Who’s a worker, what’s work?

Andrew Little was in enough trouble over his failure to pay David Cohen for his services and he was silly enough to make it worse:

. . . But referring to Mr Cohen as “a worker” has made Mr Little grumpy.

“Your commentary talked about a worker,” says Mr Little. “He was a contractor.” . .

This is the man whose first big speech of the year was supposed to appeal to a wider range of workers including small business owners.

There’s no business smaller, in terms of personnel, than that of a single contractor and if a contractor isn’t a worker the logical conclusion is that what he does isn’t work.

So who is a worker and what’s work?

The dictionary says it’s: activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a result.

In the context of employment it is also done to earn payment regardless of whether you are an employee or a contractor.

Little’s quibbling over whether a contractor is a worker should serve as a warning to anyone who was mollified by the rhetoric of his speech about reaching out to a broader range of workers.

Whatever he said a couple of weeks ago has been contradicted by his grumpy quibble.

 

34 Responses to Who’s a worker, what’s work?

  1. Petty quibbling, Ele.

    Like

  2. JC's avatar JC says:

    In left parlance a contractor has a similar status as a “parasite” employer because he takes jobs from permanent “workers”.

    Angry Andy is being entirely consistent in treating a contractor as unworthy of payment.. particularly as its clear its a personal debt.

    So far so bad, but whats dropped AA in it is his speech that Labour is going to go to bat for small business, a sector that includes many thousands of single contractors.

    JC

    Like

  3. Dave Kennedy's avatar Dave Kennedy says:

    I actually agree with Ele on this, Little has handled this issue really badly. I don’t believe he deliberately shafted the contractor/worker concerned, it was just an embarrassing stuffup and he would have been far better to own up and apologise. We now have two major parties where the leaders struggle to accept responsibility for obvious mistakes.

    Like

  4. Seems we need the Greens more than ever before…:-)

    Like

  5. jabba's avatar jabba says:

    well bOb, open up your wallet a join the Gween Party, They need the likes of you to continue the success they have enjoyed over the years.

    Like

  6. TraceyS's avatar TraceyS says:

    “…far better to own up and apologise.”

    Yes it is, Dave.

    But if you can’t admit when you are wrong, you shouldn’t expect others to.

    I suspect that you will claim you haven’t a clue what I’m talking about.

    Like

  7. TraceyS's avatar TraceyS says:

    That’s just what I was thinking, JC. Contract workers are to be discouraged because it makes them vulnerable to bad employers. But what a hell of a way to make the point! Could they not find a decent example without creating one?

    Like

  8. RBG's avatar RBG says:

    This whole issue has been a beat up by Cohen and the Nats. Sure Little has not handled it well, but Cohen didn’t send in his invoice until late December, so his 4 months late claim is nonsense. Its obvious Cohen told Joyce to draw attention away from the Sky City train wreck. So Gower gets wound up on ‘invoice sent to wrong person gets paid 4 weeks after 20th of month.’ The right wing’s attacks on the left are so petty, next you’ll be going through the bins (or has Slater already got someone on to that)

    Like

  9. homepaddock's avatar homepaddock says:

    RGB – timeline from NZ Herald: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11404138

    – October: David Cohen provides consulting work for Andrew Little as part of leadership campaign.
    – 10 November: Cohen sends invoice to campaign manager.
    – 1 December: Cohen emails campaign manager again
    – 22 December: Cohen emails invoice to Little’s chief of staff, Matt McCarten. McCarten replies: “I will take this up with Andrew.”
    – 5 January: Cohen emails again. McCarten replies: “Every worker must be paid for work they are asked to do.” A few further emails are sent over January.
    – Late January: Little says he is told the invoice hasn’t been paid.
    – February 12: Cohen emails McCarten again and writes article in NBR about it.
    – February 17: Steven Joyce mocks Little about it, Little pays the bill.

    It wasn’t Little’s fault that his campaign manager didn’t do anything with the invoice Cohen sent in November. Although had he been on the ball he ought to have asked for a balance sheet.

    That McCarten got the invoice in December and did nothing reflects poorly on him.

    That Little got the invoice in late January, must have known it was well overdue and didn’t pay it immediately is both stupid and slack.

    That no-one in Labour told Little about the NBR story suggests continuing dysfunction.

    That Little prevaricated about when he paid then quibbled about Cohen being a contractor and not a worker dug himself deeper.

    Like

  10. Back Paddock's avatar Back Paddock says:

    Right wingers eh…always being nit picky about little things like being paid. Is this the problem RBG? Or is the problem that Little uses the services of people and then can’t do the right thing and front with the dosh. McCarten has a reputation for being miserly paying the tax department within his former union job. What a great combination!
    A partnership that no one can bank on I’d say.

    Like

  11. RBG's avatar RBG says:

    So you can produce a detailed timeline for that Homepaddock, how about one for when Key was briefed about the Sabin matter?

    Like

  12. A timeline Key’s Sabin briefing, RBG, here on Homepaddock???

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

    Oh, how we laughed and laughed.

    Ele’s well armed to attack the Labour leader, but knows nothing, nothing about Mr Key’s Sabin business.

    Like

  13. “Cohen didn’t send in his invoice until late December, so his 4 months late claim is nonsense.”
    Reckon anyone here will recognise the truth of what you said there, RBG? Maybe admit that the story is rigged, distorted, weighed with untruth to discredit Mr Little?
    You reckon they might?
    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

    No. They won’t. Just as they won’t acknowledge the seriousness of the Sabin/Key story. If you don’t talk about it, it doesn’t exist.
    You know that.

    Like

  14. Andrei's avatar Andrei says:

    Robert the Sabin story is trivial – it doesn’t matter

    Nor does this invoice story

    The Skycity deal did matter given that it involved taxpayers money going to a parasitic and powerful industry and that was a serious misstep on J, Key’s part.

    Still hopefully the penny has dropped and the message that the public will not tolerate their money being used for this purpose has been received and that will be the end of the matter,

    Focus on the things that you perceive will make this country a good place for your children and grand children and forget the petty ephemeral “scandals” which will not even be footnotes in future histories of this era

    If you do that while I might not agree with you I will at least respect your opinion

    Like

  15. RBG's avatar RBG says:

    Actually Andrei it does matter whether or not the PM knew Sabin was under investigation by the police when he appointed him to head the Law and Order select committee and its more important than Little paying a bill late and not handling the fallout well. A PM with integrity would not appoint someone under police investigation to head that (or any) Parliamentary committee. Key refuses to show the NZ public that he didn’t know about Sabin when he appointed him. But the personal failings of politicians are far less important than the major issue of whether or not we should be joining another US led war. Lives matter more than reputations.

    Like

  16. Andrei – I agree with you about the Skysore. If it’s wasting public money you are concerned about, then the by-election and its associated cost, paid for by the taxpayer of New Zealand, will concern you, especially if you consider that evidence points to Key knowingly allowing Sabin to stand for the seat when it was clear that he’d be vacating it in disgrace at this later point. How much will the bi-election cost the taxpayer? That’s something I don’t consider trivial. The $45 million Novopay “penalty”? How about that? That must upset you also, if wasting taxpayer money is the measure of your interest. Or have you not been following that story. Joyce buried it, as National does when it’s hiding information from the public, in a news release at the weekend, all the while covering the front-pages with this tripe about an unpaid bill.
    Focus on the things that you perceive will make this country a good place for your children and grand children” – believe me, Andrei, I do, it’s just that I believe those “scandals” are indicators of the greatest threat to us all, the behaviour of our elected leaders. If they continue to behave this way, we will never make the progress we need to build the society our children and grandchildren deserve. Squabbling here on the Homepaddock annoys you, but I see the embedded behaviours that serve to preserve the behaviours I describe, demeaning, dismissive, erosive dialogues that frame “the opposition” in order for the party of the “framers” to keep power. I answer with the same and the wheedling starts. Clearly, the clientele
    here want submissive opposition, polite, respectful, tame, pliable, timorous commenters from the “other side”, but just because they demand that we “know our place” doesn’t mean we should conform to their desires, in my view.

    Like

  17. TraceyS's avatar TraceyS says:

    Robert, you don’t have to be submissive, tame, pliable or timorous in order to be polite and respectful.

    Andrei demonstrates this.

    You don’t.

    So sad to not have learned basic etiquette by your stage in life.

    Like

  18. TraceyS's avatar TraceyS says:

    RBG wrote: “[s]o you can produce a detailed timeline for that Homepaddock, how about one for when Key was briefed about the Sabin matter?”

    Has that also appeared in the NZ Herald?

    If it had then maybe she could. If it hasn’t then this is just an unfair question from someone trying to be clever.

    Like

  19. Don’t be sad, Tracey. Be afraid. Very afraid.

    The Key-knew-about-Sabin timeline hasn’t appeared in the Herald, RBG, so there’s nothing to see here. The issue doesn’t exist. Of course it’s all over the rest of the media, but if the Herald hasn’t done it, poof! nothing but hot-air.

    Oh
    My

    Goodness.

    Like

  20. “Has it also appeared in the NZ Herald?”

    Help me, Lordy!!!

    Like

  21. TraceyS's avatar TraceyS says:

    Be “afraid” of what, Robert? Are you threatening me?

    That’s not very polite now is it.

    Like

  22. Mr E's avatar Mr E says:

    Tracey indicates she is sad about Roberts level of etiquette. Robert suggests she shouldn’t be sad she should be afraid.

    Tracey asks if that is a threat.

    Curious.

    Like

  23. TraceyS's avatar TraceyS says:

    I have done the polite thing and given him the opportunity to explain himself.

    Past history suggests he probably won’t take it up.

    Like

  24. You are being silly, Tracey and Mr E is encouraging you. Don’t be silly, Mr E.
    You already are afraid that I’ll continue with my vigorous approach to debate here, Tracey. I’m confirming that I’ll not change my manners to alleviate your sadness. Your ongoing nagging is all designed to make a toothless Green of me, but I’m not that simpering creature of your imagination. Get on with the debates, Tracey and Mr E and stop your belly-aching. There are interesting things to be discussed. My use of exotic phrases and needling-words isn’t of any interest to anyone, bar you two pedants. I sympathise with Andrei where he expresses his dismay at trifles being the focus here on the Homepaddock and always wonder why no one from the Right ever address his concerns about, say, Russia, where as the Lefties here at least have a go. I’d apologies to Andrei on your behalf, only that’d inflame you for another month of anguishing over an imaginary slight.

    Like

  25. TraceyS's avatar TraceyS says:

    “Your ongoing nagging is all designed to make a toothless Green of me…”

    Why bother wasting energy on what time alone will take care of!

    Now what did you mean by “Don’t be sad, Tracey. Be afraid. Very afraid.“?

    Or was this just you, a toothy Green (capital “G”), puffing yourself up all big and scary-like?

    Why would you need to do that? I’m no threat myself. You’ve made that rather clear with your insults to my intelligence.

    Like

  26. TraceyS's avatar TraceyS says:

    Signed frothy ditz.

    Like

  27. TraceyS@12:46 – respect! Now we’re on the same wavelength 🙂
    Let’s put this nonsense behind us and get on with the toothsome debates, aye, Trace?

    Like

  28. TraceyS's avatar TraceyS says:

    “Let’s put this nonsense behind us and get on with the toothsome debates…”

    When you’ve answered my question please. I believe it is important.

    You often write about holding politicans to account. I agree that they should be. You are a politician and I am holding you to account.

    What did you mean by:

    “Don’t be sad, Tracey. Be afraid. Very afraid.“?

    And no, Robert, this is between you and I and has nothing to do with John Key.

    Like

  29. Mr E's avatar Mr E says:

    A toothsome discussion – Yeah right.

    Like

  30. Like a dog with a bone, you are, Tracey. Settle your little chihuahua-self down and leave off the obsessive gnawing and take up my invitation to debate in a mature manner. If you can cease worrying that bone, we could get down to some real discussion and cast some useful light on the dark matters of this shady Government. Come on, TraceyS! You are letting your side down. I’ve been very patient with you, but really, my magnaminity only goes so far…

    🙂

    Like

  31. TraceyS's avatar TraceyS says:

    Won’t address my question because your answer is…..shady?

    I won’t debate with you, Robert, because when the going gets tough, you revert very rapidly to personal insults and denigration, exhibit above.

    It is very reasonable to expect an answer to my question about your statement telling me to be afraid. Afraid of what? Your juvenile behavior?

    I ask you again to please clarify.

    Like

  32. I ask you to set aside your quibbling and debate like a mature adult, but you choose to quibble-on.
    What else can I do – write your stuff for you?
    Come on, gal.
    Lighten up.
    Join the conversation.

    Like

  33. Gravedodger's avatar Gravedodger says:

    For pitys sake Guyton, your defending the indefensible is pathetic and quibbling

    A simple very sorry for that oversight David here is your money and a bottle of my best Chardonay, would have been the best practice for a candidate for membership of the human race.
    Littles response both personal and per his appointed agents is bad enough but for one who represents the vulnerable and disempowered in his previous life that performance was indeed entirely indefensible.

    Like

  34. Quite right, Gravedodger.
    I’m terribly sorry, Tracey, if you took offence at anything I said. I would be the last person on earth to wish harm upon you. I think very fondly of you and think you are a wonderful person, quirks and all. Likening you to a chihuahua was too cheeky, I can see that now and though I’ve never met you, I can imagine you are more a Long-haired Persian cat than a bald Mexican yap-dog. What a great friend you have in Gravedodger! A true genn’lman, ‘im. You’d not hear inflammatory rhetoric spilling from his lips, now would we! You and he, a righteous pair, I reckon. Makes me seem like some pimple-necked yobbo without a skerrick of sense in my bones (gnaw/ignore).

    Like

Leave a comment