IN THE TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act 1984

Earlier separate hearings dealing with these applications resulted in the parties being referred into conference. T.664 of 1987 has also been the subject of a decision by the Commission as currently constituted dated 23 March 1987.

However, while that decision refused the application the parties were given the opportunity for further negotiations.

Discussions since those earlier hearings resulted in the two matters involved, being linked, with certain proposals being put by the Tasmanian Prison Officers Association (T.P.O.A.) as a means of resolving all applications.

T.508 of 1986 seeks to take away the discretion currently given by Clause 14(1) of the Prison Officers Award (the Award) to the controlling authority, to pay a first aid allowance. The clause sought, if included in the Award, would make the payment mandatory once the employee obtained a current St. John Ambulance First Aid Certificate or its equivalent.

The ultimate response to T.508 of 1986 was an application from the Minister for Public Administration (the Minister) (T.702 of 1987) seeking to delete the current provision from the Award.

T.664 of 1987 and T.684 of 1987, applications by the Tasmanian Public Service Association (.T.P.S.A.) and the T.P.O.A. respectively, seek the reduction of the 1/40th divisor for the calculation of overtime, shift allowance and weekend penalties reduced to 1/38th.

My decision of 23 March 1987 in T.664 of 1987 deals with this matter and in part says:

In protracted discussions since adjourning the separate applications, the T.P.O.A. has put a proposal to the Minister which has been refused. They now seek Commission endorsement of their proposal. The T.P.O.A. proposition is:

· that the allowance of $389 p.a. provided by clause 14(1) of the Award be reduced to $133 p.a.;

· that as recompense for the above, employees receive a 1/38th divisor in lieu of the current 1/40th.

In supporting the above, I was advised by the T.P.O.A. that 118 employees were currently receiving the full allowance of $389 p.a. The savings represented by the reduced rate would more or less equate the cost of the 1/38th divisor. It was conceded that 44 officers, who currently did not receive the $389, would under this proposal receive the lesser allowance of $133 thus making the cost approximately $5,000 p.a.

The T.P.S.A. did not support the proposal to reduce the First Aid Allowance and so far as the 1/38th divisor is concerned, did not resile from its position detailed in the transcript of proceedings in T.664 of 1987.

Before dealing with the merit of these applications, I commend the T.P.O.A. for having genuinely addressed the issues and for being prepared to table a compromise, not only with the Minister but also this Commission.

For the reasons detailed in my decision in T.664 of 1987, I am not prepared to vary the current divisor for overtime, shift allowance and weekend penalties from 1/40th to 1/38th.

In respect to T.702 of 1987, the application by the Minster to delete Clause 14(1) First Aid Allowance from the Award, that application is also refused. No useful purpose would be achieved by such a decision.

From a technical view point, a decision to delete the clause from the Award, would simply mean a similar provision in the General Conditions of Service Award has application to Prison Officers.

In considering the merit of the provision, the Minister relied on changed circumstances to support his request for deletion of the First Aid Allowance payment. The changed circumstances he submitted, meant that no Prison Officer currently qualified for the payment.

If the above situation is accurate, the Minister has through the wording of the clause the authority to stop any or all payments.

In the absence of me being satisfied that no officer currently qualifies for the payment, I believe the controlling authority should put its own house in order.

Having so decided, it seems to me that the parties should again confer in a genuine attempt to resolve the issues between them. There is no doubt in my mind that the T.P.O.A. in the offer that they made, were moving in the right direction.

If there is no longer a need for properly trained and qualified St John Ambulance First Aid Certificate holders, within the prison system, there can be no justification for the continuation of the payment of the current allowance.

In any case there appears to be substantial double counting in the provisions of Clause 14.1 and 2. If not, at the very least the wording should be changed.

In all the circumstances, I direct the parties into conference and will receive a report back on progress, at a relisting of these applications before 15 February 1988.

JG King
COMMISSIONER