Feature
Forced to close
by Rebecca Macfie
The pandemic could spell the end for some businesses
For a businessman who has just lost the better part of a week’s production on account of two sick employees, Mark Skevington is remarkably philosophical. “It’s more of a nuisance than anything,” he says of the decision by health officials to order the temporary closure of Sea Products this week.
The iwi-owned company employs almost 100 workers at its Christchurch plant, where it processes mussels for export to the US, Europe, Asia and Australia. At the start of the week Skevington, Sea Products’ general manager, was ordered to shut down the night shift for three days after a female worker was found to have swine flu. By 10.30pm on Monday night, a worker on the day shift was also diagnosed with the illness, forcing the closure of that shift until Friday.
“No one else was crook,” says Skevington. Workers with sick leave or annual leave up their sleeves were able to take it, but those who had used up their entitlements went without pay.
Skevington says although the circumstances of this stoppage were unusual, the company is accustomed to dealing with breaks in production. The business is seasonal – the factory operates from October to July – and heavy rain sometimes causes shutdowns that result in workers going without pay. With luck, he says, this week’s lost time will be made up by a few extra days’ production at the end of the season.
From now on, factory supervisors will strictly monitor everyone coming onto the site. Anyone with the hint of a sniffle will be sent home, he says. “I know people are under pressure to work, but it’s about managing the risks on site.”
Skevington depicts the closure as a modest setback, but others in the business community are contemplating the implications of the pandemic with dread and confusion.
Peter Townsend, chief executive of the Canterbury Employers Chamber of Commerce, says the pandemic – coming on top of the worst economic downturn in decades – will hit some businesses hard. “A lot of companies are just hanging in there. If they lose a significant portion of their staff either directly or indirectly because they are sick or having to stay home to look after kids because schools have closed down, it could have a significant impact. A lot of them are running real lean, and they don’t have any spare capacity.”
For organisations like his, it’s relatively easy for employees to work from home if necessary. “But in a lot of companies you need to have people standing in front of a lathe or serving customers in a shop – those companies that have a heavy on-site presence are the ones that will be hit the worst.”
Workplace disputes over who bears the cost of enforced time off work seem inevitable. Should workers who are fit and well but prevented from working by a company shutdown be required to use their sick leave? Who pays if they have used up all their leave? What about workers who have to stay home to look after perfectly healthy children whose schools and childcare centres have been shut down because some kids are infected – are they entitled to sick pay?
David Lowe of the Employers and Manufacturers Association (Northern) says all workers get five days’ sick leave, which can accumulate up to 20 days. Considering most affected workers are likely to need only three or four days off work, “sick leave should accommodate it”. If they have no sick leave, they can reach agreement with their employer to use annual leave.
But Eileen Brown, policy analyst with the Council of Trade Unions, argues workers who are not sick but prevented from working shouldn’t have to use up their leave.
Andrew Little, national secretary of the EPMU, says it’s a grey area but he argues employers in this situation should keep paying workers who have little or no sick leave. He predicts there will be disputes over sick leave when workers are forced to take time off to care for children whose schools and creches are closed.
“Where a worker has sick leave available, most employers will be accommodating … but if an employer wants to quibble, there would be legal grounds to do so, and employees and their advocates will have to argue about that. But it’s in everyone’s interest to keep this under control and if there is sick leave available it should be used.”
Brown points out the situation is unprecedented in modern times, and she believes there’s a case for some form of special leave such as that enacted in Queensland, where 20 days is available for state workers in the event of a public health emergency where workers have exhausted their sick leave entitlements.
For some businesses, the main burden of the pandemic will be absenteeism, loss of productivity and disputes over leave entitlement. For others, it will be a slump in demand.
Page 1 2 
