Law firm could take Chorus to court over workers' rights but needs more backers

Friday, 30 August 2019

Telecommunications network operator, Chorus, has reported a drop in profit as more customers move onto fibre networks.

A law firm is considering directly targeting broadband company Chorus with a 'class action' lawsuit claiming thousands of self-employed telecommunications contractors should have been treated as employees.

About 60 telecommunications workers attended a meeting hosted by Shine Lawyers in Auckland last week to discuss the potential legal action, which could result in claims for holiday and backpay and sick leave.

Shine Lawyers director Karl Robinson said it was considering action against Chorus but said no final decision had been made.

Chorus could be targeted by lawsuit but its backers admit they don't yet have the numbers.

Shine had previously indicated Chorus' prime contractor Visionstream was the most likely legal target.

The law firm has alleged that since 2011, 'Visionstream and/or Chorus' had misrepresented the true nature of the workers' engagement as telecommunications technicians working on Chorus' copper and ultrafast broadband networks.

* Chorus promises improvement after failing to prevent exploitation

* Public Service Association recruits outsourced call centre workers, saying they should be IRD staff**

Chorus and Visionstream declined to comment.

Earlier this month a group of disgruntled subcontractors launched an online petition, saying they were tied down into '21st century slavery' because they had needed to invest tens of thousands of dollars in Chorus-branded vans and specialist equipment but were paid for jobs on piece rates that had in some cases reduced.

Visionstream said at the time it had introduced a new code of practice that improved workers' rights, while Chorus said it was working hard to make changes.

Robinson said Shine was 'committed to standing up and taking action for potentially thousands of workers who may have been exploited'.

But he admitted it would need support from more workers to make the business case for legal action stack up.

'60 people is not enough. So one of the key messages of the meeting was; the more people who sign up the more chance we have of getting something off the ground.'

E tū union organiser Joe Gallagher said nothing appeared to have changed in the industry since April when Chorus promised all subcontractors a 'decent wage'.

Shine hopes to find a funding partner which would underwrite its legal action in return for a share of any pay-out made to telecommunications workers if the case was successful.

That would mean telecommunications workers who chose to be represented by Shine would not take on any financial risk.

E tū union organiser Joe Gallagher has been encouraging Chorus subcontractors to agree to be represented by Shine.

'From my perspective and from all the feedback at the meeting, everyone really says Chorus controls everything, except from a legal perspective they don't. It has to be tested,' Gallagher said.

Chorus chief executive Kate McKenzie promised in April that the company would work to ensure all its subcontractors could earn 'a decent wage'.

That was after admitting more than 100 small subcontracting firms involved in the roll-out of its UFB network might have breached labour laws, and a Chorus-commissioned report finding it had failed to protect migrant workers from exploitation.

But McKenzie said she had not considered an apology.

Gallagher said it appeared from last Tuesday's meeting that nothing had changed in the industry.

'There were some pretty harrowing stories of it being very hard for people to make any money.

'We had one couple who said they couldn't get a contract back with Visionstream because their van was 11 years-old but they were 'maxed out' with their bank and their mortgage and everything.'

People had left the meeting with 'a positive resolve', but the proof would be in the pudding, he said.

Visionstream has been a pioneer of the contracting model in telecommunications which it has promoted as providing more flexibility and opportunity.

It is understood that if an action was successful, contractors who had not agreed to be represented in the lawsuit would also be potentially able to benefit from any ruling.

Any lawsuit could have implications for the rights of contractors throughout the telecommunications and construction industries, Gallagher said.

Robinson said he was keeping an eye on legal action involving the Public Service Association which claims call centre workers who Inland Revenue insists are employed by outsourcer Madison Recruitment should legally be regarded as being employed directly by the department.

The Inland Revenue dispute, which surfaced after some call centre workers were presented with contracts that they said they initially thought were a joke, could have a bearing on any case against Chorus and Visionstream, Robinson said.

'But each case turns on its own facts as well.'