Key NZ Employment Law Changes That Will Matter to Associations and Their Staff Arrangements

(As at 26 February 2026)

1. Employment Relations Amendment Act 2026 (In Force)

1.1 Personal Grievance Changes

High-Income Threshold

• Employees earning $200,000+ total remuneration cannot bring a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal or disadvantage unless both parties agree otherwise.
• Existing employees have a 12-month window to opt in to retain protections.

Remedies Reduced Where Employee Contributed

• Compensation may be reduced or eliminated entirely where employee conduct contributed.
• Reinstatement is no longer available where employee behaviour contributed.

Justification Test Adjusted

• Procedural defects alone will not automatically make a dismissal unjustified unless they result in substantive unfairness.

Impact for Associations
Stronger footing in dismissal situations involving misconduct. Reduced exposure at the top remuneration level. Process still matters.

1.2 Contractor vs Employee – Statutory “Gateway Test”

To qualify as a specified contractor, all criteria must be met:

• Written agreement specifying contractor status.
• Freedom to work for others.
• No minimum required availability period.
• Ability to subcontract.
• No termination for refusing additional tasks.

Impact for Associations
More certainty — but only if documentation and practice align precisely.

1.3 Removal of the 30-Day Rule

• New employees no longer need to start on collective agreement terms for the first 30 days.

Impact for Associations
Simplifies onboarding. Templates must be updated.

1.4 Trial Period Protections Expanded

• Employees dismissed under a valid trial period cannot raise a grievance for unjustified dismissal or disadvantage relating to that dismissal.

Impact for Associations
Trial periods are now a stronger risk-management tool — provided agreements are correctly drafted.

2. Crimes (Theft by Employer) Amendment Act 2025

• Withholding wages can constitute theft under the Crimes Act 1961.
• Elevates non-payment from a contractual issue to potential criminal liability.

Impact for Associations
Payroll accuracy is now a governance risk. Controls must be robust.

3. Pay Transparency and Pay Equity Changes

3.1 Pay Transparency (August 2025)

• Employees cannot be disciplined for disclosing their pay details.

3.2 Equal Pay Amendment Act 2025

• Revised framework and thresholds for pay equity claims.

Impact for Associations
Remuneration systems must be defensible and transparent. Confidentiality clauses restricting pay discussion are unenforceable.

4. Other Relevant Updates

Minimum Wage & Training Rates

• Updated in 2025. Ensure payroll compliance.

Leave Reform (Proposed)

• Employment Leave Act intended to replace the Holidays Act (not yet in force).

Fair Pay Agreements

• Repealed. No current compliance obligation.

Accredited Employer Work Visa (AEWV)

• Adjustments affect migrant employee conditions.

What This Means for Associations – Practical Checklist

Immediate Actions for Boards and Executives

• Review employment agreements (especially senior roles near $200k).
• Audit contractor arrangements against gateway criteria.
• Update dismissal and performance policies.
• Strengthen payroll oversight and sign-off controls.
• Refresh onboarding documentation.
• Review remuneration transparency settings.

References

Employment Relations Act changes take effect today | Employment New Zealand

Employment Relations Amendment Act

Major reform to employment law: the Employment Relations Amendment Act 2026 - Lane Neave

Employment Law changes with the Employment Relations Amendment Act 2026 - Christchurch Lawyers and Legal Advice » Harmans Lawyers

Work Isn’t a Place Anymore — It’s a Discipline

This morning I’m sitting at the Aotea Centre in Auckland.

Laptop open.
Phone hot-spotted.
Coffee close by.
NZSAE Professional Development Committee dialled in and around the table.

And in my hand, a “space pen” gifted by Darren from the Steel Construction Association — apparently it writes in space. I haven’t tested that claim, but it writes perfectly well in a civic centre foyer.

Twenty years ago, this would have been unusual.
Ten years ago, it would have been labelled “flexible.”
Today, it’s simply how we work.

Work Has Shifted — Permanently

For associations in New Zealand, the idea that work must happen in an office from 9 to 5 no longer holds.

We travel.
We meet members where they are.
We run committees from airports.
We hotspot our phones when Wi-Fi fails.
We draft board papers in hotel lobbies.
We host webinars from home offices.
We hold governance discussions across cities.

The tools are straightforward:

• A reliable laptop

• A strong phone connection

• Cloud-based systems

• A bit of discipline

That’s it.

The shift hasn’t just been technological — it’s cultural.

The Association Sector Is Built for Mobility

Associations, by nature, are distributed.

Our members are nationwide.
Our boards are often in different regions.
Our events move city to city.
Our stakeholders are not confined to one postcode.

So why should we be?

The modern association executive can operate:

• From a conference venue between sessions

• From a regional café before a member visit

• From a major city civic space like the Aotea Centre

• From home

• From anywhere with signal and intent

The office is no longer the centre of gravity. The mission is.

But Let’s Be Clear — This Isn’t About Slowing Down

Remote work doesn’t mean casual work.

In fact, it requires more discipline, not less.

You need:

• Structure in your diary

• Clear outcomes for meetings

• Reliable systems

• Strong governance processes

• Trust within your team

Working anywhere only works if you know exactly what you’re there to achieve.

The danger isn’t flexibility — it’s drift.

Big Centres, Small Corners

One of the advantages of operating in our larger centres — Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch — is that there are professional spaces everywhere.

Conference venues.
Hotels.
Shared civic buildings.
Libraries.
Quiet foyers.
Airport lounges.

You can conduct serious business in any of them.

This morning’s committee discussion was no less robust because we weren’t in a formal boardroom. The work still mattered. The outcomes still count.

The environment changes. The responsibility does not.

What This Means for Associations

If we’re honest, many associations still design their internal structures around older models of work.

Policies assume presence.
Systems assume office servers.
Processes assume paper.

But our members are modern.
Our partners are mobile.
Our workforce is hybrid.

If we want associations to remain relevant beyond 2030, we must reflect the way professionals actually operate.

Mobility is no longer a perk.
It’s infrastructure.

A Final Thought

The ability to work anywhere is a privilege.

But it’s also a reminder.

Our role is to strengthen membership organisations across New Zealand. That responsibility doesn’t switch off because we’re in a different building.

Today it’s the Aotea Centre.
Tomorrow it might be Wellington.
Next week Rotorua.

The location changes.
The purpose doesn’t.

And for the record — the space pen works just fine in Auckland.

Conference Standards Work – Update for Members

Thank you to everyone who contributed to the Conference at a Crossroads discussions. The feedback was clear, practical, and consistent.

A Conference Standards Group of experienced association executives has now met to help shape how this work is progressed in practice.

Members highlighted:

• increasing cost pressure and pricing uncertainty

• inconsistent quoting and late add-ons

• challenges understanding AV and technical costs

• the need for practical tools that support teams with varying levels of experience

The message was not about prescribing how conferences should be run, but about improving clarity, confidence, and consistency.

What we are focusing on first

Based on the group’s input, NZSAE will focus initially on:

• Standardised RFP and quotation templates

• Clearer guidance on pricing transparency and add-ons

• Practical frameworks and checklists for association teams

• Foundational standards for supplier, sponsor and exhibitor engagement

What happens next

NZSAE will begin drafting practical tools and guidance, alongside a national member survey to build an evidence base. Draft materials will be tested with the Conference Standards Group before being shared more widely.

This work is about reducing uncertainty and supporting better outcomes for associations — not setting prices or limiting choice.

Should you wish to be involved please email Brett

When “Yes” Becomes the Default

By February, most New Year’s resolutions have already slipped away. The year has found its rhythm again, the inbox is full, and work feels familiar.

For me, this is usually the point where I stop and take stock — not of big goals, but of how I’m actually showing up day to day.

In associations, “yes” is our default setting. And I include myself squarely in that.

Yes to helping.
Yes to another call.
Yes to one more request that wasn’t in the plan.

It comes with the territory. Supporting members, answering questions, making ourselves available — that’s what association people do, and we’re generally pretty good at it.

But lately, I’ve been realising that always saying yes doesn’t automatically mean I’m being as effective as I could be.

Noticing the pattern

Most requests are reasonable. Most conversations are worthwhile. And that’s what makes it tricky.

What I’ve noticed, though, is how easily days can become reactive. One request leads to another, and before long, time that should be going into longer-term work gets pushed out — not because it isn’t important, but because it’s less urgent.

None of this is about being unwilling to help. It’s more about recognising that capacity isn’t unlimited.

Rethinking what “no” really means

I’m trying to get more comfortable with the idea that saying no — or at least not yes straight away — isn’t the same as saying no to members.

Sometimes it’s a:

• not right now

• not in that way

• let’s come back to this

• or here’s a better place for this to land

That shift feels small, but it’s harder than it sounds.

A small adjustment, not a big resolution

This isn’t a grand resolution or a dramatic change. It’s just an intention to pause a little more before responding, and to be clearer with myself about what actually needs my time and attention.

Associations are long-term organisations. If we want to keep doing this work well, there’s probably value in being a bit more deliberate — even when our instinct is to say yes.

I don’t have this sorted. But it feels like a useful thing to notice as the year settles in.

And if it resonates with others in the sector, that’s probably a good sign we’re not alone.

Brett 

Outsourcing is often talked about as if it’s now standard practice in associations. The data tells a more measured story.

Based on recent NZSAE survey results, only around 35% of New Zealand associations currently outsource any part of their operations. The majority still operate fully in-house, typically with small teams managing a wide range of responsibilities.

That context matters.

Outsourcing is not the norm. It is a considered option used by a minority of associations — but one that offers useful insight into how organisations are managing workload, capability, and sustainability.

What is being outsourced

Among the associations that do outsource, the approach is targeted rather than extensive.

The most commonly outsourced areas relate to back-office and specialist support, particularly:

• Accounting, financial, and bookkeeping support

• Administrative and account management support

• Event and conference delivery

• Graphic design and communications assistance

Importantly, accounting and administrative functions are often delivered as a combined back-office service, rather than as distinct roles. In practice, many associations engage a single provider to manage invoicing, reconciliations, payroll processing, and basic reporting alongside general administrative support.

This reflects how smaller associations actually operate — outsourcing capability, not job titles.

Outsourcing is measured in hours, not headcount

Rather than outsourcing whole functions, most associations engage contractors for defined, limited time commitments:

• Short weekly engagements (2–10 hours)

• Part-time ongoing support (10–20 hours per week)

This suggests outsourcing is being used to supplement lean teams, providing specialist support where needed without adding permanent roles.

Why associations choose to outsource

For those associations that outsource, the drivers are pragmatic:

• Cost certainty

• Access to specialist expertise

• Flexibility to scale support up or down

Annual outsourcing costs vary, but generally remain well below the full cost of employing equivalent in-house roles once salary, leave, KiwiSaver, and overheads are considered. For boards managing financial risk, that flexibility is significant.

What remains in-house

It is equally telling what associations continue to keep in-house.

Leadership, member relationships, and strategic direction overwhelmingly remain internal functions. These are seen as central to the organisation’s identity, credibility, and long-term success — and are not readily outsourced.

The real insight for boards

The takeaway is not that associations should outsource.

It is that:

• Most associations still don’t

• Those that do are deliberate and targeted

• Outsourcing works best when it supports focus, not when it replaces core capability

For boards and CEOs, the more useful question isn’t “Why aren’t we outsourcing?”
It’s “Is our current structure still fit for purpose given the size, complexity, and expectations placed on the organisation?”

That’s where the real conversation begins.

NZSAE has been advised of an upcoming call for nominations to Industry Skills Boards, overseen by the Tertiary Education Commission (TEC). This is a significant opportunity for association executives and senior leaders with an interest in workforce development, vocational education, and training.

There are eight Industry Skills Boards, each playing a critical role in shaping training and workforce priorities across New Zealand:

• Transport
• Construction & Specialist Trades
• Food & Fibre
• Energy & Infrastructure
• Manufacturing & Engineering
• Services
• Education, Health & Community
• Electrotechnology & IT

Each Board currently has five members, with a further three appointments per Board to be made by 31 March 2026.

Why this matters

Industry Skills Boards:

• Set training and skills standards
• Endorse and moderate vocational training programmes
• Advise government on funding priorities
• Undertake workforce and skills analysis
• Act as the sector voice on education and training

For association leaders, this is a genuine opportunity to influence the future skills pipeline for your sector and represent industry needs at a national level.

Appointment details

• Board fees: approximately $30,000 per annum
• Term: 2–4 years
• Experience: strong governance, sector knowledge, and workforce or training insight are key

Key dates

• Nominations open: 21 January 2026
• Nominations close: 18 February 2026 (5.00pm)
• Appointments confirmed: by 31 March 2026

A wider opportunity for associations

In addition to Board appointments, the regulations require each Industry Skills Board to formally engage with industry associations and peak bodies.

This presents a potential opportunity for NZSAE — and for member associations — to:

• Act as a recognised conduit for sector consultation
• Support member input into skills and training discussions
• Strengthen the role of associations in workforce planning

NZSAE will continue to explore where this aligns best with our coverage and member capability.

Further information

• What Industry Skills Boards are:
  https://www.tec.govt.nz/strategic-initiatives/vocational-education-system/industry-skills-boards
• Details on the eight Industry Skills Boards (operational from 1 January 2026):
  https://www.tec.govt.nz/strategic-initiatives/vocational-education-and-training-vet-system/changes-to-the-vocational-education-and-training-vet-system/industry-skills-boards

Links to the nomination process will be shared once they go live on the TEC website.

If you’re considering applying and would like to talk it through, feel free to get in touch.

Here for associations
Brett

Is Your Association Website Up to Standard for 2026?

Most association websites look fine on the surface. But many are still hard to use, hard to manage, and disconnected from how the association actually operates.

For 2026, the question isn’t “Do we need a redesign?”
It’s “Is our website actually helping our members, staff, and volunteers do their jobs?”

Below are five simple, testable checks you can use to answer that — no theory, no technology debate, just practical reality.

1. Can a New Member Find What They Need in Under Two Minutes?

If someone joined your association today, could they quickly:

• log in
• see upcoming events
• access member-only resources
• update their personal or organisational details

If the answer is no, that’s friction.

And friction loses members — not because they’re unhappy, but because things feel harder than they should be, especially in those first few weeks after joining.

Early member experience matters. If people struggle to find their way around straight away, confidence drops and engagement stalls.

A member portal doesn’t need to be clever or clever-looking. It needs to be clear, obvious, and reliable — so members can get on with why they joined in the first place.

2. Is Your Website Doing Work Your Staff Shouldn’t Be Doing?

Take an honest look at where staff time goes.

If your team is regularly:

• emailing PDFs
• manually updating member records
• resending event details or links

then your website isn’t pulling its weight. A well-set-up association website should reduce admin, not create more of it. If staff are acting as the bridge between members and information, something isn’t working.

3. Does Your Site Reflect How Your Association Actually Works?

Most associations evolve over time. Boards change. Committees form and dissolve. SIGs come and go. Events grow. Resources build up.

The problem? Websites often don’t keep up.

Ask yourself:

• Is the structure of your site clear and logical?
• Do boards, committees, interest groups, events, and resources make sense to someone new?

If only “the person who built it” understands how things fit together, that’s a risk — especially when staff or suppliers change. Your website should mirror how the association operates today, not how it operated years ago.

4. Is Your Content Written for Members — Not About the Organisation?

This is a common one.

Many association websites talk about the organisation:

• history
• structure
• internal language

But members are asking a different question: “How does this help me do my role better?”

When reviewing a page, ask:

• Does this help a member take action?
• Does it answer a real question they have?
• Is it written in plain language they’d actually use?

If not, it’s probably serving the organisation — not the membership.

5. Can You Improve One Thing Without Rebuilding Everything?

This is the most important check.

If every improvement requires a full rebuild, the issue isn’t design — it’s setup.

Strong association websites are modular:

• you can fix navigation without redesigning the homepage
• improve member access without changing branding
• tidy structure without touching content

If change feels risky, expensive, or impossible, that’s a signal worth paying attention to.

The Bottom Line

For 2026, associations don’t need prettier websites. They need websites that:

• reduce workload
• support members properly
• reflect how the organisation actually functions
• get used — not worked around

Start small. Fix what’s slowing you down. Build from there.

If you’d like help thinking through where to start, that’s exactly the conversation NZSAE is here for.

The AML/CFT settings have been under review for some time, and many organisations across New Zealand have been calling for more workable, real-world requirements. Last week, the Statutes Amendment Bill passed its final reading, bringing several practical updates into force immediately.

For associations and membership bodies that interact with AML-regulated environments — whether through financial services, professional services, or sector partnerships — these changes will matter.

Address Verification No Longer Required for Standard CDD

The headline change is simple but significant:

Address verification is no longer required as part of standard customer due diligence (CDD).

This step now only applies when there’s a higher-risk situation under enhanced due diligence.

For years, organisations have highlighted the difficulty of collecting physical address documents when the risk profile didn’t justify it. This amendment brings the law more in line with how organisations operate, supported by sector submissions including work from Lyn McMorran and the Financial Services Federation.

It’s a shift toward a more risk-based, proportionate approach — something long requested by many associations.

More Time for Reporting Obligations

Two further changes aim to improve reporting quality and practicality:

• Prescribed Transaction Reports (PTRs) now have a longer timeframe for submission.
• Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) also have extended submission times.

For organisations working alongside AML-regulated providers — or operating within regulated settings themselves — this should ease reporting pressure and support more accurate, complete information.

Clarification on “Occasional Transactions”

Another helpful change clarifies the definition of “occasional transaction.”
Cheque deposits made at a registered bank or non-bank deposit taker are now excluded from this definition.

This removes ambiguity and helps prevent organisations being captured by rules not intended for low-risk, routine actions.

Why These Changes Matter for Associations

Many associations may not be directly captured by the AML/CFT Act, but often work alongside sectors that are. Others have members affected by changing compliance expectations.

These amendments demonstrate a move toward:

• More practical compliance requirements
• A better fit with how organisations actually operate
• Clearer proportionality and risk focus

They also show that sector feedback is being taken seriously — especially where compliance obligations have become unnecessarily burdensome.

What Happens Next

The Ministry of Justice will update formal guidance shortly. Until then, the amendments apply immediately.

If you or your members need further detail, the AML/CFT Programme Team can be contacted at aml@justice.govt.nz.

View the ministerial press release.

The amendments included in the Statutes Amendment Bill:

• clarify that address verification is not required for standard customer due diligence and only required under enhanced due diligence
• extend submission timeframes for Prescribed Transaction Reports
• extend submission timeframes for Suspicious Activity Reports
• clarify that cheque deposits at registered banks or non-bank deposit takers are excluded from the definition of “occasional transaction”

When Strength Becomes Fragile: The Hidden Financial Risk Facing New Zealand Associations

The 2025 State of the Association Sector Report revealed something that should give every board pause for thought: nearly half of New Zealand’s associations could operate for only 3–12 months on their current reserves.

For a community built on continuity and trust, that’s an uncomfortable truth. Our sector has weathered economic cycles, pandemics, and political shifts — yet for many associations, one cancelled event, one lost sponsor, or one year of slow renewals could put real pressure on stability.

And this isn’t about poor management or lack of intent. Most associations run lean. They stretch every dollar to serve members, fund advocacy, and deliver events. But lean can quickly tip into fragile — especially when fixed costs rise faster than revenue.

The challenge behind the numbers

The report shows that events and sponsorship remain the dominant non-dues income sources for more than 85% of associations. When those two pillars wobble, financial resilience does too.

At the same time, member affordability pressures are rising. Many organisations froze or delayed fee increases, while venue, catering, and AV costs have jumped sharply. It’s a perfect storm that leaves little margin for error.

So what can association leaders do?

Financial fragility isn’t inevitable. It’s a signal — one that calls for sharper strategy, stronger collaboration, and better use of the collective intelligence in our sector. Here are five actions every board and executive team can take now:

1. Re-set the reserve policy
   Move beyond “a year of cover” as an arbitrary benchmark. Align reserves to your actual risk profile — consider what a major disruption to your main event or membership income would cost and build policy from there.

2. Diversify your non-dues revenue
   Don’t rely solely on the annual conference. Associations that build small but steady income from online learning, supplier partnerships, or credentialling programmes are better protected when sponsorship fluctuates.

3. Model financial scenarios annually
   Use simple sensitivity testing: What if membership dropped 10%? What if event income fell by a quarter? Present those to the board each year so strategic choices are made with eyes wide open.

4. Invest in value before price
   Fee increases are easier to justify when members see tangible benefit. Strengthen perceived value through professional development, sector-specific resources, and peer connection — then communicate those wins clearly.

5. Collaborate, don’t compete
   Shared services, co-hosted events, or joint purchasing between associations can reduce cost and increase reach. The sector’s collective strength is one of its greatest untapped financial assets.

Turning resilience into confidence

None of this is about panic — it’s about preparation. Associations are, by nature, built for the long haul. But long-term impact depends on short-term security.

If your board hasn’t reviewed its reserves or revenue diversity recently, now is the time. Start the conversation, run the scenarios, and treat financial sustainability as the strategic priority it truly is.

Together, we can ensure our associations remain not just resilient — but confident, adaptive, and ready for whatever comes next.

By Brett Jeffery, CAE — Executive Director, NZSAE
3 November 2025

The Top Three Challenges Facing Associations in 2025

When we released the State of the Association Sector in New Zealand 2025, the results didn’t catch anyone off guard. The same three challenges came up time and time again from over 230 executives:

• Growing and recruiting members.
• Coping with the economic pressures your members are under.
• Demonstrating real, tangible value for the membership fee.

Now, it’s one thing to nod along and agree these are familiar. It’s another to stop and ask the harder question: what are we actually doing about them?

Recruitment and Growth

Membership growth has always been the heartbeat of associations. It’s not just about numbers on a spreadsheet — it’s about energy, reach, and long-term sustainability. But competition for people’s time and attention has never been stronger. We’re all up against busy calendars, tighter professional development budgets, and countless alternative networks that exist outside of the traditional association model.

Some associations are starting to rethink their recruitment strategies. Referrals remain the strongest pathway in, but referrals don’t happen by chance — they happen when your members are so engaged that they want to bring a colleague or friend along. Others are focusing on younger or emerging professionals, creating “starter memberships” or entry-level pathways that are affordable, flexible, and welcoming. The key is to keep asking: how do we make it easy for someone new to say yes to joining?

 

Economic Pressures

It’s no secret that the current economic climate is biting hard. Members are looking at every dollar they spend, and association fees are not immune. This is where the pressure comes back to us as leaders — are we structuring our fees fairly, offering flexibility where we can, and being open about how we use the money entrusted to us?

Some associations are experimenting with payment plans or multi-year discounts to spread the load. Others are bundling services together so that membership doesn’t feel like “just a fee” but like access to a suite of resources. Even small gestures, like making travel subsidies available for events or highlighting free resources, can help members feel the organisation is sharing the burden rather than adding to it.

Demonstrating Value

Perhaps the most persistent challenge of all is proving that value exists beyond the invoice. It’s not enough to say “trust us, we’re doing good work.” Members are asking — rightly — “what do I get for being part of this association?”

The answer usually lies in the basics: advocacy, professional development, and networking. The report confirms these are the things members consistently value most. But here’s the trap — just doing them isn’t always enough. The real shift comes when we show members how their involvement is making a difference. Did your submission change a piece of policy? Tell them. Did your conference help create a new business partnership? Share the story. Did your training help someone take the next step in their career? Celebrate it loudly.

Value is not just about the service provided, it’s about the story told around that service. If members can see the impact — on themselves, on their sector, and on the community — the sense of value becomes undeniable.

Turning Challenges into Opportunities

These three challenges are not going away. They’ll keep resurfacing every year in one form or another. The real opportunity lies in how we respond. Around board tables and in leadership teams, the conversation can’t stop at “yes, recruitment is tough” or “yes, budgets are tight.” It has to shift toward “what are we trialling this year, what’s working, and what do we need to rethink?”

The answers aren’t the same for every association, but the process of testing ideas, sharing wins, and learning from the misses is universal.

So, here’s the question I’d encourage you to take back to your own team:
? How are we, right now, addressing these three challenges — and what will we do differently if our current approach isn’t working?

Because when we move from simply naming the challenges to actively experimenting with solutions, we don’t just survive another year — we strengthen the very case for why associations matter.

Brett Jeffery, CAE, Executive Director, NZSAE