The law graduate’s thesis examines the role of tikanga Māori (Māori law and practice) and Te Tiriti o Waitangi in the New Zealand workplace and finds more commitment is legally required to fully embed their practices whether in the office or out in the field.
“This thesis amplifies the voice of the worker and considers the real-world impact of collective agreement clauses,” says Ria, whose iwi affiliations are Te Ātiawa ki Whakarongotai, Ngāti Toa Rangatira, and Ngāti Raukawa ki te Tonga.
It also illustrates the significance of Māori participation and activism within the trade union movement and workplace systems.
It’s an environment Ria is personally familiar with, having previously worked as an organiser at Aotearoa’s largest private sector union E tū. Ria is passionate about improving systems of work, especially for future generations.
Ria identified several “tensions” within current workplace systems that need to be addressed to ensure consolidation of both tikanga and Te Tiriti.
“Tension exists between world views, in our daily practices, and decision making. The research asks what does a true Te Tiriti relationship look like in employment? How can Te Tiriti and tikanga support and meet the needs of Māori and non-Māori workers?”
The Public Service Act 2020 expressly recognises the unique relationship between Māori and the Crown in accordance with Te Tiriti, but the Employment Relations Act (ERA), passed in 2000, does not, she says.
“The ERA expressly recognises the possible engagement of tikanga within collective bargaining processes and more broadly within the confines of good faith obligations. But it needs to be updated to meet the standard of the Public Service Act.”
Ria notes that the ERA was a reaction against the earlier Employment Contracts Act of 1991 which sought to reduce the influence of unions and move employees onto individual employment agreements.
Alongside looking into labour law history, Ria also considered the development of tikanga within the Employment Relations Authority and Employment Court, and its implications. Ria explains a landmark ruling by the Employment Court in 2023 did not accept that tikanga was only applicable to Māori. Rather, where the public sector organisation had voluntarily included tikanga in the employment relationship it was bound to meet such inclusions which “covered all staff and therefore could not only be relevant to some”.
Ria also gathered data on the effectiveness of collective agreement clauses from the worker perspective. Questions were sent out to 600 members of the Public Service Association working at three separate public sector ministries. Sixty-one percent of the respondents self-identified as Māori.
Key questions in that survey related to the presence of Māori-specific collective agreement clauses, and there use and application within the workplace.
The survey results highlighted tension where assumptions were made that Māori employees complete cultural roles within the workplace, without recognition or remuneration, and would make themselves available for such roles as giving karakia, leading pōwhiri, or offering tikanga advice to others.
“This is indicative of systemic inequity within the workplace and ongoing unpaid cultural labour.”
While her research was focused on the public sector which has a higher level of inclusion of Tiriti and tikanga clauses, private sector employers were also recognising their relevance.
Ria’s research made some particular recommendations toward further reform including that tikanga experts be appointed to the Employment Relations Authority and updating the Act to expressly recognise Te Tiriti. She acknowledges though that the current political environment is not positive.
“We are faced with an aggressively anti-Māori government, seeking to undermine Te Tiriti and alter its status within the law. This aggression has been aimed squarely at the public service, with mass redundancies and demands that adversely impact Māori.”
Examples included the reduction in use of te reo in the public sector and the disestablishment of the Māori Health Authority.
“Unfortunately, we’re in a position that instead of fighting to improve those things we are fighting to keep hold of them,” she says.
That reality “recognises the inherent tension throughout the thesis, the piecemeal incorporation of te ao Māori [world view] within dominant Pākehā systems”.