T471 and T507
|
IN THE TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Industrial Relations Act 1984
An application for variation of the Prison Officers Award (the Award) T.471 of 1986 seeks to add to Clause 15 - Qualifications, subclause 3 the following: "(iii) or in the event of having completed the necessary 5 years service but the Controlling Authority has not conducted a Senior Course within the previous 12 months, the appointee must successfully complete the Senior examination within 2 years from date of such appointment." At proceedings before the Commission on 17 September 1986 a further application T.507 of 1986 was joined to T.471. That application seeks to add to Clause 8 - Salaries, subclause (i) of the Award the following: "PROVIDED FURTHER that a Prison Officer who has completed five years satisfactory service but has not, after a further period of six months been given an opportunity to sit the abovementioned examination, the allowance of $262 per annum will be paid." The proviso to subclause (i)of Clause 8 reads: "PROVIDED ALWAYS that a Prison Officer who has completed five years satisfactory service as such, and who in addition has successfully completed an approved Senior Prison Officers examination, shall be paid an allowance at the rate of $262 per annum." Mrs. Herbert appearing for the Tasmanian Prison Officers' Association (TPOA) submitted that the applications were lodged to overcome what the Prison Officers regarded as a current problem. It was explained, that there was currently nine (9) Prison Officers who had in excess of five (5) years service and who were being disadvantaged. Four had completed five years' service in May 1985 and the other five in February 1986. However, the prison administration had not made available the opportunity for those officers to undertake the Senior Prison Officers examination. They were therefore being deprived of the opportunity to apply for vacant Senior Prison Officer positions and the payment of an allowance of $262 per annum. It was submitted by Mrs. Herbert that in the past examinations had been available to officers without unreasonable delays. However, the last Senior Prison Officer course was conducted in May 1983. The nine officers were not only deprived of the opportunity for promotion and to qualify for the allowance, but also the chance to act as Senior Prison Officers during periods of temporary absence of those officers. Mr. Quilliam appearing for the Minister for Public Administration conceded that longer delays now occurred before Prison Officers were able to sit the qualifying examination. This situation had been brought about by staff ceilings and consequent staff shortages, imposed as a result of financial constraints. It was not practicable to run a Senior Prison Officer course with less than 10-12 participants. Given the tight staffing situation a loss of that number of employees from duty creates considerable difficulties and results in added cost. Mr. Quilliam further submitted that the timing of Senior Prison Officer courses was a management prerogative. There should not be an award provision overriding what he considers is management's right to decide when such events take place. He foreshadowed that the next course would be conducted in February-March 1987. Mr. Vines appearing on the second of the hearing days for the Tasmanian Public Service Association supported the TPOA submissions. I will deal firstly with the proviso to the allowance, a decision on which leads naturally on to the acting up and promotional aspects. The merit of the allowance was not debated before me. I therefore assume that its inclusion in the award has mutual benefit i.e. it provides an incentive for the Prison Officer to better equip himself; and, for management it assists in providing properly qualified Senior Prison Officers. On that basis I do not see the application of the clause being at the sole discretion of the employer. In other words, whilst I accept that management has the right to determine when Senior Prison Officer courses are conducted, it does not have that right to the exclusion of the interests of the employees. I am therefore prepared to vary the Award by adding a further proviso to Clause 8 subclause (i) as follows: "PROVIDED FURTHER that a Prison Officer should be afforded the opportunity to complete an approved Senior Prison Officers' examination before the completion of six years' service. Where an opportunity to complete the Senior Prison Officers' examination is not afforded a Prison Officer within that period, such Officer, on successful completion of the examination (at the first attempt) shall be paid the allowance from the six year anniversary date." If the above new proviso has the effect of ensuring Senior Prison Officer courses are held, as far as is practicable, before six years' service is completed, the other problems highlighted by the TPOA will be generally resolved. I therefore refrain from further varying the Award. However, if over time the TPOA is still not satisfied with the situation, believing its members are being unreasonably deprived of promotional and acting up opportunities, it can of course reapply to this Commission. In relation to the four employees who have now completed six years' service and have not been given the opportunity of completing the Senior Prison Officer exam; on successful completion of the examination (at their first attempt) those officers are to be paid the allowance from the date of this decision. The date of operation of the Award variation will be the first pay period commencing on or after 7 October 1986.
JG King
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||