T1060 - 26 April
|
IN THE TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Industrial Relations Act 1984
REASONS FOR DECISION
This matter concerns an application by the United Fire Fighters Union (the UFU) for a 4% second tier wage increase for all persons covered by the Fire Brigades Award, consistent with the requirements of the Wage Fixing Principles currently in force. At the commencement of proceedings on 2 December 1987 the UFU advised that it had been involved in extensive negotiations with the State Fire Commission over a period of months and as a result agreement had been reached "as to what would be a satisfactory proposal for all concerned to fully justify the complete 4% increase". The UFU then sought to table details of the proposal and formalise the agreement with this Commission. Mr. Pearce, for the Minister for Public Administration, attested to the fact that discussions in relation to the 4% claim for UFU members employed at the State Fire Commission commenced on 1 October and continued through to 1 December 1987. It was submitted however that the package still needed to be subjected to certain formalities regarding the Government, or the Minister for Public Administration as the employer. He confirmed that a package proposal had been arrived at between the State Fire Commission and the UFU, but said the package must be subject to further criteria of the employer before the matter could be advanced before this Commission. Whilst the discussions concerning the 4% package had been between the UFU and the State Fire Commission, they had included a representative of the Office of Industrial Relations from time to time. Having finally completed a comprehensive exercise, the UFU displayed some signs of disappointment at the likelihood of any unwarranted delay in the processing of the agreement before this Commission. This was particularly so since the agreed "offsets" could all be implemented forthwith so far as the UFU was concerned. The UFU therefore preferred to present to the Commission documented details of the total proposals agreed to during negotiations to facilitate award variation, but the Minister's representative objected, pending final approval by the Minister for Public Administration, who is the employer. I must admit I find it difficult to follow how formal negotiations could be conducted and finally concluded on the basis of all of the elements of an agreement being reached on such vitally important matters as a 4% wage increase unless the "employer" (i.e. the Minister for Public Administration) was already being represented by an agent. Even in the highly unlikely event that the State Fire Commission was not acting on behalf of the relevant Minister in its management role on matters such as this, surely the Office of Industrial Relations involvement was with the knowledge and consent of the Minister for Public Administration. Thus, if the Minister for Public Administration was already involved in negotiations from the beginning I can appreciate the fact that the UFU were somewhat perplexed by the turn of events at the conclusion of its negotiations. My comments are not intended simply as an aside, because where one party does the right thing by following proper industrial relations procedures and then runs into a brick wall and becomes frustrated as a consequence, then this is the classic ingredient for disputation to arise. The proceedings of 2 December were of necessity adjourned to a date to be fixed, with the Commission as constituted indicating the matter would be given priority and relisted as soon as advice was received that final consideration by the employer (or Cabinet) had been finalised. The matter was next heard on 23 February 1988, at which time Mr Devine, for the UFU, briefly retraced the history of developments which preceded the finalisation of a package containing cost offsets through improved efficiency and work value items sufficient to justify a 4% second tier increase in wage rates. He said that in May or June 1987 the UFU began to formulate a proposal of its own as to how to achieve a 4% second tier wage increase which is wholly sustainable within the requirements of the Wage Fixing Principles. Then the State Fire Commission was first approached on 17 August 1987. The response from the State Fire Commission and the Office of Industrial Relations at that time was that the UFU should negotiate with them concerning this particular claim. Formal negotiations commenced on 1 October and concluded on 2 December 1987. As a result of those negotiations the parties concerned "reached a proposal which was satisfactory to parties at that time, on 1 December 1987", according to Mr Devine. Upon finalisation of negotiations the UFU made immediate application for hearing and ratification of the package concerned. Having concluded his submissions as to historical background Mr Devine presented Exhibit D1 which was headed `Second tier salary increase for wages for certain employees of the State Fire Commission'. Each item contained in this exhibit was then explained in detail. Essentially the document dealt with the cost of granting a 4% wage increase, cost offset items going to award variations and understandings reached on matters such as flexibility of manning. The cost of granting a 4% wage increase was estimated at $415,000 per annum, and the offsets which were capable of being costed amounted to $417,000 per annum. All parties concerned, i.e. the UFU, the State Fire Commission and the Minister for Public Administration acknowledged the genuineness of each of the items costed out as well as the fact that there are other items which also represent cost savings to the employer, but cannot be accurately costed. The costed items are set out in full in Exhibit D1 attached to this decision. They may be summarised, however, as follows:
A further part of the agreed package concerns the clothing issue for the classification of "Special Serviceman", and is contained in Exhibit D2, also attached. Mr Lowe, for the State Fire Commission, endorsed the entire details of the package presented by the UFU and offered some further explanation of the individual items of such package, particularly as to how they were costed out. He said also that what had been achieved in the agreement is greater flexibility which in the end resulted in increased efficiency in running the State fire service. In going into details on each of the main items he highlighted the fact that some of the matters now embraced in the agreement had previously been the "subject of contention". Broad-banding and trade work by firefighters was a prime example. Understandings now reached as part of the package for a 4% wage increase would undoubtedly result in improved efficiency in the service, even though it is difficult to cost such items. Another area which had been the subject of disputes in the past, but which had now been agreed upon, concerned the number of days of annual leave to be granted each year, given the complexities of the rostering system and associated matters. The consensus view of all parties was that all of the agreed matters contained in Exhibits D1 and D2 should become an attachment to the award. In my view it is important that whilst the details concerned need to be properly chronicled for future reference, attachment to the award is rather cumbersome. Instead I prefer that those matters which properly form part of the clauses of the award be made part of the formal variation. And those items which perhaps can be better categorised as `memorandums of understanding" be picked up as part of Exhibit D1, appended hereto. The representative of the Minister for Public Administration said that the "offsets" had been negotiated in co-operation with the State Fire Commission, the Office of Industrial Relations and the UFU. Also the agreed offsets outlined by exhibits are a true reflection of the agreed matters which were discussed over a period of months. State Cabinet has agreed to the proposed package and from that point of view the employer would have no objection to the package being implemented. It was further submitted that it would be in the public interest that the package put forward to this Commission be implemented in exchange for a 4% increase in wages and salary. I note that there is total consensus by all parties over the acceptance of every aspect of the package put forward in support of a second tier wage increase and find that persuasive. I have also studied all of the material and evidence provided going to what have been described as cost offsets. Such material, and the detailed costings stand the test of close examination, and there is no question that each of the matters, which have been well documented and supported by submissions, are genuine in every respect. Since the cost offsets involve efficiencies of scale which include changes to work practices and changes to management practices; reduction in previously existing demarcation barriers; multi-skilling and therefore work value components; manning levels being rationalised; and resolution of previously highly contentious disputed matters involving both award and non-award matters with a cost component, I conclude that the requirements of Wage Fixation Principles have been met. Because the comprehensive and detailed exercise will result in a 4% wage increase for employees concerned at negative cost and the State fire service will be more cohesive and efficient the adoption of the package presented also satisfies public interest requirements pursuant to Section 36 of the Act. For all of these reasons I have decided to vary the award by granting a 4% increase in wages and salaries together with award variations and undertakings given by all parties going to the question of "cost offsets" as detailed in Exhibit D1. Form of Variation The UFU requested that consideration be given to converting the 4% wage increase into an average flat increase for all concerned. This would of course favour the lower paid sector of the workforce and disadvantage those at the top end of the salary structure. No other party supported this approach, but instead opposed it. I have some sympathy for the general concept proposed and am also mindful of the fact that the UFU canvassed their members and gained their endorsement before advancing such a proposition. However, as I pointed out to the parties at the relevant time, the past two State Wage Case decisions granted $10.00 and $6.00 per week as flat increases. This would of course have already achieved the desired effect of assisting lower paid classifications. The other effect was to have compressed wage relativities. There is a limit to how much compression is sustainable, given that levels of skill, training, responsibility, service and supervision must also be recognised by different levels of remuneration expressed in award prescriptions. For all of these reasons the form of adjustment will be the application of 4% to award rates of pay. Calculations will be rounded off to the nearest 10 cents in the case of weekly (or fortnightly) rates of pay, and rounded off to the nearest $1.00 in the case of annual salaries. Where either an even 5 cents or 50 cents results from calculations made, the next highest 10 cents or $1.00 shall apply. Operative Date The UFU sought variations of the award from the first day of hearing, i.e. 2 December 1987. The transcript discloses that the UFU mentioned 3 December, but that was clearly an error as to the actual date. Reasons advanced for such a claim were that the UFU believed it reached agreement with the employer of its members in accordance with Wage Fixation Principles as at 1 December 1987. In addition, the agreement was in place and capable of being implemented when before this Commission on 2 December 1987. The representative of the State Fire Commission was content to have the operative date determined by myself, but said such date could not be before 16 February 1988 which was the date when Cabinet approved the agreement, even though the State Fire Commission did agree to the package on 1 December 1987. The submission of the Minister for Public Administration was that the operative date of effect of the 4% wage increase should be from the date of my decision. The Minister's representative drew to my attention, and relied upon, that part of the second tier principle which provides in item (d), quote: "The Commission will not award retrospectivity in relation to any second tier increase." Before deciding this important aspect, given the unusual circumstances of this particular case, I enquired as to whether or not the efficiency offsets listed were already in place or were prospective. The responses received illustrated to me that:
Items such as annual clothing issue and annual leave entitlements are not items in which any particular operative date is likely to have great impact. When the parties were before me on 23 February I gave them a decision on transcript and now confirm that the operative date of effect of all award variations in this matter is the first pay period to commence on or after 2 December 1987. I now confirm that decision and confirm also the reasons for decision:
Whilst any organisation is perfectly entitled to adopt any such domestic arrangements, the resultant delay to employees receiving that which they reasonably expected would, in all the circumstances, be grossly unfair.
"The Commission will not award retrospectivity in relation to any second tier increases." And the Minister relied heavily and indeed exclusively upon the wording used in the Principles. I am of the view that in a constructive sense, the second tier agreement in this matter was in place as at the time it was before this Commission on 2 December 1987, and thus retrospectivity does not arise.
At the final day of hearing I raised this very fact and gave full opportunity for my observation in this regard to be taken up, but it was not. If there had been some clearly identifiable good reasons for the delay such as perhaps the necessary checking of figures contained in costings; the further examination of the feasibility of certain proposals; or the availability of funds, my decision as to operative date may have been different. But no attempt was made to advance a case beyond that of the literal limitations imposed by the Principles.
This reference may be found at page 30 of the decision, where the Full Bench stated in relation to this aspect - "Our interpretation of the responses to questions asked during proceedings leads us to conclude that the spirit and intention of the package will be observed by all parties. In order to ensure that the new Principles are not frustrated without fair trial, we make it clear that we will closely monitor the progress of individual negotiations where the matter is the subject of an application." The proceedings properly before me on 2 December 1987 were part of that monitoring process and my decision embraces the concept of the spirit and intent of the Wage Fixation Principles.
The approach I have taken in the circumstances of this matter are totally consistent with that part of the Act.
The Order reflecting the award variations is attached.
A. Robinson
Exhibit D1 SECOND TIER SALARY INCREASE FOR WAGES FOR CERTAIN 1. Background 101 Representatives of the Office of Industrial Relations, the State Fire Commission and the United Firefighters Union have been meeting regularly since 1 October 1987 for the purpose of negotiating a suitable package of offsets in compensation for a 4% second tier wage increase. The Award in this instance is the Fire Brigades Award of the Tasmanian Industrial Commission. 2. Costs 201 There are approximately 300 employees affected. The cost of the Commission's wages bill for these employees is $10,390,000. The estimated cost of the 4% second tier increase is $415,000. For the calculation of offsets, the pay rate for a Senior Firefighter has been used, being $13.94 per hour. 3. Cost Offsets 301 Hours of Duty Temporarily Transferred Personnel
Training Division, Fire Brigades Award to be amended:- "Clause - (a) Maintain their substantive rank and salary. (b) Not attract overtime unless time worked exceeds forty (40) hours per week over an eight (8) week period. (c) Be given the option of working on holidays with pay, as described in Clause 21, or, if preferred, to have the day off duty. If that holiday is worked, leave credits will remain unaffected. Should, however, a person have the holiday off, a corresponding day will be debited to the person's leave credits. (d) Transfers are generally for a minimum of two (2) years, however, a person may apply for any position for which that person is qualified during the period of temporary transfer. (e) should the transfer require the applicant to be promoted to officer rank, normal appeal provisions will apply and the successful applicant prior to promotion will be required to successfully complete a medical examination by a Commission Medical Practitioner." This offset is calculated to save the Commission in excess of $70,000. An officer could work 14 nights (6 p.m. to 11.p.m.) and 4 Saturdays or Sundays (8 hour days) per 8 week cycle. The potential wages for these extra 102 hours at double time would be $2,840. There are 6.5 eight week cycles per year less A.R.L. equalling approximately 5.5 cycles, 5.5 times $2,840 = $15,620. There are 9 transferees at any one time (2 Field Officer Division, 4 Training Officers, 2 Fire Investigation Officers and 1 Fire Safety Officer) who would at present work half the available "outside" hours. The maximum cost to the Commission would be $140,580 but based on known work patters, savings are estimated at $70,000 per annum. Total: $70,000 302 Rationalisation of Uniform Issue The Uniform issue is determined in accordance with the Fire Brigades Award. By the rationalisation of the issue, $33,000 in direct savings would be made, together with other savings of at least $15,000. This is the estimate of savings to be made in storemen's time by leaving the storemen more time to devote to the quick turnaround (receipt and issue) of operational and consumable stores. There would also be a reduction in stock holdings of uniforms, a shorter lead time required to order uniform items. Reduced stock holdings also offers "opportunity" savings by releasing funds for investment purposes. The revised uniform issue is as per Annex A. Total: $48,000 303 Siting of Fire Extinguishers by Service Department Personnel All fire extinguishers are sited in public buildings by operational personnel or officers from the Fire Safety Division. This proposal is for Special Servicemen to be responsible for the siting of extinguishers in buildings of up to two (2) storeys. This would have the effect of freeing up the operational personnel for the inspection and siting of larger complexes. Under existing arrangements, if a Special Serviceman sees an area that requires a fire extinguisher, e.g. an electrical switchboard, that person writes a report and forwards it through his supervisor to the Chief officer. The chief Officer then details an operational officer to inspect the site. As this officer is on duty he must be prepared for a fire call, therefore he will travel to the site in a fire appliance normally with a crew of three (3) firefighters. The officer then writes a report to the Chief Officer who forwards it to the Servicing Supervisor. The Servicing Supervisor then returns to the site and affixes the extinguisher. The time delay in this operation could be up to two weeks. In the meantime, the site could be unprotected. The savings in time, together with reduction in travel expenses, have been assessed at $20,000. Total: $20,000 304 Trade-work/Broadbanding The Commission currently is restricted from requiring Fire Brigades Award employees to carry out any extraneous duties not connected with firefighting. (FBA Clause 44) This agreement would allow a degree of preventative maintenance as outlined in Annex B. The situation presently exists where a major appliance such as the Snorkel could be put off-line in a minor fault such as a blown indicator globe. If this happened on a Saturday morning, the vehicle would be out of commission until Monday morning unless a mechanic was recalled to repair it. The mechanic would be paid a minimum of three (3) hours recall at double time (approx. $85.00) to replace an 80¢ globe. Savings on tradesmen's wages and contractors, together with improvements in efficiency, have been calculated at $45,000. Total: $45,000 305 No Overtime Claim for First Five Minute Run-on At present all overtime is computed to the next fifteen minutes. By not claiming the first 5 minutes of overtime the Commission will save 15 minutes of double time (½-hour pay) on each occasion. Should a crew of one officer and three firefighters return to the Station from a fire call even thirty seconds after official finish time, the whole crew is paid a minimum of 15 minutes at double time. Estimated saving of $5,000. Total: $5,000 306 Annual Leave Entitlements Currently 49 consecutive days per year are taken by Fire Brigades Award personnel in the form of annual and recreation leave. These days are accumulated on the basis of:- 28 for twelve months service The Tasmanian Industrial Commission at a previous hearing ruled that as the eleven statutory holidays are taken consecutively, two weekends would be encompassed and so a total amount of 15 days is the entitlement for Clause 21 of the FBA (Statutory Holidays). Therefore the actual entitlement under Clause 10 of the F.B.A. (Annual Leave) is 50 days per year, not 49. Having regard to the Annual Leave entitlements of shift workers elsewhere in the State Service, e.g. Hospital employees, of 51 consecutive days, it is likely that an application by the U.F.U. for similar entitlements would be successful. The present 49 days are taken under a system of rotation and amounts to 30 days leave every 224 days. This roster system also allows for 7 leave periods per year with approximately 41 operational staff on leave at any given time. It was envisaged that the extra day, up to 51, would be implemented after finalising agreement on Easter Tuesday. The changing of holiday rosters is a complex matter with implications for brigade efficiency. The United Firefighters Union would enter into an agreement with the State Fire Commission not to pursue the inclusion of these extra 2 days into the annual leave quantum, thereby maintaining the present holiday roster system. The benefits of such an agreement:- (a) the fiscal offset for approximately 782 working days saved (2 x 313 members) = $87,000 (b) if the leave entitlement is increased to 51 days it would be difficult to maintain 7 leave periods per year with 41 members on leave. (7 x 51 = 357 plus change-over days). Reducing from 7 to 6 periods would require that 48 personnel be on leave at any given time and so would have the effect of reducing operational strength by 7 staff. The above agreement not to pursue the Easter Tuesday holiday and maintain the 49 days per annum would allow the present roster to be maintained. Savings have been computed to be $112,000. Total: $112,000 307 Flexibility of Manning Agreement The present manning agreement is restrictive insofar that there can be little or no use of personnel away from the rostered station. The proposed new agreement allows the Commission to use personnel for training purposes provided they start and finish at their rostered station. This gives the Commission the ability to better utilise personnel in training activities. This proposal would immediately allow the release for training of one man each from Burnie, Devonport and Launceston, and three from Hobart. This would lead to a better utilisation of the Commission's two major training complexes at Cambridge and Bell Bay. Savings of $50,000 are estimated. Total: $50,000 308 Alteration of Crib Times/Spread of Hours This proposal extends the spread of hours available for Crib from the present specific times to those below:- 15 minutes morning Crib between 0900 and 1100 hours This allows longer continuous periods for activities such as building inspections, evacuation practices, flow tests, fire safety activities, familiarisation, and other Fire Service related activities deemed necessary. The present system allows for 4 work periods with the maximum available time in any one period being 2¼ hours. The proposed new spread still allows for four periods however it is possible to have continuous periods for the above activities of up to 3¾ hours and if crib is taken on side, a possible 5 hours almost continuous activity is possible. For example, at present if a crew if to undertake pump training on the Hobart waterfront, they would leave the station following morning crib at approx. 1030 hours. By the time they set up (approx. 15 minutes) and pack up to return to the brigade, the morning training is reduced to 1½ hours. The above proposal would allow an actual training session to be 3¼ hours. Savings, attributable to an improvement in efficiency are estimated to be a minimum of $20,000. Total: $20,000 309 Reduction of Evening Crib from ½ hour to ¼ hour Reducing evening crib from half an hour to quarter of an hour represents an increase of in excess of 3,000 possible training hours per year. Together with the flexibility in 308 this is estimated to give a saving of at least $42,000. Total: $42,000 310 Electronic Fund Transfer Of the total payroll of approx. 300 brigade personnel, 125 cheques are paid per fortnight. No cash payments are made. This proposal is that all brigade personnel be paid by electronic funds transfer. Total savings have been determined to be $5,000. Total: $5,000 4. CONCLUSION 401 The State Fire Commission has identified total savings of $417,000 in the package proposed. These may be summarised as follows:-
The negotiated savings above are considered by the Commission to represent a minimum of 4% offsets. It must be noted that the United Firefighters Union has accepted changes to work practices and changes to management practices and several of the proposals include action to reduce demarcation barriers and advance multi-skilling. Many of these areas have been totally un-negotiable in the past. 5. RECOMMENDATION 501 That Cabinet approves the second tier 4% wage increase for the State Fire Commission employees under the Fire Brigades Award, based on the proposals contained herein, and that in accordance with Cabinet policy, the matter be submitted to the Tasmanian Industrial Commission for ratification. Nick Evers Exhibit D2 SPECIAL SERVICEMEN 3 x Polyester work shirts (Blue) Blue uniform shirt ANNEX 'A' FIRE BRIGADES AWARD - UNIFORM ISSUE
Estimated cost savings 192 x Firefighters @ $114.79 + 84 Officers @ $ 107.96 + 17 CROs @ $105.67 = $ 32,904.71 ANNEX 'B' Trade Work / Multiskilling Matters being envisaged are mainly preventative maintenance jobs which if not completed promptly could lead to a major breakdown or major downtime. Example Vehicles Replacement of minor parts (fuses, globes lenses etc.) Equipment Painting, varnishing Buildings Minor Painting (door, window, cupboard etc.) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||