TONY BULLOT AGAINST RADIO NEW ZEALAND

1. Radio New Zealand (RNZ) published an article on June 7, 2024, headlined: What’s the deal with sick leave changes?
2. The article reported on proposed changes to sick leave entitlements and how they would affect part time workers who might have two or more part time jobs. It explained that under the present system all workers were entitled to 10 days sick leave a year. This applied to part timers as well, but the new rule would adjust the entitlement available to part timers on a pro rata basis.
3. The last paragraph reads:

Do you really get twice the sick leave if you have two part time jobs?

An employee's leave entitlements apply to each job they have. So if you have two part-time jobs, you will be entitled to sick leave - and annual holidays - for both of those jobs. Remember though that sick leave is usually paid at your relevant daily pay - the pay you would have got, had you worked on that day. So if I work at one job on a Tuesday morning, and one job on Tuesday afternoon, but I'm sick on Tuesday - and I meet the entitlement criteria for sick leave - I'll take a day of sick leave and be paid my relevant daily pay for job one, and a day of sick leave and receive my relevant daily pay for job two - you wouldn't be doubling your pay for that day

4. Tony Bullot complained that the article was not fair or balanced. He said the last paragraph showed a situation where there was no difference in sick leave entitlement between the current calculation and the pro rata system proposed in the new rules.
5. It did not mention someone working more than one job on different days was entitled to at least 10 more sick days per year than an equivalent worker with one employer.
6. He also complained the paragraph was in quotation marks but was not attributed to anyone.
7. After receiving the complaint RNZ corrected the story and inserted the name of the lawyer who provided the comment made in the last paragraph.
8. The Media Council notes that RNZ responded appropriately when it included the attribution it left out when the story was initially published.
9. It also noted the article was an explainer which aimed to set out the proposed rule change in easy-to-understand terms. It was an attempt to summarise the change and it would not be expected to cover all situations.
10. The last paragraph addressed the question “Do you get twice the sick leave if you have two part time jobs? The expert quoted set out the situation with a simple scenario to explain that it did not.
11. The article was not unfair or unbalanced just because it did not set out another scenario suggested by Mr Bullot.
12. There were no grounds to proceed.