MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Public Service Association (PSA) – a feminised shipwreck

Filed under: General — Downunder @ 3:43 pm Tue 1st April 2014

The PSA – the Public Service Association/Te Pukenga Here Tikanga Mahi by its own assessment ‘is a powerful public voice and a key player in New Zealand Politics’, although its antics this week, might have many wondering whether its ship has been high-jacked, and left foundering on the rocks of feminist dogma.

Representing 58,000 workers (70% female) in central government, state-owned enterprises, local councils, health boards and community groups the PSA’s stated objective is to build a union organisation able to influence the political, economic, industrial and social environments in the interests of the membership of the PSA.

Within the current organisation the PSA operates four formal groups or networks;

(a) PSA Pasefika
(b) Women’s network
(c) PSA Youth network
(d) Out@PSA

Even by this stage you’d be thinking – this is not looking at all male friendly and this of course raises the question as to whether there are men leaving the PSA or not joining, because they do not find it representative and suitable for them as a workplace union.

For those that had any doubts, they were surely dispelled this week when the PSA proudly announced it had commissioned a study on the costs of domestic violence in the workplace – PSA president Mike Tana adding,

The report was commissioned for use by all NZders and is freely available on our website.”

When pushed for further detail PSA secretary Brenda Pilott went to ground refusing to return emails requesting information about the selection process of the author and the terms of reference for the report.

That’s not sensible; surely Brenda, there is nothing to hide here or was this jack up between the PSA and Suzanne Snively’s media company meant to be accepted without question.

Possibly this deal doesn’t comply with PSA rules, however those involved hadn’t expected to be taken to task on the issue.?

The question of the PSA commissioning a discriminatory report was also raised with Mr Tana who responded by saying,

“This report does not take away from the equally legitimate case for men affected by family violence in NZ, neither is there any intention to discriminate.”

Ok, so will the PSA be commissioning a report on the cost to the workplace through the effects of domestic violence on men anytime soon? No of course not, but when Tana came out with this doozey I realised he’d got a little too close to the feminist hotbed and fried a few neurons;

“My real concern is for the children who are so affected as a result, if this report helps one NZ child affected by family violence then it is well worth supporting. I believe this is also the intention of the PSA in this regard.”

There you have it folks the PSA is not there for the workers it is another agency that, as they say in feminist New Zealand, “is here for the children’.

If that doesn’t make the organisation look small what has certainly dented their claim to being a key player in New Zealand politics is the PSA’s commissioned report being linked to radical feminist and Green MP Jan Logie’s member’s bill which is currently in the ballot box with 72 other bills hoping for a run in the debating chamber.

Surely any credible representative organisation would be dealing with legislation at a party level?

All in all it looks like a messy little feminist-nest venture and of course no one is meant to question these things. Is the PSA doing what it is meant to be doing – supporting workers in the work place?

If you’ve had a bad male-experience at the PSA email [email protected]


  1. Even though you go overboard with your reporting, IMO, ie, it’s a shipwreck because it didn’t include men….or it’s a shipwreck because feminists are involved, I am pleased to learn of this.

    Someone wrote a post on menz, a little while ago, about a business that got a government contract to run health and safety programs. A group complained about the deal saying it was wasting tax payers money and released opinions from ACC specialists who said the program would not save ACC enough money to make it worthwhile. (who cares if it saves ‘ONE male’).

    The Unions or a union or two or more, also got the same contract.
    It seems this is the same thing, IMO.

    Comment by Julie — Tue 1st April 2014 @ 5:40 pm

  2. @Julie

    The PSA is a shipwreck because it steered off course, stopped doing what it was meant to be doing.

    Feminist behaviour in that respect is a distraction; you’re misunderstanding that aspect of the post.

    No, you’re analogy about one worker is not the same as ‘saving one child’.

    One is a consequence the other is a justification.

    Comment by Downunder — Tue 1st April 2014 @ 8:34 pm

  3. The Unions are in a bad and sad position at the moment, IMO. There’s talk amongst professionals that they may not have a place in today’s working environment and that they may not last. It is not wrong or a shipwreck if they look for ways to survive and feminists are not monsters that destroy everything they touch any more than men are monsters that destroy everything they touch.

    If they (the union) can hang in there, they will find they do have a place, IMO, because change is coming. There’s a war going on but there’s no point turning that into a discussion, lol. Too much difference of opinion, IMO.


    Y’know, men are in the same position. Whoever steps up is going to need money.

    Here’s something a male mental health nurse of 22 years told me yesterday. “People stopped giving to other people. We moved from the 1950s – 1980s of giving a man a fish, to teaching a man to fish”. We don’t look after each other any more and so we have services to give advice – the youth line, suicide line, programs, workshops, etc.

    Women’s refuges, men’s refuges, women’s groups, men’s groups, like rehabilitation facilities (drug & alcohol, mental health, etc) are facilities/services that aid a person from a dependant situation to being independent, kind of like a half way house or meeting place, time out with programs, workshops, referrals to other rehaps, etc. All these facilities/groups including men’s facilities/groups are going to need money from the government ie: contracts to teach a man or woman to fish, so to speak.


    Back to the Unions. Why don’t men argue that men should be a part of the programs? ie Men suffer from domestic violence and it costs business too. Is there any research of men’s domestic violence in NZ? That could be thrown into the mix when and if Jan’s bill is pulled from the ballot. The men working for the unions are already voicing their opinion about ‘who has control in relationships’.

    Comment by Julie — Wed 2nd April 2014 @ 10:57 am

  4. Oh, there are other options. I should always remember not everyone wants to same thing. (both sides are filled with men and women with different opinions).

    Another option could be to destroy the unions. Not every man and women wants them around. 🙂

    Comment by Julie — Wed 2nd April 2014 @ 11:02 am

  5. Don’t bother with the email address above, it was, as expectecred, unable to be used.

    Comment by Downunder — Sat 4th November 2017 @ 12:25 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar