Department of Justice

Tasmanian Industrial Commission

www.tas.gov.au
Contact  |  Accessibility  |  Disclaimer

T295 - 30 June

 

IN THE TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act 1984

 

T.295 of 1985 IN THE MATTER OF an application by the Hospital Employees' Federation of Australia, Tasmanian Branch No. 2 to vary the WELFARE AND VOLUNTARY AGENCIES AWARD
   
  re: insertion of new classification structures, incorporating wage increases, into Sections IV and VI; and insertion of a "Special Licenses" provision into Sections IV, V and VI.
   
COMMISSIONER R. K. GOZZI HOBART, 30 June 1986
   

SUPPLEMENTARY DECISION

   
APPEARANCES:  
   
For the Hospital Employees'
Federation of Australia,
Tasmanian Branch No. 2
- Mr. D. Rees
   
For the Federated Miscellaneous
Workers' Union of Australia,
Tasmanian Branch
- Mr. L. Brown
   
For the Hospital Employees'
of Australia,
Tasmanian Branch No. 1
- Mr. P. Imlach
   
For the Tasmanian Chamber
of Industries
- Mr. M. C. Sertori
   
DATES AND PLACES OF HEARING:  
   
19 December 1985 Hobart  
4 March 1986 Hobart  
6 March 1986 Hobart  
8 April 1986 Devonport  
24 April 1986 Huonville  
16 June 1986 Devonport  
   

On 28 May 1986 I issued my work value decision affecting Supervisors, Functional Programmers and Programme Assistants covered by the previously-titled Sections IV and VI of the Welfare and Voluntary Agencies Award.

In that decision I proposed that the new definitions for the above employee classifications should be amended to include, for progression purposes, reference to the completion or part completion of approved courses of study.

At pages 24 to 26 of my decision I said, inter alia:

    "...I recognise that the level of training skills utilised by employees, which are necessary in meeting the high aims of the establishments concerned, are attained through a combination of on the job training and experience together with formal training.

    Formal training skills, acquired through participation in approved courses of study are a basic fundamental, and in my view they complement and enhance on the job learning and training.

    To take this aspect to its logical conclusion, and whilst I support the classification structure put forward to the parties, I am of the opinion that the definitions supporting the structure could be greatly enhanced if the criteria for progression from grade to grade also included suitable references to progression in and/or completion of approved courses of study.

    Each subsequent grade above base grade could contain reference to progression at the lower end of the structure and actual completion, at the top end, of approved courses of study.

    In my opinion this would represent a significant step forward and would be totally compatible with the thrust of the thinking of the establishments I inspected.

    The 1984 Devonfield Annual Report, drawn to my attention by Mr. Rees, reads, at page 2, as follows:

      "All Staff at the Hostel are currently attending a Residential Care Course conducted by T.A.F.E. It is hoped that through the skills acquired and the exposure afforded by this course that a more professional service delivery will occur."

    Whilst the above is only an example of one study option, I am aware that there are also others available.

    The Endeavour Foundation Diploma Course material was submitted as an exhibit, and there are also other training courses available, e.g. the Special Needs Course and the Developmental Disabilities Course; and there may be others.

    Accordingly, whilst deciding in favour of the proposed restructuring of the Supervisor classifications, I intend for the parties to make further submissions going to the question of inclusion of references to approved courses of study in the definitions.

    In this regard the order giving effect to my decision will not issue until after I have had the benefit of those further submissions.

    However the operative date for the order, when issued, will be the date of this decision, provided that this particular matter is speedily resolved. I will not impose a definite time limit by when discussions and further submissions should be finalised, but I would expect that only a little time should be required by the parties."

Further Submissions

On the resumption of this matter on 16 June 1986, the parties indicated that whilst some courses of study were currently available, accessibility for employees to those courses is limited. For example, the Developmental Disabilities Course is only conducted in Hobart and Launceston.

As well, entry to this particular course is very strictly vetted and has, from an employment point of view, the drawback of being a full-time course only.

A further impediment to the inclusion of the kind of provision contemplated by me is that there are no alternative permanent courses of study in other regional centres.

The parties also considered that the development of appropriate courses of study which would directly reflect Tasmanian needs is at least five years away.

I accept the immediate problems associated with my proposal and therefore decide that at this stage no further substantive variations to the new classification definitions should be made.

Accordingly there is now no impediment to the implementation of my decision of 28 May 1986.

Employee Training Clauses

It is, however, appropriate that I record that the parties recognise the intent of my proposition and did seriously address themselves to it.

I have no difficulty with the suggestion, that as a first step, clauses be inserted into the award which recognise the benefits of employee training; and that a progress review be undertaken in twelve months' time as to the practical effect of these clauses.

The wording of the proposed clauses, contained in Exhibit S1B, is specific as to the expectation that In-House training be provided and that employees will be expected to participate.

My decision therefore is that the award be further varied to include the clauses: "Training For Supervisors" and "Training for Functional Programmers and Programme Assistants".

I will leave it as a matter for the parties to initiate the agreed progress review. As I indicated at the hearing, I would be willing to chair a meeting of that kind.

The order giving effect to my decisions in this matter is attached hereto and is operative from the beginning of the first pay period commencing on or after the date of my initial decision.

 

R.K. Gozzi
COMMISSIONER