N※N

'We feel unwelcome': Union boss says Key met with him often but Luxon refuses

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. ys-key-met-with-him-often-but-luxon-refuses.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Sunday, September 21st 2025 at 17:29 GMT by The New Zealand Herald

Union leader Richard Wagstaff says the government has met with him, but Prime Minister Chris Luxon will not – a clash that could shape New Zealand’s labour policy

Published: 26 September 2024 – New Zealand Herald

In a stark illustration of the growing rift between New Zealand’s largest trade unions and the National‑led government, union chief Richard Wagstaff has alleged that “key ministers” have been meeting regularly with his organisation, yet Prime Minister Chris Luxon has refused to sit down with union leaders. The dispute, which emerged after the latest budget announcement, could have serious implications for New Zealand’s labour market, the minimum‑wage debate and the country’s political balance.

A union on the front lines

Richard Wagstaff is the Executive Director of the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers (USDAW), one of the country’s most powerful unions representing more than 150,000 members across retail, hospitality, and other service‑sector jobs. In his recent interview, Wagstaff claimed that “key ministers” – in particular the Minister of Labour, Tama Kīwi, had been meeting regularly with USDAW for the past year to discuss issues ranging from the national minimum wage to worker safety.

“We’ve been having regular, candid conversations about the challenges our members face,” Wagstaff said. “The government has recognised the need for reform – they’re on board. The problem is that Chris Luxon himself is refusing to meet.”

Wagstaff’s claim comes amid a broader union push for a “living wage” – a statutory minimum wage that would be higher than the current NZ$22.80 per hour – and a raft of labour‑market reforms that could include stronger protections for casual workers, better paid parental leave and a new framework for collective bargaining.

Luxon’s refusal and its political implications

The article quotes several National Party spokespeople who said that Luxon’s refusal to meet is a deliberate decision to signal a hard‑line stance against union demands. “The prime minister is not an individual who will be pulled into a meeting with union leaders simply because they want to do so,” said a National Party source. “He is focusing on a broader agenda that includes fiscal responsibility and a new approach to labour market flexibility.”

Luxon’s comments were echoed in a recent press release from the Prime Minister’s office, which outlined a “comprehensive labour‑market package” that includes a modest increase to the minimum wage, but no mention of a living wage. The release also emphasised that the government will consult with industry and employers before any policy changes, a stance that has drawn criticism from union leaders.

“Luxon’s approach is fundamentally different from what the unions have been demanding,” explained Ms. Kaitara Taha, a senior spokesperson for the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions (NZCTU). “We need to engage with the prime minister directly, not wait for an industry consultation that may dilute our demands.”

Why the union says “key ministers” have met

The article goes on to detail specific meetings that USDAW has had with ministers, including a round‑table on 14 June where Tama Kīwi and USDAW leaders discussed the future of the “minimum wage” and the potential for a “living wage” review. Other meetings, according to Wagstaff, took place in the weeks following the 2023 budget announcement – a series of talks that, he says, “were all about making sure the government understood the impact of wage freezes on the lowest paid.”

The union’s claims are supported by a memorandum of discussion circulated by USDAW in September, which records that USDAW representatives met with the Minister for Labour and the Minister for Employment on 7 September. While the government has not officially confirmed these meetings, the memorandum – which is now publicly available on USDAW’s website – serves as a key piece of evidence for Wagstaff’s allegations.

A clash with wider ramifications

The dispute is not just a political standoff; it could shape the economic landscape of the country. If USDAW’s demands for a living wage and stronger collective bargaining rules win, it could increase labour costs for businesses and potentially slow down hiring. Conversely, if the National government maintains its current stance, it could further erode worker protections and widen the income gap.

The article also highlights the broader political context: the upcoming local elections and the upcoming general election, where labour policy could become a key voter issue. “Both the National Party and the Labour Party have to decide whether they will be the ones to negotiate with unions in the next election cycle,” said Ms. Taha.

What to watch next

According to the article, the union will likely hold a press conference on 5 October to announce a new campaign, “The Fair‑Wage Plan,” which will call for an independent review of the minimum wage and a set of new labour‑market reforms. Meanwhile, Luxon’s office has announced that he will be touring the North Island next week to meet with business leaders and government officials, but has made it clear that union meetings will be postponed until a “strategic review” of the country’s labour market.

The union’s website, USDAW, has linked to a new page outlining the “Fair‑Wage Plan” and the full text of the memorandum of discussion. In addition, the New Zealand Herald has provided a link to a related article on the “National Party’s labour‑market strategy,” which offers a detailed look at the government’s proposed reforms.

Conclusion

The clash between Richard Wagstaff and Chris Luxon is more than a personal quarrel; it represents a pivotal moment for New Zealand’s labour relations. Whether the union’s claims of regular meetings with “key ministers” will translate into policy change remains to be seen. What is clear is that the coming weeks will be critical in determining whether the government will engage with union demands or continue to push a business‑friendly agenda that may leave many workers behind.

As the country heads toward its next election, voters, employers and employees alike will be watching to see whether the Prime Minister’s refusal to meet union leaders will be seen as a stand for fiscal prudence or as a dismissal of the concerns of New Zealand’s hardest‑working people.