, and affect our national wealth and prosperity. To my knowledge, consultations have never adequately featured the voices of Pacific nations and workers. This must change. Hearing the stories directly from the workers, using their own language, can better inform changes to policy. I think the way we respond overall offers a chance to better highlight the contribution that Pacific nations and Pacific people within Aotearoa make to our wealth and prosperity.

When working well, with good employers, do you support the scheme?

There are many beneficiaries of the RSE scheme – from New Zealand businesses and surrounding communities, industries and economy, to the Pacific workers and their respective countries. Our horticulture and viticulture industries gain especially. Other industries could also benefit if included. We also know that the scheme has unintentionally drawn away essential talent from the Pacific, due to higher income earnings in Aotearoa compared with the Pacific job market and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on Pacific economies. It has become a mixed blessing in some nations with inequities through how job opportunities are distributed.

When employers breach the rules, what is the risk for employees, wine companies and the industry at large?

We want to look ourselves in the mirror, and celebrate our success and prosperity, knowing we profited without causing harm to anyone. The reality is that the cost of breaching human rights can hurt a business significantly – financially and in terms of its credibility and brand reputation. It can also directly affect key relationships and shake consumer confidence. This is not just a moral issue. How you address human rights will make a difference to how you are perceived, minimise your risk and ultimately, add value to your business.

Could modern slavery and worker exploitation legislation improve the safety of the RSE scheme?

I look forward to Aotearoa having meaningful, human-centred, effective modern slavery legislation to help stamp out exploitation, and rebuild public confidence in some of our industries, agencies, and government. One of the key tools that can be seen internationally is the rise of due diligence requirements over local and overseas supply chains. It is important for a human-centred legislation to include all sizes of entities and the public sector. Our cultural identity and international reputation are the responsibility of everyone. If small and medium sized enterprises below a certain threshold are not counted, there is a chance that it will exclude many RSE workers who will need the protection of the law and access to remedies it may enable.