TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act 1984
s.23 application for award or variation of award

Health Services Union of Australia
Tasmania No 1 Branch
(T.4960 of 1994)

WELFARE AND VOLUNTARY AGENCIES AWARD

Award variation - sleep-over allowance

REASONS FOR DECISION

This application by the Health Services Union of Australia, Tasmania No 1 Branch (HSUA) was for the variation of the Welfare and Voluntary Agencies Award to increase the quantum of the Sleep Over allowance from $5.50 to $20.00 a night. Additionally accompanying conditions applicable to Sleep Over arrangements were sought to be included in the award. All variations were requested to be made on an interim basis pending the finalisation of the structural review of the award being undertaken by the parties. The application by the HSUA followed the decision of the Commission in matter T.4700 of 1993 dated 17 December 1993. In that decision the Commission made the following comments:

"A further issue related to a proposed variation of the Sleep Over allowance in the award. An increase in the allowance from $5.50 to $20.00 a night was sought. Having regard to the Conditions of Employment Principle Ms Harvey requested that this matter be referred to the President for him to determine whether the issue should be considered in accordance with the Special Case Principle. In respect of that submission I conclude that the Allowances Principle is appropriate to the circumstances in question.

That particular principle requires that the increase in the Sleep Over Allowance be considered on the basis of work value changes. I understand that a work value case causes the applicant in this matter some concern. Be that as it may I can see no impediment to the case being undertaken in accordance wit the relevant wage fixing principle. In that context, given that a comprehensive review may take a considerable period of time, sufficient material may initially be able to be put before the Commission to facilitate an interim adjustment pending the total review of all of the factors associated with Sleep Over. That of course would be dependent on the substance of the case put to the Commission."

Ms Harvey for the HSUA outlined the history of the Sleep Over allowance indicating that it was included in the award in 1980. She informed the Commission that the 1985 work value review of the award, which has as a central plank the integration of people with disabilities into the community, did not examine sleep over arrangements. It was the contention of Ms Harvey that significant work value changes had occurred since 1980 and that these should be recognised by the Commission by increasing the quantum of the allowance.

In support of her submissions Ms Harvey elicited sworn evidence to the effect that to properly meet the needs of clients programs were maintained throughout the night when disturbances occur. The evidence of Ms Byrne, Executive Officer, Oakdale Lodge, Yalambee was that employees were now accountable for individual client programs and commensurate with the duty of care to clients, employee responsibility had significantly increased. The emphasis was on behaviour modification techniques to improve the general quality of life of clients. Ms Byrne also indicated that service providers were, in the main, not paying the amount of sleep over allowance in the award because it was considered inadequate. The Commission was informed that varying amounts were being paid but even so sleep-over arrangements were still more cost effective than shift work.

Ms Harvey submitted that, on an interim basis, an increase in the quantum of the allowance together with the attendant conditions pertaining to it was sustainable. Her submissions were strongly supported by Mr Sertori appearing for the Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Limited. He indicated that as far as possible employees subject to the award had been consulted and the claimed increase on work value grounds was supported.

In all of the circumstances and having regard to the Work Value Changes Principle and Section 36 of the Act the award will be varied in the manner requested. Given that the variation endorsed by the Commission is interim in nature, it follows that the parties should have regard to the mechanics and operation of the wage fixing principles in any subsequent proceedings to further address the adjustment of the allowance.

The order, operative from the beginning of the first full pay period to commence on or after the date of this decision, is attached.

R K Gozzi
COMMISSIONER

Appearances:
Ms R Harvey for the Health Services Union of Australia, Tasmania No 1 Branch.
Mr M Sertori for the Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Limited.

Date and Place of Hearing:
1994
March 31
Hobart