The Green Party has put forward a commitment to end the apprentice pay tier that allows employers to offer below-minimum-wage rates to workers still in training. Pegged at four-fifths of the minimum wage, the training rate currently stands at $19.16 per hour.
Workers aged 20 and above become eligible for the payment when their employment contract obliges them to complete a minimum of 60 credits annually through an industry training scheme. In most cases, the provision covers those in apprenticeship positions.
Under the proposal, apprentice pay would be subject to a minimum-wage floor — set at $23.95 — while a party spokesperson argued that a productive economy depends on having a well-supported workforce.
Green Party co-leader Swarbrick outlined a commitment to guaranteeing fair wages for apprentices while expanding pathways that bring more tradespeople into the workforce and keep them there. Swarbrick noted that apprentice enrolment numbers have dropped to their lowest level in 15 years, creating a mismatch between that shrinking trades pipeline and the rising volume of construction work now in demand.
The party's apprenticeship plan would pair two separate $2,000 payments — one directed at employers upon a trainee's programme completion, the other a grant available to apprentices toward the purchase of tools — alongside a statement from the party that wages, job security, and pastoral care in the sector leave apprentices managing financial pressures rather than concentrating on their training. Projected annual spending under the measure stands at $117 million.
ACT released a training wage proposal calling for workers under 20 to receive 60 percent of the minimum wage throughout their first year in any given role. Based on prevailing exchange rates, that figure would translate to approximately $14.37.
At the second leaders debate, Hipkins and Luxon — representing Labour and National respectively — each put forward a commitment to lift the minimum wage by no less than the inflation rate on an annual basis. Luxon's assertion that his government had "more or less" satisfied the requirement was placed against the available evidence.
Each of the three years on record shows the following: in 2024, consumer prices climbed 4 percent while the floor wage advanced only 2 percent; a year later, inflation eased to 2.5 percent yet the wage floor trailed further behind at 1.5 percent; and through 2026, a 3.1 percent price rise again outpaced the 1.9 percent gain applied to the lowest-paid workers.
Following the debate, journalists put the question directly to Luxon — whether minimum wage rises would at least keep pace with inflation under a future government he led — and he moved away from that position. Pushing back on the characterisation, Luxon maintained that his position had always been to take inflation as the starting figure before weighing up various gains and losses from recent years.
