Very few accidents or work-related injuries were reported by either workers or employers. Far more widely acknowledged by employers interviewed were bouts of sickness, particularly boils, relating to dietary issues.
An obvious source of risk in apple picking is the requirement to be constantly moving up and down long picking ladders while carrying heavy loads of apples in body harnesses. One worker spoken to in Blenheim after travelling south on a joint ATR, had injured an arm when falling from a ladder (field notes, 26-5-12). The eight foot long ladders in widespread use are designed to have a safety framework attached to the top but Harold (27-4-12) explained that this would interfere with the apple picking and so generally workers did not stand on the top rung, but Di reported that her Samoan workers do stand on top:
We were one of the few people who don’t use hydro ladders for picking. We got frustrated at the quality so we cut the trees’ heads off and use eight foot ladders and Samoans will go to the top of the ladders; one of the few who will go to the top and reach to get that last apple. (Deb, 22-3-12)
Royden, a large Hawkes Bay contractor, was asked about back injuries:
Two this year have gone to a doctor with sore backs, they were treated and they came right but Wira had 3 days off and he was really sore. But they are Thais and they want to make money by working so they follow that philosophy very well.
(Royden, 12-4-12)
The pack house environment could be expected to be of less risk than the orchard if basic precautions are observed:
We give them a pretty good induction about behaviour and where not to put hands ... there is moving machinery; conveyers and rollers ... we do have the odd injury but none from the RSE since we had them here. (Philip, 23-3-12)
Gregory (10-4-12) recounted how one worker suffered a hernia in 2011 and other workers picked his patch for him so that his pay sheet showed he had picked above minimum rate while others were down a bit. The apparent failure of the programme to provide social security for him was
circumvented by the solidarity of the cultural group.
Sickness featured more prominently in most discussions than accidents. New Zealand law requires sick leave eligibility to apply after six months of continuous employment, which in the first two years of the programme left the great majority of RSE workers highly vulnerable. The lack of sick leave is highlighted by the acceptance by DOL of a contract which allows the workers to be paid 30 hours every week.
It means if someone is sick for a week they still get paid the thirty hours and they’ve got enough hours accumulated and we keep paying them unlike in big companies if you are sick for a week you don’t get paid...One guy three years ago had gout and we told him if he didn’t get better it would use up all his accumulated savings; that certainly fixed him. (Deb, 22-3-12)
Since 2009 it has been policy to require all RSE workers to have private health insurance which eliminates the problem but adds to their costs. Drew referred to an incident which he believed helped to provoke the requirement:
Luckily we had taken out insurance; we had done it anyway and there was argument from the company over pre-existing conditions and they were not going to pay ... I think it was seventy odd grand in the end and they fronted up and paid but after that it was compulsory. (Drew, 22-6-12)
Taking the requirement for private health insurance as a given, employers asked about its effectiveness were positive:
DR: For an overseas person in New Zealand hospital there will be extra charges ... did the insurance cover that?
Yes. There was no cost borne by the employee. We had one person taken away this year with difficulties breathing and the ambulance came in and there was no cost to the employee; just the insurance card and all put through. No issues. (Joel, 21-6-12) Three key points emerge from a discussion about the pastoral and security needs of the workers. Firstly, the usual combination of sick leave, accident compensation, and occupational health and safety is not available to RSE workers and although there have been instances of collective risk sharing, the primary means of addressing this issue has been through compulsory insurance, which necessitates a further deduction from pay. Secondly, the government requirements of pastoral care have been met with diverse interpretation, from patronising oversight to disinterest at extreme ends of a spectrum. Thirdly, accommodation provision has been closely monitored and in most cases meets New Zealand standards for agricultural employment. However, too many employers have failed to address the specific needs of workers coming from a tropical climate.