High income workers unable to claim unjustifiable dismissal thanks to new policy

Who is this policy for? Other than maybe creating a path to kill off management roles in government without needing to pay redundancy. Or maybe it’s just the first step to wind back employment protections.
And what does this mean for existing employees, and termination procedures? What’s stopping an employer giving you a salary increase and firing you?
- It's not for "management positions", rather it's for management, so they can dismiss highly skilled and highly paid employees and replace them with either shitty AI or cheaper foreign outsourcing.
  E.g. a top tier software engineer in NZ is paid a hell of a lot more than the equally top tier software engineer in Bangladesh... and without the "burden" of employment law.
  This is just more anti-employee crap. It's set at a level high enough that the vast bulk of employees in NZ will never ever be affected.
  
  Well, unless it has no ratcheting clause to have that rise in line with inflation etc. It won't take all that long before that starts to impact people who see themselves as being quite middle-class* - particularly white collar workers in Auckland / Wellington where housing costs are very high.
  *Note i'm well aware that their version of middle class doesn't align with historic NZ perceptions. But also the amount of high-end inherited wealth and the growing disparity between the top 10% and the rest means its also not entirely unrealistic to put a single income family with one earner at $180k as "middle-class" in Auckland.
  
  Oh, yeah, 100% that too.
  But also, 180k is coincidentally the around the salary of middle management positions within government.
  I would not be surprised if the 180k number drops should National get a second term.
- I haven't read the text of the legislation change, but that sounds like an awesome loophole. Someone earning minimum wage, gets pay rise to $181k then immediately fired.
  I'm assuming, or at least hoping, that there will be some sort of protection against that. The article seems to imply that the intention is that dismissal claims are negotiated conditions of contracts at high income levels, rather than a fixed legal requirement. So I guess the $180k+ salary needs to be in a signed contract.
  
  I'd love to hear of any employee-employer negotiation that started from a position of no redundancy provision, no unjustified dismissal that ended up with those in the contract.
- What is to stop someone from firing you for not having sex with them?

Having a poor performing manager or executive can have big flow-on effects for the entire business and increase the risk of poor culture and low morale.
I agree with this, having worked under a pretty shitty manager. They make a huge difference to the way an organization runs. But that doesn't mean throwing them all under the bus is the correct way to deal with this issue.

I'm tired boss