Labour Market Reforms and Lockouts in New Zealand
This paper reviews New Zealand’s experience of lockouts over the last nearly two decades. It employs published and unpublished official (Statistics New Zealand) data plus unofficial data on the following, hitherto ignored, dimensions of lockouts: (i) employees involved in lockouts, (ii) person-days lost due to lockouts and (iii) the average duration of lockouts. The patterns of lockouts are compared for different New Zealand politico-legislative eras from 1986 to 2004. It is found that there has been, over time, a declining trend in the incidence of person-days lost due both to strikes and to lockouts in New Zealand. But the relative incidence of person-days lost due to lockouts vis a vis strikes rose quite sharply during the middle years of the operation of the union-hostile Employment Contracts Act, 1991. Comparisons are made with Australian experience. There are some notable similarities in the pattern of lockouts in both countries, including the tendency for the average duration of lockouts to be considerably longer than the average the duration of strikes.
Volume (Year): 32 (2006)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
|Note:||Perry, L., 2006. Labour Market Reforms and Lockouts in New Zealand. Australian Bulletin of Labour, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 401-420.|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +61 8 8201 2265
Fax: +61 8 8276 9060
Web page: http://www.flinders.edu.au/sabs/nils/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Perry, L J, 2006. "Lockouts and Strikes: Some Comments on the Experience of India and Australia," Australian Bulletin of Labour, National Institute of Labour Studies, vol. 32(1), pages 74-102.
- Briggs, C, 2004. "The Return of the Lockout in Australia: a Profile of Lockouts since the Decentralisation of Bargaining," Australian Bulletin of Labour, National Institute of Labour Studies, vol. 30(2), pages 101-112.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fli:journl:26181. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Rupali Saikia)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.