New Zealand Becomes First Country to Introduce Paid Leave to Domestic Violence Victims

New Zealand just became the first nation in the world to mandate paid leave for domestic violence victims.

Any worker who is subjected to domestic violence is eligible for 10 days paid leave so they can take the necessary actions to separate from their partner, protect their family, move locations, or take legal action. The victim is not required to show any proof of the violence, and the legislation will also require employers to offer additional workplace safety measures, such as changing work locations or contact information.

The legislation, which was approved this week by 63 votes to 57, will go into full effect in April.

Green MP Jan Logie, who has spent the last seven years working on the measure, worked in a women’s shelter before she became a politician – and as representatives cheered for the bill, she was reportedly seen with tears in her eyes.

“Part of this initiative is getting a whole-of-society response. We don’t just leave it to police, but realize we all have a role in helping victims. It is also about changing the cultural norms and saying ‘we all have a stake in this and it is not OK’,” said Logie, according to The Guardian.

Legislators hope that the initiative will be the first of many steps taken to help domestic violence victims in New Zealand, which currently experiences the highest rates of domestic violence of any other developed country.

“Domestic violence doesn’t respect that split between work and life. A huge amount of research tells us a large number of abusive partners bring the violence into the workplace,” said Logie. “Be that by stalking their partner, by constant emails or phone calls or threatening them or their workmates. And some of that is about trying to break their attachment to their job to get them fired or get them to quit so they are more dependent on their partner.”

https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/new-zealand-becomes-first-country-to-introduce-paid-leave-to-domestic-violence-victims/

Any worker who is subjected to domestic violence is eligible for 10 days paid leave so they can take the necessary actions to separate from their partner, protect their family, move locations, or take legal action. The victim is not required to show any proof of the violence...

Any benefits law where one doesn't have to show the triggering events is ripe for abuse--no pun intended.

I can see a huge boondoggle where families pay for summer vacation on claim of the abuse to the wife, and pay for Christmas with grandma on the claim of abuse to the husband.

We don’t just leave it to police, but realize we all have a role in helping victims.

There's some confusion here.  Police don't help victims.  Police either protect them on the spot, or they vindicate them with prosecution.  But the police don't pay money to victims.  So, why the equivalency between police action and state compensation?

I am definitely not against helping abuse victims.  But here someone has not thought through the mechanics of the system.  Is it for emotional abuse or just physical abuse?  If you don't need to show the abuse, do you at least need to explain it?  Can children claim it?

I wish them luck.

Original Quill wrote:

Any worker who is subjected to domestic violence is eligible for 10 days paid leave so they can take the necessary actions to separate from their partner, protect their family, move locations, or take legal action. The victim is not required to show any proof of the violence...

Any benefits law where one doesn't have to show the triggering events is ripe for abuse--no pun intended.

I can see a huge boondoggle where families pay for summer vacation on claim of the abuse of the wife, and pay for Christmas with grandma on the claim of abuse of the husband.

We don’t just leave it to police, but realize we all have a role in helping victims.

There's some confusion here.  Police don't help victims.  Police either protect them on the spot, or they vindicate them with prosecution.  But the police don't pay money to victims.  So, why the equivalency between police and state compensation?

I am definitely not against helping abuse victims.  But here someone has not thought through the mechanics of the system.  Is it for emotional abuse or just physical abuse?  If you don't need to show the abuse, do you at least need to explain it?  Can children claim it?

I wish them luck.

Interesting and from a Liberal

Good reply mate

It makes sense to me, it helps give the victims a chance to escape

it wouldn't be as simple as that to 'abuse' in reality, since you'd have follow up the lie with a change in circumstances.

really it is just adding this to a growing list of things that can be covered by sick/personal leave.
It's not the USA, NZ (like here) tends to be more free with paid leave and unpaid leave.

And here Police often do help victims particularly in DV crimes, they can put restraining orders in place and help the victim physically separate from the abuser, one of the number one call outs is 'domestic incident'. There has been policies to change public opinion to break the taboo of calling the police, often it can be neighbors that call. it is not always DV though, sometimes it just a pair of Pissed Bogans having a spat.

veya wrote:you'd have follow up the lie with a change in circumstances.

Where do you see that?

Some aspects of this legislation don't actually read quite right,
going by that 'goodnewsweek' report...

As reported in the OP, "any worker..  is eligible for 10 days paid leave..."  --  that only applies to salary & wage earners in regular 'permanent' emplyment postions, as contract and "casual" employers don't get paid leave (holidays, sick leave)..

It then claims that employers would be expected to "offer additional workplace safety measures", including a change of workplace location ! and helping change information --  these kind of more onerous demands on an employer are normally only applied to big businesses and gov't departments, in other situations  --  most small businesses, and many "middle sized" companies simply can't afford such demands;  especially with single site enterprises, such as many farms, small factories, corner shops and mechanic's workshops..

Imagine the expense involved in moving a complete farming operation, or a small factory -- and the whole workforce with it -- to a new hidden location, just to protect one worker !  Much cheaper to jail the offender --  and have the gov't provide a lifetime lension to the victim..

If the legislation is as draconian as suggested, than one could imagine the situation developing where many small businesses won't employ women on a "permanent" basis, but rather only on casual/"rolling" contracts, to protect themselves from possible future onerous costs...

I blame the original report in the OP, as not giving the complete story..

Original Quill wrote:

veya wrote:you'd have follow up the lie with a change in circumstances.

Where do you see that?

I don't know what sort inhuman relationship you have with your employer/employee/colleagues 

But I know if they are getting divorced, new baby, going on holidays etc through you know, human interaction.

If someone was taking 10 days off to leave their Abusive Relationship, it would be a little bit 'weird' if they were still with the same person 2 weeks later.

veya_victaous wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Where do you see that?

I don't know what sort inhuman relationship you have with your employer/employee/colleagues 

But I know if they are getting divorced, new baby, going on holidays etc through you know, human interaction.

If someone was taking 10 days off to leave their Abusive Relationship, it would be a little bit 'weird' if they were still with the same person 2 weeks later.

The issue isn't the righteousness of the program or it's purposes. It's just that I know there's someone out there who will abuse it.

Original Quill wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Where do you see that?

I don't know what sort inhuman relationship you have with your employer/employee/colleagues 

But I know if they are getting divorced, new baby, going on holidays etc through you know, human interaction.

If someone was taking 10 days off to leave their Abusive Relationship, it would be a little bit 'weird' if they were still with the same person 2 weeks later.

The issue isn't the righteousness of the program or it's purposes.  It's just that I know there's someone out there who will abuse it.

no they wont, or not enough people will to give the shit, because this is New Zealand   

Same In Oz, they worked out the best way to stop us taking random Sickies is to give us more, too many, it's like If your employer gives a shit about you , you don't feel like taking random days off.  (it's not the USA, employees do not need to and cannot be treated like animals) 

Plus if you we're caught out lying you'd have to explain yourself come performance review time. 


Like Wolf said (in nicer words) 
if you were in a shit kicker role you'd be 'Casual' not permanent, so this only counts for people in reasonably decent roles or at least with a decent employer that doesn't want high staff turnover.

veya wrote:no they wont, or not enough people will to give the shit, because this is New Zealand

Pardon me if I don't always go along with that. If Kiwis have abusers, they've got losers.