wage inflation

After calling for employers to exercise moderation in giving wage and salary increases, the Reserve Bank's wage bill has grown by 18% in the last year. The Herald points out that the rise

takes into account a rise in staff numbers to 223 full-time equivalents from 218 in 2004/5, it still represents a 15.4 per cent average rise in remuneration per employee to $96,860 from $83,944.

Which, compared to the NZ Income Survey is well above the 4% pay rise given to the average worker this year. In real terms, the average wage is only just keeping in line with inflation, the CPI for the year to June 06 was 4%.

That the RBNZ isn't keeping inflating between 1-3% - missing it's targets - clearly doesn't have any relation to how the reward their staff. It demonstrates that workers at the top end of the wage spectrum are treated spectacularly differently from those at the bottom. As the RBNZ forks out 15% extra for their staff without blinking, those wanting just over half that are punished for daring to suggest it.

Interesting to note also, from the Income Survey that while females still lag behind their men on average incomes ($473 for women vs $754 for men av p/w), they are closing the gap faster than they have for many years (up 7.1% for women vs 2.1% for men). Let's hope it's even closer next year.

exclusive nonsesnse

What I don't get about the the Exclusive Brethren's exemption to labour laws is this:

If you run a business in New Zealand, it's safe to assume that you're going to have contact with people who you disagree with politically and religiously. Some of your employees and contractors will hold different beliefs, the employees of your suppliers are bound to be of different faiths - especially if you source raw materials offshore (i.e. China) - AND they're going to change as people leave. Customers in particular - regardless of whether you are a wholesaler or retailer - are going to be varied to a very strong degree.

So it's fine for the Church to insist that it's members not associate with outsiders, that they lobby (to outsiders) for laws allow for them to be treated above the law, but if they need to make money, all that doesn't matter. Preventing your followers from accessing modern civilisation while engaging in capitalist behaviour for the benefit of the Church is on par with with the plight of North Korea's citizens and the indulgences of Kim Jong-il.

I don't believe that the EB's pleas to get Union officials off their workplaces is about remaining separated from others. Sue Bradford quoted someone from the EB in her speech in favour of the law (Hat tip: RB):

Separation is maintained from all groups, unions or associations of a business, shareholding, property, political, pleasure, social, medical, or superannuational (sic) nature. We have found in Jesus a satisfaction nothing in this passing world can compare with. Additionally, we are also governed by the scriptures as to employing or being employed. There is special concern to maintain inviolate the direct employer to employee relationship.

Which is to say: our employee's aren't allowed to join unions, which of course would be illegal even for the EB. But for employees of small and medium businesses, it's extremely difficult to join a union. Mostly because unions don't have the resource to bargain collective agreements for a handfull of employees - compare Progressive stores (one company, unions are involved) to Foodstuffs stores (many owner operated companies, little union involvement) .

The EB isn't an organisation that has the betterment of it's members at it's core (see RB again), it's an organisation devoted to power, money and control of it's members. They're not in the politics game to protect their right to practice their religion. They're in it to advance their cult.

Section 24 of the ERA needs to be repealed - not becuase Labour wants to hit back at the EB - but because no group should be exempt from the law because of their beleifs.

marfat et prieur

Today the Supreme Court rejected a vexatious leave to appeal an Appeal Court decision bought by Alain Marfat and Dominique Prieur to prevent TVNZ from screening footage they recorded of the pair pleading guilty to the manslaughter of Fernando Pereira. The Supreme Court in delivering its verdict was very unimpressed in the appeal, summarising that

We have not been satisfied that this is a proper case to be heard by this Court, directed as it is to a discretionary decision which has already been reviewed and confirmed by the Court of Appeal. The decision below turned upon a balancing exercise that involved the application of settled criteria to the particular facts. This is a very unusual case, which, an appeal on the merits having been heard and determined by the Court of Appeal, no longer raises any question of general or public importance. We are satisfied that we would not be assisted on the question of leave by having an oral hearing. We are also far from persuaded that the Courts below have erred in their assessment, let alone that it is arguable that they were plainly wrong.

Which is the correct decision. That someone who has pleaded guilty to manslaughter (and being responsible for the attempted murder of 11 others, not to mention terrorism) can claim any rights to privacy is idiocy. I'd accept their augment if they were innocent - but to commit an act of espionage against a country whose only crime was to allow freedom of expression of its citizens and visitors is reprehensible. The pair - while possibly being only accessories to the crime - served only 2 years out of a 17 year sentence thanks to a UN negotiated release.

They got off light.

The least they can do is stop complaining. Ultimately Marfat or Prieur were not responsible for the decision to attack the Rainbow Warrior, but their Government. Their ludicrous action formed part of our history, and that is the most important reason why we should see those tapes.

The Supreme Court was right in dismissing the leave to appeal, which I feel is an example of the robustness of the newly formed institution. It's fantastic that their cases and decisions are available for anyone who cares to look. To have the Privy Council decide cases of national importance for New Zealand is silly today. I'm glad that they're getting a new building, and pleased that the plans are to create an impressive building to serve as the symbol of the institution as in other countries.

buy nz made - before it's all gone

I had a chance to speak to a local manufacturer today who sells into both Australian and New Zealand supermarket chains. His experience of late has confirmed what many had fared about the buyout of Progressive Enterprises by Woolworths Australia - that NZ based suppliers are fucked. In an environment where the price grocery retailers pay for their goods have remained relatively static, suppliers here are now forced to match terms with Australian products or lose access to supermarket shelves. In theory, there's opportunity for NZ suppliers to gain access to Australia, but the reality is that the margins they get from NZ supermarkets is low, and a lack of cashflow for the smaller suppliers to invest in equipment to be able to ramp their output serving four million people to output serving six times that number makes quick expansion impossible. The same lack of liquidity prevents manufacturers from acquiring horizontally - meaning business that are in trouble simply disappear, rather than being bought by another NZ operation.

All the while, the Woolworth's Australia has made a very nice profit, reporting in the latest half year that
- EBIT was up by 31.5% to $A902.4 million.
- Supermarket (Oz&NZ) sales up $A2.4 billion to $A16 billion.
- NZ Supermarket sales up 4.3%
- Food inflation was 1.5-2%

The cost of doing business was also down (read: squeezing suppliers), with

80% of these cost savings were reinvested in gross margin with the balance going to increase EBIT margin.

(PDF here)

So we - the consumer - is left with little choice in what we buy, even if we are swayed by the Green's Buy NZ Made Campaign. It's starting already - you may have noticed your favorite Basics product replaced with the Oz made home brand. Little wonder we're flocking to Australia, pretty soon we'll be left without any food.

map this!

Google Maps now features New Zealand street level maps. (Hat Tip: NZBC).

Doesn't (yet) have the functionality to search for locations or driving directions. They'll get there, presumably, which has got to worry the other players in the NZ online map business - Wises and TUMONZ - who have both invested a lot of time and money into their services. We'll still be typing in the above for some time, out of habit. That'll stop when it intergrates into the main google search like GImages has.

However - and it is a big however - Google's product is a lot more fun to use, and it's open to mashing, allowing groups of people & businesses to create a common set of places, directions and labels. Imagine a retailer being able to provide custom directions to their customers from the shoppers home to the store, complete with icons signposting various store locations, layered with phone, carparking and service information, all for the cost of modifying their website. Current uses are, as always, less practical than all that. If the Earth were a Sandwich asks just that, and a lot a time can be wasted there. Google Maps Mania is the blog dedicated to mashing GMaps. A more cynical view here.

Yahoo! has provided a maps service for years, and I'm sure altavista or excite did at one stage too. Google's Mashing API is the killer app for maps (at the least), and while the other USA players may be able adapt to the coming of Google, the local players won't.

Press 1

I'm jet-setting off to Palmerston North tommorow - no thanks to my father, who originanally told me to be there on the 22nd, and only informed me after I had booked and paid for my flights that he'd given me the wrong dates. I'd booked my tickets, as one does in today's age, online, and because I'd done so I thought I'd be boarding a long haul telephone trip to sort it out. Then the most wonderful thing happened, a person - a real live one - answered the phone, after 6pm. And, after grovelling to the CSR I has booked new flights (albeit at impossible times of the day). My hat off to House of Travel, whose service was in stark contrast to my most attempt to call a company I do business with.

This lot, who recently ground the country to a stop, were impossible to get information out of. Admitedly, after a day of faults they decided to put up a message saying they were broken, but only if you managed to call the right number. One would assume their main portal, 0800 000 000, would at have a way to naviage to the faults/broadband line. But no, you don't even get 'if you are expeirencing trouble with a telecom product or service, hang up, step away from the phone, and don't contact us until you pay your bill'.

liquor.shop.co.nz

The liquor market in NZ is hotting up with Progs, Foodies and the Warehouse set to shake up the scene over the next few months. The move by the big two supermarket isn't supprising given international licencing conditions have given their overseas counterparts plenty of profit in the sprit and RTD market.

But we're not going to see a pice war - not unless one of the big two flinches, despite The Mill's opening of Liquor.co stores. Partly because the supermarkets will ignore Liquor.co, and partly because Liquor's parallel import strategy will hamper direct comparative pricing, and keep the the budget brands (inc. The Warehouse) happy with their margins.

(Liquor.co isn't to be confused with liquor.com on Queen St, neither of which have an internet presence...)

Despite what the supermarkets would have you believe, compared to dry grocery lines, liquor has a good margin - and the high value, again compared to Weet-Bix and tinned peaches, high volume nature of the category will keep all the players interested in keeping prices stable.

It's bad enough to them that Kiwis buy well over half of all liquor when it's discounted, when margins are squeezed in favour of volume. They can't afford to push loss leaders year round against each other because neither Progs or Foodies will win. They really have only two options in the market: push smaller players out or let their competitors etch away at their market share. It's going to be a combination of both - probably consolidating into 4 or 5 players with very few independants stadning firm in small towns and licencing trust areas.

Which is why growing the category is the only option for them. Bring on sprits. Bring on the store within a store model. Yes, less players=evil in a lot of cases. But with licencing laws unlikely to relax in New Zealand in the next twenty years, large liquor retailers will continue to go out of their way to keep their licences clean from underage stings (v bad PR).

Big players are easy targets for instectors, they deliver results and publicity to the reality of underage alcohol purchases. Less players=easier targets=more vigilance.

This has got to be good for our binge drinking culture. Normalising the 18+ sale of hard sprits (and bringing it away from dodgy dealers) will create a more mature drinking culture in the country. Just look at how we looked at wine 20 years ago. I'd bet Chardonnay and Sauvignon weren't everyday words, let alone Gewurztraminer and Pinot Gris.

Yes. It's all about the money. But if the police/district and national licencing authrotities hold their nerve (as they did with the Red Sheds) and keep on top of the big players, we could all be better off.