# Question 12: I rent with my partner and work rostered hours that change from week to week. Our pay can drop unexpectedly, but rent and bills don't. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. Which parties would change rules around guaranteed hours, casual work and sick leave, and what are the trade-offs? Collected 2 November 2026 [NZ Election 2026 · Edition 8 study](https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/8) ## ChatGPT Answer ID: 4f1f586a-8f11-470a-85dc-4802a9a01d65 # New Zealand 2026 election: guaranteed hours, casual work and sick leave For your situation, the most important political distinction is between having flexibility over when you work and having security over how much you earn. If your roster changes every week but your rent, power, groceries and other bills remain fixed, the rules around guaranteed hours and paid leave can make a substantial difference to your financial security. The broad political divide in the 7 November 2026 election is: - Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori: generally favour stronger worker protections and reversing or changing the Government's employment and leave reforms. - National, ACT and NZ First: supported the Government's employment reforms, including the new Employment Leave Act, and generally favour retaining more employer flexibility. There are some important differences within each group, particularly around how far parties would go to guarantee hours. ## 1. The biggest change already passed: Employment Leave Act 2026 This is particularly important to understand before voting. The National-led Government, with ACT and NZ First support, has passed the Employment Leave Act 2026. It replaces the Holidays Act, but the new rules do not begin until 6 August 2028. Until then, the existing Holidays Act rules still apply. [Employment Leave Act 2026](https://www.employment.govt.nz/news-and-updates/employment-leave-act-2026)[Employment Leave Act 2026](https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2026/48/en/latest/sections/LMS1518270/) Under the new framework, working hours are divided into categories including: - Standard hours: the hours your employer is required to offer. - Additional hours: extra hours you can refuse, with payment arrangements governed by the Act. - Casual hours: work that the employer does not have to offer and you do not have to accept. This distinction matters because your leave entitlements will be calculated differently depending on the type of hours you work. ### Why this matters to you If you regularly work variable hours, but your contract guarantees relatively few hours, you could find that some of your actual working time attracts different leave treatment. The concern raised by Labour, the Greens and worker representatives is that people with variable hours, part-time work and casual arrangements could receive less paid leave or lower payments while taking leave. The Government's argument is that the new system will be simpler, more predictable for payroll and easier for employers to administer. [Employment Leave Act 2026](https://www.employment.govt.nz/news-and-updates/employment-leave-act-2026)[Employment Leave Bill](https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2026/259/en/latest/)[Policy scorecards for working people NZCTU](https://union.org.nz/election-scorecards-26/) ## 2. What each party would do ### New Zealand Labour Party Proposed stronger worker protections Labour has committed to rolling back employment changes made by the current Government. Its relevant commitments include: - Reinstating leave entitlements removed through the Holidays Act changes. - Rejecting the new contractor gateway test, which affects whether workers can challenge their employment classification. - Strengthening protections for gig and platform workers. - Restoring collective bargaining and introducing Fair Pay Agreements. - Reviewing employment law to improve worker security. Labour has also explicitly committed to restoring leave entitlements, although its published policy does not yet set out a complete alternative system for guaranteed weekly hours. What this could mean for you: More protection against losing entitlements through variable-hour arrangements, and potentially stronger bargaining power over your employment conditions. Trade-off: More obligations for employers and potentially less flexibility in rostering and staffing. Labour would need to turn its broad commitments into detailed legislation to guarantee a particular minimum income. Source: [Labour – Fairer Workplaces](https://www.labour.org.nz/fairer-workplaces?utm_source=chatgpt.com). [Release: Labour’s plan to deliver a fairer deal for workers](https://www.labour.org.nz/news/release-labour-s-plan-to-deliver-a-fairer-deal-for-workers/)[Fairer Workplaces](https://www.labour.org.nz/fairer-workplaces) ### Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand Strongest explicit worker-protection direction The Greens have a particularly relevant employment platform for people in insecure work. Their proposals include: - Stronger protections for casual, contract and gig workers. - Mandatory overtime pay or time off in lieu for hours worked beyond contracted hours. - Increasing minimum annual leave from four to five weeks. - Raising the minimum wage to the Living Wage. - Removing trial periods. - Stronger collective bargaining and union access. The Greens opposed the Employment Leave Act, arguing that its treatment of part-time and variable-hour workers could leave people worse off. What this could mean for you: If you have contracted hours but regularly work more, the proposed overtime protections could help ensure those extra hours are recognised and compensated. It could also make it harder for employers to use insecure arrangements to avoid employment obligations. Trade-off: Higher employment costs and more regulation for businesses. Some employers may respond by reducing overtime opportunities or being more cautious about hiring. Source: [Retail NZ – Employment election policy comparison](https://retail.kiwi/insights-media/election-hub/employment/?utm_source=chatgpt.com). [Employment](https://retail.kiwi/insights-media/election-hub/employment/)[Employment Leave Bill](https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2026/259/en/latest/) ### Te Pāti Māori Supports reversing the leave reforms Te Pāti Māori opposed the Employment Leave Act and other Government employment changes. Its parliamentary position has included opposition to: - Changes weakening collective bargaining. - The contractor gateway test. - Reductions in personal grievance protections. - The replacement of the Holidays Act. It supports stronger protections for workers, particularly those vulnerable to insecure employment. What this could mean for you: Its voting record points towards retaining stronger worker entitlements and opposing changes that could disadvantage people with variable hours. Trade-off: There is less detailed, published 2026 policy on exactly how it would redesign guaranteed-hours and casual-work rules. Its opposition to the current law should not be mistaken for a fully specified alternative. [Employment](https://retail.kiwi/insights-media/election-hub/employment/)[Policy scorecards for working people NZCTU](https://union.org.nz/election-scorecards-26/) ### National Party Supports the existing reforms National has supported the Employment Leave Act and the wider employment reforms introduced by the coalition. Its approach prioritises: - Lower compliance costs for employers. - Greater flexibility in employment arrangements. - Simpler leave calculations. - Greater flexibility for businesses to manage staffing requirements. National has not announced a specific commitment to introduce stronger guaranteed weekly hours for workers in your situation. What this could mean for you: Employers may retain greater freedom to adjust staffing and offer additional work when demand changes. Trade-off: That flexibility can benefit businesses, but it does not necessarily give workers the predictable minimum income they need to meet fixed expenses. [Employment](https://retail.kiwi/insights-media/election-hub/employment/)[Policy scorecards for working people NZCTU](https://union.org.nz/election-scorecards-26/) ### ACT New Zealand Most strongly focused on employer flexibility ACT has been a major supporter of the Employment Leave Act. Its employment philosophy places emphasis on: - Reducing employment regulation. - Giving employers more flexibility. - Making leave calculations easier for payroll. - Reducing restrictions on employment arrangements. ACT also supports freezing the adult minimum wage for three years and introducing a 12-month training wage for workers under 20. What this could mean for you: Your employer would retain considerable flexibility in organising work and staffing. Trade-off: There would be less emphasis on introducing additional statutory guarantees to protect people whose hours and income fluctuate. [Employment](https://retail.kiwi/insights-media/election-hub/employment/)[Policy scorecards for working people NZCTU](https://union.org.nz/election-scorecards-26/) ### New Zealand First Supported the existing leave reforms NZ First supported the Employment Leave Act as part of the governing coalition. It is worth distinguishing NZ First from ACT: NZ First supports some worker-focused measures, including increasing the minimum wage above inflation over the next three years according to the NZCTU's election scorecard. However, on the specific question of repealing the Employment Leave Act, NZ First's position is to retain it. There is no clearly established separate 2026 commitment from NZ First to introduce substantially stronger guaranteed-hours protections. What this could mean for you: Some support for wage increases, but no clear commitment to protect your minimum weekly income if your roster shrinks. [Policy scorecards for working people NZCTU](https://union.org.nz/election-scorecards-26/)[PF012: Jobs and unemployment · AI election answers](https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/3/questions/bcb5e5bc-b63b-4169-8295-e03c3d7002e4/) ## 3. Comparison at a glance | Party | Stronger guaranteed-hours protections | Casual-work protections | Reverse Employment Leave Act? | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Labour | Supports stronger worker protections; details developing | Yes | Yes | | Greens | Stronger contracted-hours protections | Yes | Yes | | Te Pāti Māori | Supports stronger worker protections | Supports stronger protections | Yes | | National | No major new commitment identified | Retains current framework | No | | ACT | No major new commitment identified | Employer flexibility | No | | NZ First | No major new commitment identified | No major separate reform identified | No | One important qualification: a party opposing the Employment Leave Act does not automatically mean it will introduce a guaranteed minimum number of weekly hours. These are separate policy questions. [Employment](https://retail.kiwi/insights-media/election-hub/employment/)[Policy scorecards for working people NZCTU](https://union.org.nz/election-scorecards-26/)[Fairer Workplaces](https://www.labour.org.nz/fairer-workplaces) ## 4. Sick leave: an especially important difference This is one of the biggest practical issues for someone whose income changes week to week. Current rules (until August 2028): - Eligible employees receive 10 days of paid sick leave annually. - You generally become eligible after six months of continuous employment, subject to the alternative hours-worked test. - The entitlement applies to eligible full-time, part-time and casual employees. - Sick leave can cover you, your partner, children and other dependants. Importantly, being part-time does not automatically mean you only receive half the current 10-day entitlement. [Taking sick leave](https://www.employment.govt.nz/leave-and-holidays/sick-leave/taking-sick-leave)[Employment Leave Act 2026](https://www.employment.govt.nz/news-and-updates/employment-leave-act-2026) From August 2028 under the new Act: Leave will operate through an hours-based system. This changes how entitlements are accumulated and paid. Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori want the legislation repealed before it takes effect. National, ACT and NZ First supported it and have indicated they will retain it. For you, the crucial question is whether you accumulate enough paid sick leave to protect your income when you or your partner becomes unwell. A person working fewer hours or with irregular shifts could be particularly affected by the new calculations. ## 5. Guaranteed hours: arguably your biggest financial issue I would actually put guaranteed hours ahead of sick leave when considering your particular circumstances. Consider this example: Illustrative weekly income Assume your contract guarantees 20 hours at $28 per hour. Guaranteed weekly gross pay # $560 20 hours × $28 If roster drops to 12 hours # $336 12 hours × $28 Weekly income lost # -$224 Illustrative figures before tax, assuming no other contractual payments or compensation. Even if your employer needs fewer workers that week, your rent and bills do not decrease by $224. There are three employment protections worth looking at: 1. Guaranteed minimum hours: Your employer must pay you for your contracted hours, even if they don't provide enough work. 2. Availability provisions: If your employer requires you to be available beyond guaranteed hours, a valid availability provision generally needs reasonable compensation. 3. Shift cancellation protections: Your employment agreement must contain reasonable notice and compensation provisions for cancelling shifts. These protections are important because changing rosters do not automatically mean your employer can reduce your guaranteed contractual hours. I would like to emphasise that none of the six major parties has provided a sufficiently clear, comprehensive election commitment to guarantee every variable-hours worker a stable minimum weekly income. ## 6. What are the trade-offs for someone renting? Here is how I would evaluate the different approaches against your household's financial priorities. | Your priority | Policies most aligned with it | | --- | --- | | Predictable minimum weekly income | Stronger guaranteed-hours legislation | | Protection against casualisation | Greens, Labour, Te Pāti Māori | | Maintaining sick leave entitlements | Labour, Greens, Te Pāti Māori | | Higher minimum wage | Labour, Greens, NZ First, Te Pāti Māori | | Employer flexibility to change rosters | National, ACT, NZ First | | Simpler payroll and leave administration | National, ACT, NZ First | There are genuine economic trade-offs. - Stronger guaranteed-hours rules could make household income more predictable, but might lead employers to reduce guaranteed positions or offer fewer additional shifts. - Stronger casual-work protections could discourage employers from using casual contracts to avoid ongoing obligations, but could make short-term staffing more expensive. - More generous sick leave provides better income protection, but increases employment costs. - Greater employer flexibility can help businesses respond to changing demand, but leaves more income uncertainty with workers. The important distinction is that flexibility is not necessarily bad. The question is who carries the financial risk when business demand falls. With insecure rosters, that risk often falls on the worker. ## 7. Where I would concentrate your voting research For your circumstances, I would put the following three questions at the centre of your decision: 1. Will the party guarantee that employers cannot reduce your contracted weekly hours without your agreement? 2. Will it prevent employers from using casual arrangements for people who actually work regular, ongoing patterns? 3. Will it protect paid sick leave for part-time and variable-hours employees, rather than reducing entitlements according to hours worked? The NZ Council of Trade Unions has published a useful election comparison, including which parties support repealing the Employment Leave Act. [NZCTU – 2026 Policy Scorecards for Working People](https://union.org.nz/election-scorecards-26/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) For a separate overview of the parties' employment policies, see [Retail NZ – 2026 Employment Election Hub](https://retail.kiwi/insights-media/election-hub/employment/?utm_source=chatgpt.com). ## My overall assessment Based on the policies and parliamentary voting records available as at 1 November 2026: - The Greens have some of the clearest proposals for stronger protections around contracted hours, overtime and insecure work. - Labour offers a broader programme to reverse employment changes and restore leave entitlements, although its guaranteed-hours proposals need more detail. - Te Pāti Māori has consistently opposed the relevant reductions in worker protections, but has less detailed published policy on the precise arrangements you are asking about. - National, ACT and NZ First are more likely to retain the current Government's direction on employment flexibility and the new leave system. I wouldn't base your decision solely on which party promises the biggest minimum-wage increase. If your employer can reduce your weekly hours substantially, a higher hourly rate might not compensate for the lost income. For a renting household with variable wages, the most valuable protection may be a reliable minimum amount of paid work each week, rather than simply a higher hourly wage. One additional thing I would recommend: check whether your current employment agreement specifies guaranteed hours, availability requirements and shift-cancellation compensation. Those details can make a difference to your rights even before the election changes anything. ## Gemini Answer ID: 93162774-e9ff-4492-9fa3-7cf243c03b2a For workers balancing fluctuating rostered hours, variable income, and fixed expenses like rent, the regulatory framework governing guaranteed hours, casual arrangements, and leave entitlements is a central issue. The political landscape divides parties into two main approaches: the **National-led coalition (National, ACT, NZ First)**, which has implemented workplace law changes aimed at flexibility and lowering compliance costs for businesses, and the **left-bloc and minor parties (Labour, Greens, Te Pāti Māori)**, which advocate for stronger worker protections, collective bargaining, and income security. --- ### How Parties Approach Guaranteed Hours, Casual Work, and Leave #### 1. National, ACT, and New Zealand First (The Current Government) This bloc has focused heavily on structural adjustments to employment legislation to streamline business costs and accommodate flexible work arrangements. * **Leave & Roster Changes:** The coalition passed the **Employment Leave Bill**, which alters how leave entitlements are calculated—particularly for workers whose hours or pay rates vary from week to week. It provides a standardized framework (such as an upfront leave compensation percentage for additional or casual hours) intended to simplify calculations for irregular rosters. * **Casual & Fixed-Term Work:** The government generally supports flexible contracting models, maintaining that strict statutory requirements on hours can discourage businesses from hiring staff whose demand fluctuates. * **Trade-offs:** * *For workers:* Critics (including unions and opposition parties) argue that these changes can result in lower overall leave accruals for variable-hour and part-time workers, leaving them more vulnerable when hours drop unexpectedly. * *For employers/economy:* Proponents argue that the framework reduces administrative complexity, avoids unintended windfall costs for businesses, and preserves the flexibility needed to keep hiring workers on variable rosters. #### 2. Labour, Green Party, and Te Pāti Māori (The Opposition Parties) This bloc advocates for enhanced security, minimum income guarantees, and stronger collective rights to protect workers from volatility. * **Guaranteed Hours & Roster Security:** Labour and the Greens have historically pushed back against exploitative casualization. They support mechanisms that prevent "zero-hour contracts" and ensure workers on regular, predictable rosters are given stable, guaranteed minimum hours matching their actual working patterns. * **Sick Leave & Holidays:** They generally favor expanding leave protections rather than restricting them, opposing legislation that scales back entitlements for part-time or irregular workers. * **Collective Bargaining:** The left bloc historically champions industry-wide or collective bargaining structures (such as Fair Pay Agreements, which were repealed by the current government) to lift baseline conditions, sick leave, and base pay in industries characterized by irregular or low-wage work. * **Trade-offs:** * *For workers:* Greater income predictability, robust safety nets when hours drop, and stronger legal recourse if hours are arbitrarily cut. * *For employers/economy:* Businesses argue that rigid scheduling mandates and increased minimum entitlements raise operational costs, make rostering inflexible during economic downturns, and can ultimately lead to reduced hiring or higher consumer prices. --- ### Key Trade-offs to Consider for Your Vote When deciding how to cast your vote, your choice largely weighs **flexibility and business cost-efficiency** against **income security and regulatory protection**: 1. **Flexibility vs. Predictability:** Laws that make it easier for employers to manage fluctuating workflows via casual or variable hours keep businesses agile, but they pass the financial risk of a slow week directly onto you and your partner's household budget. Conversely, locking in guaranteed hours shields you from sudden drops in pay, but businesses may respond by reducing total headcounts or tightening overall scheduling. 2. **Leave Accrual Fairness:** Rules that simplify leave for irregular hours aim to find a mathematical average, but workers with highly volatile rosters often find themselves disadvantaged compared to standard 9-to-5 full-time employees. Parties proposing stricter leave enforcement prioritize ensuring no worker loses out, even if it increases administrative burdens for payroll systems. ## Google AI Mode Answer ID: 9f026ec1-acb7-4bda-986e-f229694bb130 Navigating fluctuating rostered hours while trying to keep up with fixed costs like rent and power is a major financial strain. In the lead-up to the November 2026 New Zealand general election, political parties offer contrasting approaches to workplace relations, security of hours, and leave entitlements. * * * **Left/Centre-Left Parties (Labour, Green Party)** Parties on this side of the spectrum focus heavily on increasing job security, expanding collective bargaining, and protecting baseline leave entitlements. * **Labour Party (Fairer Workplaces & Fair Go Law)** * **Proposed Changes:** Labour proposes reintroducing industry-wide sector bargaining (similar to the repealed Fair Pay Agreements) to lift minimum standards and wages in low-paying or precarious sectors. They also advocate for minimum wage adjustments tied to inflation and policies aimed at curbing exploitative casual/contractor practices (such as rules targeting platform work). * **The Trade-Offs:** * _Pros:_ Greater potential for baseline stability, standardized minimum hours or conditions in specific industries, and better protection against sudden pay cuts. * _Cons:_ Business groups and employer lobbies often argue that industry-wide bargaining and rigid mandates increase operational costs, which can lead businesses to reduce total hiring, slow down wage growth, or raise consumer prices. * **Green Party** * **Proposed Changes:** The Greens strongly oppose any scaling back of leave entitlements, advocate for strengthening protections for precarious and platform workers (like gig economy workers), and support expanding baseline safety nets for workers with irregular hours. * **The Trade-Offs:** * _Pros:_ Prioritises worker wellbeing, health, and income security during illness or reduced hours. * _Cons:_ Critics and center-right parties contend that heavier regulation and mandates make small-to-medium businesses less flexible and more hesitant to take on staff with unpredictable workflows. * * * **Centre-Right/Right Parties (National, ACT, NZ First)** Parties currently in or aligned with the governing coalition emphasize labour market flexibility, business confidence, and reducing compliance costs for employers. * **National Party** * **Proposed Changes:** National's approach centres on maintaining and refining current employment settings rather than adding new rigid mandates. They previously repealed Fair Pay Agreements to return flexibility to individual workplace negotiations and focus on economic settings that encourage business hiring rather than prescribing guaranteed hours by law. * **The Trade-Offs:** * _Pros:_ Maximizes business flexibility, which National argues encourages companies to create and maintain jobs and remain open to flexible or rostered staffing arrangements without heavy legal overhead. * _Cons:_ Workers bear more volatility. Fluctuating rostered hours and casual arrangements mean less predictable income, leaving employees vulnerable to sudden drops in take-home pay with fewer statutory protections against underemployment. * **ACT New Zealand** * **Proposed Changes:** ACT pushes for deregulation of the labour market, arguing that personal freedom to contract individual terms between employer and employee works best. They generally oppose blanket mandates on sick leave extensions, minimum hour guarantees, or collective sector bargaining. * **The Trade-Offs:** * _Pros:_ High flexibility for both nimble businesses and workers who specifically prefer variable, independent, or contract work styles. * _Cons:_ Substantially lower security for workers who rely on stable, predictable weekly income to meet fixed living costs like rent. Power dynamics in low-wage or fragmented industries typically tilt heavily toward the employer. * * * **Summary: What It Means for Your Situation** * If you vote **Labour or Green** , you are backing policies designed to use government regulation and collective bargaining to smooth out income volatility, protect sick leave, and place tighter bounds on casual or irregular work. The risk is that tighter rules might make employers more defensive or cautious with scheduling and hiring. * If you vote **National or ACT** , you are supporting a flexible labour market framework that prioritises business ease-of-operation. The benefit is a fluid job market, but the drawback for you is continuing uncertainty and vulnerability when your rostered hours drop unexpectedly, with fewer legislative mechanisms to force guaranteed minimum stability. ## AI Overviews Answer ID: b994023f-4d57-4c83-83a8-bba4795dd700 In the **2026 New Zealand general election** , the rules surrounding guaranteed hours, casual work, and sick leave are major battlegrounds. The debate centers around the **Employment Leave Act 2026** (passed by the National-ACT-NZ First coalition to replace the Holidays Act in 2028), which fundamentally shifts how leave is earned. Here is how the major parties propose to handle your situation, along with the trade-offs of each approach: * * * 1\. National, ACT, and NZ First (The Coalition) The governing coalition passed the [Employment Leave Act 2026](https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2026/48/en/latest/) to simplify payroll compliance for businesses and provide immediate cash options for flexible workers. * **Sick Leave:** Instead of everyone getting 10 flat days of sick leave per year, leave **accrues based on "standard hours"** specified in your contract (at a rate of 0.0385 hours per standard hour worked). * **Casual & Rostered Work:** If you work extra hours on top of your contracted "standard hours," or if you are classified as casual, you **do not earn extra sick leave or annual leave** on those hours. Instead, you receive a **12.5% "leave compensation payment"** paid out upfront in your pay packet. * **Guaranteed Hours:** Retains a business-friendly environment with minimal restrictions on flexible scheduling, meaning roster fluctuations remain legal. **⚖️ The Trade-offs:** * **Pros:** You get a cash boost (12.5%) on your paycheck immediately for any extra or casual hours you pick up, which can help cover bills during high-earning weeks. It gives employers more predictability, making them more willing to offer casual or ad-hoc shifts. * **Cons:** If your roster drops unexpectedly, or if you work a lot of non-standard hours, your total safety net shrinks. Casual workers lose access to legal sick leave entirely, and part-time or irregular workers face reduced total leave hours if they need to call in sick. * * * 2\. Labour Party Labour strongly opposes the Employment Leave Act 2026 and has committed to **repealing or heavily amending it** if elected to form a government. * **Sick Leave:** Labour intends to restore the universal minimum baseline, ensuring that all workers—including part-time and irregular workers—maintain a **guaranteed 10 days of sick leave per year** regardless of their exact hourly breakdown. * **Casual & Rostered Work:** Labour opposes tying leave strictly to "standard hours" because it penalizes rostered and casual workers whose incomes and hours fluctuate. They plan to calculate leave pay so that it reflects what you _actually_ earn, including your usual overtime or rostered allowances. * **Guaranteed Hours:** While specific 2026 platform text on roster changes is tight, Labour historically aims to strengthen rules around "availability clauses," ensuring workers cannot be left on call without fair compensation or guaranteed baseline hours. **⚖️ The Trade-offs:** * **Pros:** Provides a reliable income safety net. If you or your partner get sick during a low-income week, you are guaranteed full day-based sick pay rather than fractional hours, ensuring your rent can still be paid. * **Cons:** You lose the 12.5% immediate cash-in-hand payout on extra hours. Some employers argue that stricter baseline requirements and higher sick leave costs make them more hesitant to hire extra staff or offer additional rostered shifts during peak times. * * * 3\. The Green Party & Te Pāti Māori Both parties push for more aggressive, pro-worker reforms than Labour and want to dismantle the current coalition's workplace changes entirely. * **Sick Leave:** They support repealing the Employment Leave Act. The Greens advocate for expanding minimum leave entitlements (such as moving towards 5 weeks of annual leave) and securing comprehensive sick leave access from day one. * **Casual & Rostered Work:** The Greens have proposed **automatic union membership** as the default setting for new employees (with an opt-out option) to give retail, hospitality, and rostered workers collective bargaining power to fight erratic scheduling. Te Pāti Māori seeks to legislatively eliminate youth/starting wages and completely outlaw practices that weaken sector-wide protections. * **Guaranteed Hours:** Both parties support strengthening definitions around employee vs. contractor tracking and mandating that rostered workers have predictable, living-wage guaranteed hours to prevent sudden income drops. **⚖️ The Trade-offs:** * **Pros:** Maximizes financial security and structural predictability for renters. Erratic roster changes would be heavily restricted, and your baseline income would be protected by robust collective agreements and expanded leave access. * **Cons:** Business groups warn these strict regulations drastically increase labor costs and decrease workplace flexibility. This could cause employers to reduce overall operating hours or cut casual roles entirely to avoid the strict compliance costs. * * * Summary Comparison Policy Area| National / ACT / NZ First| Labour Party| Green Party / Te Pāti Māori ---|---|---|--- **Sick Leave Calculation**| Accrues in hours based _only_ on "standard contracted hours".| Restores flat, universal day-based baseline (minimum 10 days).| Protects universal baselines; seeks to expand overall leave limits. **Casual/Extra Hours**| No sick leave accrual; gives a **12.5% cash payout** instead.| Earns full leave benefits based on actual hours and true pay rates.| Rejects casualization; aims to convert casual roles into stable jobs. **Roster / Income Stability**| Maximizes business flexibility to adjust hours based on demand.| Seeks protections against uncompensated availability clauses.| Advocates for mandatory guaranteed living-wage hours and default union power. To help me tailor this overview, are there **specific industries** you and your partner work in (like retail, healthcare, or hospitality), or are you interested in how these parties plan to address **rental housing security** alongside work rules?