Articles & Blog

The Employment Leave Bill was Introduced on 9 March 2026 and is set to replace the Holidays Act 2003.​ It has been referred to the Education and Workforce Committee and is due for a second reading by 13 July 2026.​ Problems with the Holidays Act 2003 are well known. This Bill has been described as achieving a simpler regime, with reduced administrative burden and compliance costs.​ The Bill includes a two-year transition period for employers to adapt to the new regime. Annual Leave​ Under the Bill annual leave will now accrue from an employee’s first day of work, at a minimum rate of 0.0769 hours per standard hour of work.​ Annual leave also accrues during periods of paid statutory leave, parental leave, volunteer leave, and jury service.​ Annual leave will not accrue while receiving compensation from ACC.​ Annual leave is recorded in hours (not weeks) and balances are not adjusted if the number of standard hours changes (e.g. a person changes from full to part time). Sick Leave​ Under the Bill sick leave will accrue from an employee’s first day of work, at a minimum rate of 0.0385 hours per standard hour of work.​ Employees can accumulate up to 160 hours (20 days for a standard 8 hour day, 5 days a week).​ Sick leave is taken in hours against standard hours and additional hours (e.g. hours worked under an availability provision or hours beyond those that are contracted that an employee can refuse).​ Bereavement Leave and Family Violence Leave​ These remain day-based entitlements but arise from the employee’s first day of employment. Employees may take part-days of these entitlements (e.g. a half day to attend a funeral). Employees with Multiple Roles Employees who perform multiple roles with the same employer will carry separate leave balances based on the hours worked in each role. New Casual Leave Payment Plan​ A new Leave Compensation Payment ( LCP ) scheme is proposed to replace the current pay as you go holidays scheme. This covers not just annual, but also sick leave entitlements, meaning a casual worker cannot access annual or paid sick leave, being paid ‘as you go’. This is a significant change.​ The LCP is set at 12.5% of an employee’s ordinary hourly rate, paid for all causal hours worked. Otherwise Working Day Test - Variable Employees​ An otherwise working day ( OWD ) test is created for determining entitlement to paid public holidays, this is for employees who do not have fixed days of work in their employment agreement.​ A day is an OWD if the employee has worked (or was on leave) for 50% or more of the same day of the week as the public holiday in​ the preceding 13 weeks. Key Takeaways for Employers The Bill changes holiday accrual compliance fundamentally and employers will need to be informed and ready to comply. We recommend that at this stage that employers: Consider the makeup of their workforce and the degree to which they will be impacted (e.g. high casual workforce) Consider the readiness of their payroll systems or payroll provider to ensure that they can ensure a smooth transition. Review leave entitlements in employment agreement and policies, noting that changes may be needed now to ensure the employer has not unintentionally created contractual entitlements. Our team can assist with your leave compliance, including updating employment agreements and policies, as well as assisting with employee communications around the changes once they are implemented. Disclaimer: We remind you that while this article provides commentary on employment law topics, it should not be used as a substitute for legal or professional advice for specific situations. Please seek guidance from your employment lawyer for any questions specific to your workplace.

Immigration New Zealand ( INZ ) has announced changes to the Skilled Migrant Category ( SMC ) Resident Visa that will help employers retain skilled workers and support long-term economic growth. These changes are set to take effect from August 2026. While a raft of changes have been announced, the full policy is not yet been released. We have summarized information in respect to the changes. Two new residence pathways are set to be introduced. Skilled Work Experience Pathway This pathway is for migrants in skilled roles (ANZSCO skill level 1 to 3) with at least 5 years of directly relevant work experience, including 2 years in New Zealand earning at least 1.1 times the median wage. Trades and Technician Pathway This pathway is for migrants who: work in specified ANZSCO skill level 1 to 3 trades and technician occupations. who hold a relevant Level 4 or above qualification, and who have at least 4 years of directly relevant experience gained post qualification, including 1.5 years in New Zealand earning at least the SMC median wage. English language English language test results will be valid for 5 years for applicants who hold a recognised occupational registration. Amber List If a migrant wishes to apply under one of the two new skilled pathways but works in an occupation on the Amber List, they must meet additional eligibility requirements of: At least 5 years of relevant eligible work experience in New Zealand; including 2 years of skilled work experience earning at least 1.2 times the SMC median wage. Red List If a migrant wishes to apply under one of the two new skilled pathways but works in an occupation on the Red List, they will not be eligible. Wage Settings Migrants will only need to meet the SMC median wage specific to their pathway when they start gaining skilled work experience and maintain at least that rate when applying for residence. The changes also introduce a grace period for situations where the SMC median wage increases before a migrant starts work. If a migrant begins skilled work experience within 5 months of their work visa being granted, the wage threshold that applied on the day the visa was granted will be used. Extension of Accredited Employer Work Visa Migrants who need up to 12 additional months of skilled work experience will be able to apply to extend their visa to complete it. This extension ability is scheduled to be introduce in 2027. Qualification Points New Zealand degrees will now provide 1 more qualification point than for those completed overseas. With an exception for doctoral and some master’s degrees. Applicants must provide: 1. The qualification certificate; and 2. an International Qualification Assessment ( IQA ) if the qualification was gained overseas and is not on the List of Qualifications Exempt from Assessment ( LQEA ). Quicker pathway to claiming 6 points 

Amendments to the Privacy Act 2020 will come into force on 1 May 2026, introducing a new Information Privacy Principle – IPP 3A. This change strengthens transparency obligations where personal information is collected indirectly, that is, from someone other than the individual concerned. The new principle is particularly relevant for employers and agencies who regularly receive personal information via recruiters, referrers, other professional advisers, or third‑party agencies. What does IPP 3A require? Under IPP 3A, if an agency collects personal information about an individual from a third party, it must notify the individual as soon as practicable after collection. The notification must include: confirmation that the individual’s personal information has been collected the purpose for which the information was collected who will receive the information the agency’s contact details whether the collection is required or authorised by law the individual’s rights to access and request correction of their information. This is a new and explicit obligation and goes beyond the previous general transparency requirements under IPP 3. Key exceptions IPP 3A does not apply in limited circumstances, including where: the information is publicly available collection is required or authorised by law notification would prejudice national security or reveal trade secrets. These exceptions should be applied carefully and, on a case-by‑case basis. Common workplace scenarios By way of example, IPP 3A will generally apply where personal information is received: through recruitment agencies from a client organisation about its employees from another government agency, unless a statutory exception applies. It will not apply where information is sourced solely from publicly available material, such as LinkedIn profiles. What should employers and agencies do now? In light of the new requirements, the practical “to do list” includes: Review and update privacy policies to address indirect collection and IPP 3A notification obligations. Update internal procedures to ensure individuals are notified promptly when information is received from third parties. Review templates and terms , including letters of engagement and contractor documentation, to ensure IPP 3A is appropriately reflected. Include IPP 3A in privacy training and compliance advice. Agencies should ensure not only that their documentation is compliant, but that their practices in reality align with the new notification requirements. If you would like assistance updating your privacy policies, templates, or training materials, please contact us . Disclaimer: We remind you that while this article provides commentary on employment law, health and safety and immigration topics, it should not be used as a substitute for legal or professional advice for specific situations. Please seek legal advice from your lawyer for any questions specific to your workplace. 

Illness in the workplace is a regular part of running any orga nisation, but managing it well is essential to meeting both your employment law and your health and safety obligations. Getting this balance right supports staff, protects productivity, and reduces legal risk. Employment Law From an employment law perspective, employers must approach illness issues fairly, reasonably, and with good faith. Below are four key points. Use sick leave correctly Employees are entitled to sick leave when they are unwell or caring for a dependant. Employers can request medical proof after three consecutive days of absence (or earlier if the employment agreement allows and the employer covers the cost). Avoid making assumptions about health conditions Employers must not jump to conclusions about an employee’s ability to work. Before considering any change to duties, performance expectations, or employment status, seek medical information through a fair process, always with the employee’s consent. Manage long-term or repeated illness carefully Where illness impacts an employee’s ability to perform their role, employers may need to start a medical incapacity process. This must include: Clear communication Access to relevant medical information Consideration of reasonable adjustments Genuine consultation before decisions are made A poor‑process incapacity dismissal is a most common sources of unjustified dismissal claims. Protect employee privacy Health information is sensitive information. Collect only what is reasonably necessary, store it securely, and share it strictly on a need‑to‑know basis. Health and Safety Law Under the Health and Safety at Work Act, businesses must ensure the health and safety of workers so far as is reasonably practicable. This extends to managing risks associated with illness. Prevent the spread of illness in the workplace Employers must take reasonable steps to ensure unwell staff do not pose a risk to others, particularly in roles involving vulnerable clients or high‑risk environments. Address psychosocial risks Work‑related stress, fatigue, burnout and mental illness are recognised workplace hazards, and WorkSafe expects businesses to manage them like any other risk. That includes: Monitoring workload Ensuring adequate staffing levels Providing access to support Responding early to signs of stress or deterioration Support a safe return to work A staged or modified return to work may be reasonably practicable and can reduce future injury or illness. Collaboration between the employer, employee, and medical professionals is key. Lead by example Managers play an important role in building a culture where people feel safe to stay home when sick, take breaks, and disclose health issues early. Where the Two Frameworks Meet Employment law focuses on fair process and rights, while health and safety law focuses on risk management. The crossover is significant: A failure to manage stress or workload can become both a bullying/personal greivance risk and a WorkSafe issue. Requiring an unwell employee to work can breach health and safety obligations and create an unjustified disadvantage. Managing illness well supports productivity, wellbeing, and retention. Need Help? We regularly assist clients with medical incapacity processes, managing fatigue and stress in the workplace, bullying policies and policy reviews. If you’d like advice or tailored training for your managers, our team can help . Disclaimer: We remind you that while this article provides commentary on employment law, health and safety and immigration topics, it should not be used as a substitute for legal or professional advice for specific situations. Please seek legal advice from your lawyer for any questions specific to your workplace.

Immigration New Zealand ( INZ ) and the government continue to make changes in the New Zealand visa, employer compliance, and investment visa spaces, we don’t anticipate a slowdown in changes. Skilled Residence Median Wage We had set out in our January 2026 update that INZ were looking at a new skilled residence median wage rate. INZ have now advised that from 9 March 2026, the immigration median wage will increase to NZD $35.00 per hour. This will impact all policy that is indexed to the skilled residence median wage rate including e.g. threshold for pay required to support partners and residence policy that references the skilled residence median wage rate. Further National Occupation List roles introduced under AEWV setting An additional 47 roles with skill levels 1 to have been introduced under the wider shift from ANZSCO to use of the National Occupation List ( NOL ) for AEWV applications. More stringent processing of AEWVs We are seeing more stringent processing of AEWVs, in particular when INZ assesses work experience documentation provided by applicants. It is possible INZ will continue with more stringent processing of work experience documentation submitted with visa applications. Changes to Open Work Visa Conditions From 20 April 2026, newly issued open work visas will have conditions that do not allow them to employ other people—either directly, or indirectly through a business they operate as an owner (including where the business is the named employer). Current conditions around barring open work visa holders from providing commercial sexual services, or to run or invest in a business that provides commercial sexual service will also continue to apply. In addition, Working Holiday Visa holders will be required to work for a employer, as an employee under an employment agreement or a contract for services. Working Holiday Visa holders will not be allowed to operate a business. Moving Forward The New Zealand immigration space continues to change and expect changes across 2026. Our team of specialists are ready to help with bespoke and practical advice and solutions on navigating the tricky and constantly changing immigration landscape. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you need help. Disclaimer: We remind you that while this article provides commentary on employment law, health and safety and immigration topics, it should not be used as a substitute for legal or professional advice for specific situations. Please seek legal advice from your lawyer for any questions specific to your workplace. 

The Health and Safety at Work Amendment Bill ( HSWA Bill ) has been introduced to Parliament, intended to reduce compliance costs while refocusing the system on “critical risks”. In this article we explain the key proposed changes and what this means for businesses. Focusing the System on Critical Risks The Bill seeks to change the purpose and focus of health and safety legislation from a system that requires all risks to be managed to a system focusing on critical risks. The Bill also presents a new definition for “critical risks” across two categories: Hazards already subject to strict specialist regulatory frameworks — for example, asbestos, hazardous chemicals, mining operations, and major hazard sites — along with other common workplace risks that are already covered by existing regulations. Hazards likely to result in death, notifiable illness or injury, notifiable incident or occupational disease. Proportional Duties for Small PCBU’s The Bill proposes that small PCBUs (less than 20 workers) will only need to manage critical risks, (rather than all workplace risks), while still meeting the minimum standards for worker wellbeing. All other PCBUs will be required to prioritise critical risks over other risks. Prioritising a critical risk means managing, monitoring, reviewing and revising the critical risk more frequently. PCBUs will also be able to apply a higher proportion of management resources to critical risks over other risks. Exception for Earthquake‑Prone Buildings The Bill creates a specific carve‑out for earthquake‑prone buildings. It states that if a building owner is meeting their obligations under the Building Act 2004, the PCBU does not need to take additional steps in relation to the seismic risks associated with that building, or any affected part of it, that forms part of the workplace. This includes actions such as ordering an evacuation, unless an actual emergency involving the building is underway. Officer Duties Under the HSWA officers, such as directors, partners, CEOs (and others with significant influence over the management of the PCBU) have due diligence obligations. The Bill proposes changes to the scope of officers’ due diligence obligations. Specifically, it clarifies that where a person holds more than one position (such as being both a director and a chief executive), their due diligence duty applies only to their capacity as an officer. The Bill also revises the current due diligence criteria by introducing a defined and comprehensive set of requirements. Regulators Functions The Bill also proposes changes to WorkSafe’s functions (and designated regulators, for example Maritime NZ and Civil Aviation Authority) to the following core functions: Provide guidance, advice, and information on compliance with relevant health and safety legislation; Develop, review, and recommend approved codes of practice ( ACOP ) and safe work instruments; and Monitor and enforce compliance with relevant health and safety legislation. ACOPs Reform ACOPs set out standards for duty holders compliance with the HSWA and regulations by providing detail on how to meet the standard of “reasonably practicable” in managing specific risks. Up to this point, development of ACOPs has been restricted to WorkSafe, but the intent is to expand this to encompass ACOPs prepared by employer and industry representatives. Draft ACOPs will then be sent to WorkSafe for review before being approved by the Minister. ACOPs will remain non-binding. Notifications The Bill seeks to add clarity around the duty to notify the regulator of certain serious incidents by broadening the existing definitions and incorporating specific examples — such as significant head injuries, serious eye trauma, major burns, and spinal injuries — to help clarify when the threshold for notification is met. Key Takeaways for Employers Government has signalled an intention to progress these changes with the current term, however the Bill is at early stages and will need to be considered by a select committee before progressing. We will report on its progression and any proposed changes. In the meantime, the existing provisions of the HSWA continue to apply and all duty holders should comply with these obligations until any changes become law. Disclaimer: We remind you that while this article provides commentary on employment law topics, it should not be used as a substitute for legal or professional advice for specific situations. Please seek guidance from your employment lawyer for any questions specific to your workplace.

The Employment Relations Amendment Act 2025 ( Act ) has now been passed, effective 21 February 2026, implementing several consequential changes to the Employment Relations Act 2000, specifically: Contractor gateway test changes Lowering personal grievance ( PG ) remedies for contributing behaviour of the employee The removal of PG claims for high earners Rules relating to collective agreements for new employees. For employers, the “to do list” given the amendments includes: Review and update any contractor agreements . The Act creates a new legislative gateway for contracting agreements. To ensure that the contractor is not an employee, the Act requires: that the written agreement specifies that the person in question is not an employee but rather an independent contractor. the person is not restricted from performing work for any other person except for while they are working for the other party to the contract. the person can subcontract the work. the arrangement cannot be terminated for refusal of additional work. the person had reasonable opportunity to seek independent advice before entering into the arrangement. It is important that these new requirements are reflected in any new contracting arrangements that you make and that how contracting arrangements work in practice also aligns with these criteria. Update the serious misconduct definitions in any employment agreements and policy documents. The presence of contributing serious misconduct will now prevent an employee claiming lost wages and damages for hurt and humiliation if they bring a personal grievance claim in respect of dismissal for this conduct. Employers should ensure definitions in agreements and policies are drafted to ensure maximum reliability for defence of any claims raised. Update offer documents for new employees earning over $200,000 and set a plan to change current employment arrangements within the 12 month transition period. Employees earning over $200,000 total renumeration will now be excluded from personal grievance rights for unjustified dismissal or unjustified disadvantage claims relating to the dismissal. Employers will need to decide whether or not to exclude these new changes in the relevant employment agreements and can expect negotiation with new employees earning at this level over dispute resolution, as well as with existing employees in this income bracket during the transition period. Collective Agreements for New Employees It is important to update any offer documents/templates th at are to be sent to future employees, if there is an applicable collective agreement in place. Employees are no longer automatically covered by any present collective agreement for the first 30 days of their employment. Employers are still required to inform the employee that the collective agreement exists, that they may join and how they can do so. Our team of specialists are ready to help with bespoke and practical advice and solutions on navigating the changing employment law environment. If you need any assistance with updating your policies, employment agreements or offer letters, please let us know. Disclaimer: We remind you that while this article provides commentary on employment law, health and safety and immigration topics, it should not be used as a substitute for legal or professional advice for specific situations. Please seek legal advice from your lawyer for any questions specific to your workplace.

In late 2025, the District Court set aside an improvement notice issued by WorkSafe to Pharmalink Extracts Limited ( PEL ). The notice related to alleged failures to comply with provisions of the Health and Safety at Work (Hazardous Substances) Regulations 2017 (Regulations). Background PEL uses extraction processes to obtain materials from natural materials like krill and green shell mussels. One of the extraction processes uses a mixture of carbon dioxide and ethanol under very high pressure and heat. This mixture, known as CO₂‑expanded ethanol ( CXE ), is contained inside sealed equipment. In these conditions, CXE does not behave like liquid ethanol and does not carry the same fire risk.  Despite this, in November 2024, a WorkSafe inspector issued an improvement notice because it believed ethanol, a flammable liquid, was being used in a building at PEL’s site that did not meet required safety standards. The notice said PEL must either upgrade the building to meet those standards or apply for a regulatory exemption. The Appeal PEL challenged the notice in court. It said the substance used in the extraction equipment was CXE, not ethanol. PEL explained that if there were a leak, the real risk would be a flammable gas or vapour, not a liquid, and that this risk was already being properly managed. PEL also argued that forcing it to follow rules for flammable liquids would interfere with its existing safety systems and could make things less safe for workers. For that reason, it said WorkSafe’s approach did not align with the purpose of health and safety law. The Court’s Findings The Court looked at whether WorkSafe’s decision to issue the improvement notice was unreasonable. It found that WorkSafe had misunderstood the regulations by focusing on how ethanol is classified in isolation, rather than on what substance was actually being used by PEL. process. Based on expert evidence, the Court accepted that the substance in use was CXE, which behaves differently from liquid ethanol. If a leak occurred, the real risk would be a flammable gas or vapour, not a liquid, so gas‑based controls were the correct safety measures. The Court found that WorkSafe relied on the wrong considerations and ignored relevant evidence by treating the process as if it involved separate ethanol and CO₂ under normal conditions. It also rejected the idea that WorkSafe could default to ethanol’s classification simply because CXE does not have its own formal classification. Importantly, the Court held that WorkSafe’s approach conflicted with the purpose of health and safety law, as it would have required safety controls that increased, rather than reduced, risk. For those reasons, the improvement notice was found to be unreasonable and was set aside. Practical Implications for PCBUs For PCBUs, the case confirms that health and safety compliance must be based on the substance and risks that actually exists in practice , not just the classification of component. Further, controls must be matched to the real hazard posed by the process, as applying incorrect controls can increase risk rather than reduce it. Where operations are complex or novel, early expert evidence is critical to explain how the process works and what risks genuinely arise. Disclaimer: We remind you that while this article provides commentary on employment law, health and safety and immigration topics, it should not be used as a substitute for legal or professional advice for specific situations. Please seek legal advice from your lawyer for any questions specific to your workplace.