Purex manufacturer Essity is being accused of "starvation tactics" after it was allegedly caught blocking locked out workers from accessing their own savings.

Essity locked out 145 Kawerau workers three weeks ago after they refused to accept a pay deal that would see their wages go backwards after inflation.

Essity's pay offer was for an increase of 14.7 per cent over three years, comprising a 3 per cent increase every year plus an additional cash payment this year, said general manager of the Kawerau mill Peter Hockley last week. Read more here.

'Essity has well-remunerated employees working at Kawerau who are amongst the highest-paid working in manufacturing in New Zealand, earning nearly double the median weekly earnings of New Zealanders.

'Our wage offer maintains attractive conditions, addresses inflation impacts on employees, and is more than fair and reasonable.”

The lockout means workers cannot return to their jobs and they receive no pay.

Now, as hardship starts to bite, the union has obtained a letter showing Essity bosses have instructed the company's superannuation provider to block workers from making financial hardship withdrawals from their own savings.

The letter from SuperLife to an Essity employee states:

'We have received your application form to apply for a financial hardship withdrawal from your Asaleo Care Super. We have been informed by your HR this week, that all financial hardship requests must be approved by the company, and they will not be consenting to any withdrawals during this time. Therefore, we are unable to proceed with your application.”

Pulp and Paper Workers Union Kawerau secretary Tane Phillips says Essity's move is cruel and vindictive.

'This is starvation tactics. The company could end the lockout any day, but instead they are trying to inflict as much suffering as they can on our members and their families in the hope they give up.

'Our members put money into this super scheme with the promise that if they ever faced hardship they'd be able to access it. It is nothing short of cruel and vindictive to cut off both their pay and their savings," says Tane.

'This lockout is being driven by Essity executives in Australia, who don't care about us and probably don't even know where Kawerau is on a map. I'd like them to come here and look these workers and their families in the eye.

'All we are asking for is a pay increase to match the rising cost of living. Essity is a company that made nearly two billion dollars in profit last year so they can easily afford it," says Tane.

'Essity should end this lockout today and let our members get back to work.”

Meanwhile, Stuff is reporting that a local toilet paper company says it feels threatened and bullied by a larger counterpart after a letter demanded it back up sustainability claims on its website.

The letter from Essity, the toilet paper manufacturer that has currently locked out 145 employees over pay disagreements, was sent to a smaller toilet paper competitor, With Small (formerly known as Smart Ass).

WIth Small managing director Tony Small says he's surprised to receive the letter from Essity.

'It would be easy for us to answer their questions as we can provide them with all of the facts, but to be honest receiving the letter didn't sit well coming from a company of Essity's size, it felt like they were trying to bully us,” he says.

'We're always willing to have a conversation or meet our competitors for a coffee, which I've suggested, but they have declined, instead informing us that after September 12 they will intend to consider their options.

'We don't want to get our solicitors involved, but we also don't want big multinational companies like this threatening smaller, independent, Kiwi-owned businesses.”

The letter, from Essity Australasia marketing manager Anne Lindsay, says the company is concerned with the rise of 'greenwashing”, a form of marketing in which sustainability is deceptively used to persuade the public that an organisation is environmentally friendly.

It asked for proof of six sustainability statements on With Small's website, in writing before September 12 – all of which With Small responded to.

In emailed replies to questions, Lindsay says:

'As all companies do, we monitor key product claims to avoid any potential consumer confusion.

'As a routine follow-up we have asked for a handful of website claims to be substantiated.

'Because this communication is with competitors we have certain formalities and have requested a response in writing.”

Kath Dewar, managing director of ethical marketing brand GoodSense, says while the letter was heavy-handed from a dominant player, it could be justified.

'We are all entitled to clarify promotional claims, as members of the public and companies, and both the Commerce Commission and the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) have provision for competitors to lay claims against other companies,” she says.

-Additonal reporting by Stuff/Brianna Mcilraith.