T2457 T2887 T2888 T3792 T3869 T2609 T3741 T3791 T3862 T2884 T2991 T2993 (30 November 1992)
|
TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Industrial Relations Act 1984 Tasmanian Teachers Federation (T2887 of 1991) Secondary Colleges Staff Association Minister administering the Tasmanian State Service Act 1984 Tasmanian Teachers Federation Tasmanian Teachers Federation
Award - Wage Rates and Conditions of Employment - Teaching Service "special case" applications - State Wage Case October 1989 - Structural Efficiency Principle REASONS FOR DECISION INTRODUCTION We are required to determine a wide range of issues relating to the Teaching Service (Teaching Staff) Award and the Teaching Service (Directors and Superintendents) Award going to wage rates and conditions of employment. Whilst the claims by the Tasmanian Teachers Federation (TTF) and the Secondary Colleges Staff Association (SCSA) (the unions) for increased wages in line with prevailing standards elsewhere in Australia are the most significant claims in terms of cost, other matters going to teacher contact hours, class sizes, teaching loads and payment of excess hours; the proportion of Advanced Skills Teacher 3 (AST3) and Assistant Principal positions, and transfer of teachers, also have significant cost implications. Conversely, the application by the Minister administering the Tasmanian State Service Act 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the Government) to vary the hours of duty and the length of the teacher year would, if granted, enable sizeable cost savings to be made. Given these circumstances, together with a climate of fiscal restraint within the State, the move towards enterprise bargaining which was endorsed as a Wage Fixing Principle in the State Wage Case decision of February 19921, we would have thought there was presented an ideal opportunity for the parties to have realistically negotiated a mutually acceptable package of outcomes which would fairly balance their competing interests. However, instead, the chosen path was to vigorously argue each and every item supported by a procession of witnesses and a plethora of exhibits from both sides. In the result this has been one of the longest running cases in this Commission's experience, covering a total of 56 sitting days extending over a period of two years in all. The Industrial Relations Act 1984 requires that in the exercise of its jurisdiction the Commission shall act according to equity, good conscience, and the merits of the case without regard to technicalities or legal forms. We are also required to have regard to the public interest. Apart from these requirements we have a set of self imposed wage fixing principles which, at the time of their making, had the support of the Government, trade unions and private employers. Significantly, the principles which apply in Tasmania, so far as this case is concerned, are the same as those which applied at the same time in all other industrial jurisdictions, and which were used by those tribunals to establish teacher wage rates currently applying. All of the arguments advanced and the positions put to us by each of the parties and interveners need therefore to be considered in the context of the requirements of the Industrial Relations Act as a whole, and the wage fixing principles. Whilst the parties accepted the need for applicants to prove each case on proper criteria, the notion of national pay parity for the teaching profession could not be ignored. Accordingly, during the course of proceedings we were apprised of decisions issued by other State tribunals, and that of the Australian Commission, regarding wage rates established in respect of teachers. These references formed part of the case advanced by the unions. Whilst the Government rejected the notion of interstate comparisons of wage rates, it provided figures relating to class sizes and length of the school year applying elsewhere to support the Government's position in relation to those matters. For our part we accept that as a matter of equity, decisions of other tribunals and the reasons advanced for arriving at such outcomes can be useful where the circumstances are the same or very similar. However, as a Tasmanian tribunal our primary task is to determine whether or not the strict tests as to merit and public interest can be met on all of the evidence and other material before us, before considering other relevant material. The present claim for wage parity for teachers also needs to be considered against the background of:
The Commonwealth was granted leave to intervene, as was the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), the Australian Teachers Union (ATU), the Independent Teachers Federation (ITF), the Tasmanian Catholic Employees Association and the Tasmanian Registered Teachers Association. In addition the Tasmanian Trades and Labour Council (TTLC) exercised its statutory right to make a submission in relation to certain of the matters before us. Mr Durbridge for the ATU presented to us material establishing the public interest for improved salaries for Tasmanian teachers. He did this by reviewing the opinions expressed by employers in this regard, quoting Ministers of other States and Territories, presenting decisions of other industrial tribunals and the reasons given by them for granting national benchmark salaries for teachers. It was on 20 May 1991 when Mr Durbridge told us that Governments had been "on notice" that the trade unions had been seeking common salary benchmarks for teachers for two years and as any prudent employer would, they should have made budgetary provision for such an eventual outcome. The ACTU intervened to support the submissions of the TTF and the SCSA, and Mr Belchamber said the claims of both organisations were consistent with a national strategy and the salary claims involved increases of amounts greater than was generally available under the structural efficiency principle of the August 1989 National Wage Decision. But in light of other considerations which were particular to the situation confronting the teaching profession in Australia, the ACTU considered this matter to be a special case. Other arguments for granting the wage claim from the ACTU perspective included the following:
Ms Allen, for the Commonwealth Minister for Industrial Relations, told us that the purpose of the Commonwealth's intervention was to put before us the Commonwealth's support for a consistent national approach to the fixing of salaries and conditions of employment for teachers. We were apprised of outcomes of teachers' salary claims in the other States and Territories and told, on 3 December 1991, that the Commonwealth supported the quantum of $38,000 as the national benchmark figure for classroom teachers at the top of the base incremental salaries scale, but it also recognised local fiscal constraints. Reference was also made to an agreement said to be reached by Ministers for Education accepting that there should be a national benchmark figure of first of all $37,200, and later $38,000 per annum for four year trained teachers. We were also given details of Commonwealth assistance to the States for both recurrent fund expenditure and award restructuring assistance. Ms Allen said that award restructuring for teachers on a nationally consistent basis was an important part of the Commonwealth Government's agenda for micro-economic reform, not only because it was critical to the achievement of greater efficiency in the teaching services, but also because of the pivotal role of education and training in the award restructuring process in the community generally, and its contribution to the future economic well-being of Australia. In its submission the TTLC supported the case put by the teacher unions and the ACTU. Mr Bacon told the Commission that his organisation's argument revolved around the central and crucial importance of education for Tasmania's future prosperity. He adverted to the consistently higher level of unemployment in this State and particularly that of youth unemployment, compared to the rest of Australia and stressed the imperative of attracting and retaining the best trained and motivated persons as teachers to lift the State's economic position. He said that there were many outside factors over which we had no control but which had affected the Tasmanian economy, such as commodity prices, the strength of the Australian dollar, the international recession and national recession. However, the TTLC believed that there were steps that could be taken in Tasmania to improve the situation and that with proper policies, proper actions being taken and a proper strategy towards the future, the whole economic situation of the Tasmanian community could be improved. Mr Bacon submitted that education and the future of education in Tasmania was absolutely crucial. The reason for that was that there was no future in Tasmania for labour intensive mass production type industries. Because of Tasmania's geographical position and because of its relatively low population, it was not possible to have industries in Tasmania which were extremely labour intensive and were producing items for mass production for a mass market. Rather, what was needed was a strategy based on Tasmania's natural resources, based on as much downstream processing of those resources as possible. In particular the strategy should aim at high quality products for niche markets which, by their very nature, required a highly skilled and high quality workforce. He said that this was where the TTLC believed that education was crucial, because it was only through a commitment to education, and particularly to improving education in Tasmania, that we could produce a better educated, more flexible and adaptable workforce, in order that Tasmania could compete in the increasingly international nature of the Tasmanian and Australian economy. Mr Bacon also referred to the Australian Education Council Report, known as the Finn Review, which supported the view adopted by the TTLC in this regard. He gave emphasis to the fact that some of the key recommendations included that Australia must continue to develop both the quality and the quantity of skills and knowledge in our society in general and the workforce in particular. There should be continuing growth in education and training in all educational sectors and in the workplace, so that by the year 2001, 95 per cent of 19 year olds should have completed year 12, or an initial post-school qualification, or be participating in education or training. Mr Bacon said that Tasmania still had the furthest to go in relation to retention rates to year 12, and although there had been quite dramatic improvement in recent times, the Tasmanian performance had not matched that of some other States, particularly Victoria, and this needed to be addressed. Schools were to link education more closely with employment and the provision of a broad vocational education. He stressed that all this had implications for teachers, and the Finn Review proposals implied significant changes to curriculum, assessment, participation and organisational arrangements across the school and TAFE and training sectors. There would be major implications for the ongoing professional development of all teachers. The successful implementation, the Review proposed, of these changes was dependent upon the capacity and quality of teachers to deliver them. It also proposed that we needed highly skilled, creative and adaptive teachers who were appropriately rewarded to make these goals possible. The TTLC believed that it was the central role of teachers in the education system that needed to be addressed, because despite all of the renewed interest in, and emphasis on, the importance of education and the role of teachers, no one could argue that teachers did not play an absolutely central and crucial role in the delivery of education. CONSIDERATION OF SALARY CLAIMS Background: The Teaching Service (Teaching Staff) Award was varied, on an interim basis, to give effect to the second structural efficiency adjustment, operative from 16 August 1990. The variation also resulted in the introduction of a new career structure for teachers with some salaries exceeding the available second instalment 3 per cent limit. We said at that time we would support those increases "in order to maintain the integrity of the proposal before us"2 and that the endorsement of those levels of increases should be "considered to be the first stages of the Special Case proceedings."3 We also referred to comments made on behalf of the Government concerning the new career structure which were that the "new structure provided new opportunities for career progression for classroom teachers".4 We went on to say:
The new career structure that we endorsed was as follows:
It was against that background that the unions made joint application for the variation of the Teaching Service (Teaching Staff) Award (Appendix B). That application, arising from Special Case proceedings in TA62 of 1990 (incorporating TTLC2/90), sought to vary the award in the following respects: (i) to change salary levels and make adjustments to the career structure; (ii) to subsequently reflect salary scales and relevant award provisions in a new Education Award. As a consequence the Teaching Service (Teaching Staff) Award and the Teaching Service (Directors and Superintendents) Award were to be rescinded, and (iii) to reflect in the new award the outcome of our decision on issues identified in our Interim Decision relating to Transfer Provisions, Length of the School Year and Conditions of Employment matters contained in memorandums of understanding, standing orders and associated policies. Subsequently we permitted the unions to amend that part of their application dealing with salaries for teachers. The amendments made on 20 May 1991 were to reflect the benchmark salary of $38,000 for teachers at the top of Band 1 of the proposed structure. All claimed salary rates were later adjusted by the unions to take account of the 2.5 per cent August 1991 State Wage Case. Whilst Exhibit TTF45 was tendered to reflect that circumstance, Mr Lane also submitted that although the TTF and SCSA believed the structure we had endorsed in our August 1990 decision would remain virtually unchanged, there had been developments in other Industrial Commission jurisdictions which he said we should consider. Those developments were that the barriers to salary progression for teachers in Band 1 had either been removed, or they had been reduced to "soft" barriers, which enabled, over a period of years, further progression in Band 1. Mr Lane also referred to the fact that a Full Bench of this Commission had introduced a model award for professional employees in the State Service which allowed progression for employees in the base career scale all the way through that scale to the top incremental level. Each claimed salary Band set out a qualification for progression or stipulated other nominated classifications to which certain salaries should be applied. The actual salaries claimed were as follows:
It was also indicated by Mr Lane that it was the intention of the unions to pursue the claim in respect of the Teaching Service (Directors and Superintendents) Award at the conclusion of dealing with salary matters in the Teaching Service (Teaching Staff) Award. Mr Lane said, as it was the intention of the unions to achieve a new Education Award, Superintendents and Directors should be classified at a new Band 4. The claimed salaries for those categories of employees were as follows:
Insofar as laboratory technicians classified in the Teaching Service (Non Teaching) Staff Award were concerned, Mr Lane requested this matter be adjourned given proceedings in the Public Sector Structural Efficiency Case6 where, among other things, a generic classification career structure was established for technical employees which included laboratory technicians. Accordingly, application T2992 of 1991 was adjourned sine die. Given that the Full Bench in the Public Sector matter7 has now determined a Technical Employees Model Award, we are of the view that Laboratory Technicians should be classified within the Technical Employees stream. To facilitate this process and all of the other requirements for this and the other model award streams, we have decided to refer application T2991 of 1991 to the President for him to consider its re-allocation to the Public Sector Full Bench.8 As already indicated, we were informed by Mr Lane that the Australian Education Council made up of Federal and State Ministers for Education had (in the absence of the Tasmanian State Minister) unanimously supported the motion that the appropriate salary level at the top of the Band 1 incremental scale should be $38,000. Mr Lane submitted, however, that the unions were not prosecuting their claims for the benchmark salary on a comparative wage justice basis with other States and Territories, but on the basis of public interest, structural efficiency and work value changes. Mr Lane also indicated that the granting of the claims would give recognition to the increasing focus on education as a national industry. Mr Lane submitted that:
Mr Lane further submitted that there had developed a realisation that the training and work of teachers, regardless of their location geographically or whether they taught in private or government systems, were very similar. We were informed, with regard to salaries, that near uniformity had been achieved with respect to the benchmark of $38,000 as a consequence of decisions in:
Mr Lane said that these salary levels were determined by tribunals in other jurisdictions following submissions and evidence relating to equity, public interest, structural efficiency and work value changes. He said that it was the intention of the teaching unions in this case to put similar submissions for the purpose of assessing work value changes. We later determined that the datum point for the purpose of these proceedings was to be 1 January 1981, which was the operative date of increases awarded by the Public Service Board in its decision dated 11 November 1981. Work Value It was acknowledged by Mr Lane that work value changes which had occurred since 1981 "will be a major aspect or basis upon which our claim for salary levels in our application is founded."9 To demonstrate work value change the unions indicated that they would discuss changes, their impact on the nature of employees' work, skills, levels of responsibility and the conditions under which work was performed, under a number of headings, including: Curriculum At this point we revisit the submissions of some of the interveners to highlight specific issues raised in support of the claims. Mr Belchamber, for the ACTU, brought to the attention of the Commission the reason for its support of the increases. He said that in the mid 1980s it became apparent that Australia faced fundamental economic problems specifically in terms of our balance of payments and associated levels of foreign debt. There were no quick and easy solutions, other than to overhaul the country's economic base. This required a total change in the way the nation went about work, work organisation and skill formation. This realisation led to significant changes in the area of wage fixing and to the concept of award restructuring. It was submitted by Mr Belchamber that the ultimate goal of award restructuring was to achieve a more flexible, dynamic workforce and economic structure and, as a consequence, a highly competent, competitive society which embraced continuous change in technology and productive processes. He indicated that in the view of the ACTU the challenge to the teaching profession was twofold. Firstly to satisfy the demand from industry and society for a greater level of competence from school leavers. Secondly there was a requirement for teachers themselves to continually upgrade and maintain their skills. We were referred to a submission made by the Secretary of the ACTU, Mr Kelty, appearing before Commissioner Baird of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission in respect of the Commonwealth Teaching Service (ACT) Award,10 in which he indicated that Australia needed well paid teachers in order to provide the intellectual infrastructure and social infrastructure for a mature nation. He said, in essence, that the entire restructuring process of Australian industries would not work without well paid teachers, who have an appropriate career structure and who are given greater incentive to stay in classrooms to teach young people, and to teach adults, in order to improve the skills of the Australian workforce. The ACTU contended that teachers' wage rates should be based on a national approach which provided for wage stability which would put an end to the ad hoc leap-frogging of teachers' wage rates across the country. We were also informed by the ACTU that the wider trade union movement, as represented in the Special Unions Conference in March 1990, considered that any salary adjustments for teachers would provide no basis for flow- on to other groups, except for nurses, a group which the ACTU said should also be subject to special adjustments. The Independent Teachers Federation represented by Ms Matthews provided information to the Bench (Exhibit ITF1) to indicate that, in the non- governmental sector in the majority of states, either $38,000 had been ratified or the expectation was that ratification would take place in the "next few months."11 It was interesting to note from the Statistical Annex, National Report on Schooling in Australia 1989 provided by Ms Matthews that the non-government schools had moved ahead, in that the benchmarks had either been achieved or timetables set in place for their achievement, in the case of Tasmania by 1 July 1992 ($38,130). Ms Matthews confirmed the submissions made by Mr Durbridge that to her knowledge no other employer apart from the Tasmanian State Government had adopted a position that no increase whatsoever should be made to teachers. She said that in most cases it was the amount of the benchmark, between $37,000 and $38,000 that was the subject of some dispute. Ms Matthews also highlighted that the benchmarks determined in other jurisdictions were not "offset" in any way by alterations to conditions of employment. On that particular issue we consider that structural efficiency should not be compromised by leaving conditions of employment outside the parameters of our determinations on the many issues that we are required to reconcile. Conditions of employment are not sacrosant or immune from attention. What follows in this decision on that subject matter is considered by us to provide a balance between cost benefits to the employer and an overall enhancement of the way work is structured. We do not regard the alteration to conditions of employment as falling within the description of negative cost cutting, but rather a rationalisation of conditions which, in some cases, provides uniformity for all areas of teaching, as in contact hours, whether that be in colleges or schools. Whilst the unions' work value claims were specifically identified, the Government directed its responses in a more generalised way. The work value submissions made by Mr Payne on behalf of the Government were prefaced in the following manner:
The Government argued that a number of work value factors claimed by the unions were addressed in a 1979 Public Service Board case and in the Public Service Board decision of November 1981 referred to earlier. The Government alleged that in the 1970s :
We were taken to transcript of the 1979 case in an endeavour to support this contention. The Government claimed, indeed, that these changes were not only "alive and well" but "fully implemented".17 A similar exercise was undertaken by the Government in relation to the 1981 case in which decision was recorded the changes in work that had occurred in the period 1979 to 1981 in the following areas:
We were urged to have regard for the features of those cases and to ensure that changes which were taken into account in those work value adjustments were not included in the current evaluation. It was asserted that the changes claimed to impact on the skills of teachers to a large degree were incremental since 1981 and did not represent new activities in the 1980s and early 1990s. However the Government conceded that there could have been an enhancement of skills or change in the nature of teachers' work since 1981. Transcripts from the 1979 and 1981 cases were introduced into the proceedings after union witnesses had been called and had undergone all stages of witness examination. We were concerned that whilst similar and, in many cases, identical work value grounds were identified in those cases as were being claimed in this one, witnesses were not given the opportunity to qualify or rebut the earlier material. The Government introduced a witness, Ms K. Braithwaite, an employee in the Personnel Section of the Department of Education and the Arts, who was involved administratively in the processes of recruiting teachers, including the maintenance of a recruitment register. The witness gave evidence about the numbers of graduates seeking employment with the Department as teachers in 1992 and the subject areas and locations of their choice. It was claimed from this evidence that there was "an abundance of local home grown experienced and graduate teachers ... seeking employment in our schools for 1992".18 Over 400 local applicants had expressed an interest in obtaining a teaching position for 1992. In addition, the equivalent of 900 full-time teachers were temporarily employed, most of whom would be interested in continuing employment. There had been a significant number of formal applications from interstate and overseas teachers as well as a constant stream of enquiries from interstate teachers seeking employment. Given these conditions it was submitted that the concerns expressed by the unions about the availability of teachers could not be sustained. We were reminded that the unions' claim envisaged increases of between 9 and 11.5 per cent for a four-year trained teacher; 14 to approximately 16 per cent for Advanced Skills Teachers; between 16 and more than 20 per cent for Principals; 24 per cent for Superintendents; 25.8 per cent for Senior Superintendents; and 33.1 per cent for Directors. However, nowhere in their submissions had the unions attempted to depict the varying levels of changes in work value which would justify the different percentages sought. The Government accepted there had been change of an evolutionary nature and that some new tasks had been required of teachers generally. CONSIDERATION OF WORK VALUE We turn now to the specific work value subject headings under which the unions submitted their case and the Government responded. Curriculum Change Mr Lane submitted that the curriculum offered to students from Kindergarten through to Year 12 had changed dramatically within the Tasmanian education system. He said that during the last 10 years numerous subjects had been devised, developed and introduced into the curriculum and that there had not been one single subject which had been excluded from the process of change. In support of the change process Mr Lane indicated that there were two main reports or policy statements which impacted on education in this State, these being the Report of the Committee on Primary Education (the Cope Report) and the Report into Secondary Education: the Future. Mr Lane informed the Bench that the Cope Report recognised the need for curriculum to cater for the needs of a particular school or indeed for the needs of an individual. This had resulted in greater teacher involvement in developing curriculum to meet the needs of students at each school. Even with central development of curriculum guidelines, teachers were involved in committees to review curriculum. When the curriculum was handed to the Schools it was up to the teachers to develop and adapt it to meet the needs of the particular school. Mr Lane said that this was a new skill for teachers which they did "not need ten years ago".19 In support of those submissions Mr Lane referred us to the 1989 Cope Update Responses which considered responses to the question "what have been the major achievements in primary education over the last ten years?" (Exhibit TTF2 Vol.1 p.60). The review of progress comprehended in that question was initiated by the Education Department (now the Department of Education and the Arts) (hereinafter referred to as the Department) with the following responses:
Mr Lane said that those responses reflected some of the major developments which had occurred in the primary sector in the review period. With regard to secondary education, Mr Lane submitted that the Report into Secondary Education: the Future, established fundamental change in the secondary education sector. The Report emphasised that:
It was contended by Mr Lane that whilst some people advocated this approach earlier it had never been fully accepted and developed. He said now that it had been accepted it brought with it great implications for teachers in secondary and primary schools, and secondary colleges. Secondary Education: the Future made the point that secondary schools and colleges should co-operate to provide for students from year 7 to year 12. Mr Lane said that this concept had dramatic influence on curriculum and assessment procedures in secondary education. The document set out desirable curriculum changes. It was stated that:
Through the experiences provided by schools and colleges students should increase their knowledge and competencies, and come to understand how ideas and practices develop and change in response to new circumstances." The policy statement on Secondary Education: the Future also discussed other facets of curriculum including that:
To bring about the changes envisaged in curriculum, syllabuses were required to be developed. In that regard the Schools Board Policy for the Tasmanian Certificate of Education (TCE) involved teachers in curriculum development as evidenced by reference to the Schools Board of Tasmania document (Exhibit TTF2 p.149) "A Guide for Teachers" in which it was stated at pages 151 and 152 that:
and later
Mr Lane informed us that the curriculum changes had been supported from a central (Departmental) or regional base by improved planning and targeting of professional development programs. These programs, it was submitted, had involved teachers in curriculum development and given them the ability to apply the curriculum guidelines. Mr Lane stressed that during the last decade it had become increasingly common for curriculum change to be initiated, devised and developed within individual schools or colleges. He said that curriculum change was either centrally initiated; in those circumstances schools and/or colleges received guidelines which required teaching staff to devise and develop syllabuses; or locally, to vary curriculum offerings to meet the needs of students at a particular school or college. Systemic or regional support was offered or was at least available when curriculum changes occurred and was usually provided in the form of guidance and advice. It was suggested by Mr Lane that this level of support would reduce given the reduction in support staff from 270 to 70. This would mean that curriculum changes would be even more in the hands of teachers generally.
Mr Elliott submitted that his organisation believed that two elements, in particular, working together had revolutionised the curriculum offering in the secondary area. The first element was the growth in the student retention rate during the eighties which, he said
The second element was the 1987 report, Secondary Education: the Future, which he said
The report had led to the introduction of the TCE with new courses, new methodology and new assessment procedures, Mr. Elliott said. Mr Lane submitted further that there had been a proliferation of policy statements emanating from the State and Federal Governments. Some 35 of those policy statements are set out in Exhibits TTF2 and TTF3 (see Appendix A). He said that these policy statements had curriculum implications "which teaching staff in all areas of the teaching service have had to interpret and subsequently incorporate in the process of developing and evaluating teaching programs and strategies".20 He said that one of the most important concepts which had developed was that of the "inclusive curriculum".21 This meant not only focussing on a broad range of competencies from particular curriculum activities but also on the "inclusivity" of social justice, gender equity, aboriginality and multiculturism issues. Mr Lane said that this had a profound impact on curricula as all teachers had to be aware of these particular issues with the result that new teaching strategies and methodologies had to be developed. The Government compared a statement by witness, Mr Poate, alleging that, in the period under review, there had "been the removal of the dogma of a strictly defined curriculum" with an excerpt from the TEND Committee Report of June 1978 which stated:
It was submitted that no other evidence had been adduced to support the contention that there had been a change in the nature of the work in respect to curriculum and the statement by the witness was contradicted by the TEND Report. The Government submitted that educationally the document "Secondary Education: the Future" was significant, but the skills necessary to implement the changes in curriculum were pre-existing skills and there was no evidence which indicated any change or need for a change in skills required. In relation to the evidence of Mrs Edmunds in respect of curriculum officers as distinct from teachers generally, the Commission was reminded that the witness considered that "intensely enhanced skills" rather than "specifically individual new skills" were required.22 Mrs Edmunds, when asked whether a curriculum officer possessed the skills of analysis and communication in any higher degree than an effective teacher, responded -
The Government had difficulty reconciling the claim by Mrs Edmunds that curriculum officers were "the initiators of exploring new and complex ideas"23 with the evidence provided by other witnesses that curriculum development was a responsibility of teachers generally. The Government argued that curriculum changes had been supported by in-service training programs that had been in place in the 1960s, 70s and 80s and had been resourced and funded by the Department and generally carried out inside the employment time of teachers. This situation had to be measured against the claim by Mr Poate that the effect of curriculum changes had been to increase the need for teachers in the 1980s to undertake in-service training programs and to expand their teaching techniques. The claim that in-service training was a recent phenomenon in assisting teachers to adjust to changes was therefore unsustainable. Finding Curriculum development and the involvement of teachers and the impact on their work was intensely debated. We have endeavoured to canvass the respective submissions of the parties, and we have gone to some length in this regard. Certainly the submissions reflect the respective weight of material put before us. The unions have satisfied us that the emphasis on developing "the whole child" and the individualisation of curriculum that has taken place because of it, represents a significant work value change. The change in emphasis is supported by the documentation, Secondary Education: the Future, and the Cope Report which recognised the need for curriculum to cater for the needs of particular schools and individuals. Whilst the TEND Committee Report of June 1978 noted that there had been a tendency to reduce the prescriptiveness of curriculum and to correspondingly increase the work undertaken by schools in this area, we are well satisfied that the significance of the change falls squarely within the review period. It is a superficial argument, in our opinion, to suggest, as the Government did, that curriculum changes resulting from Secondary Education: the Future were educationally significant, but rely on the existing skills of teachers for its implementation and therefore no work value change was able to be considered. Clearly pre-existing skills are involved; however the work of teachers demonstrably altered and new skills had to be acquired. We fail to see the distinction made by the Government between "intensely enhanced skills" and "individual new skills". At a given point in time surely intensely enhanced skills do in fact represent additional or new skills. We consider the whole emphasis in schools and colleges has changed with every opportunity given to each single child to develop to his or her maximum potential. In our opinion teachers have developed new skills to accommodate that very clear new direction in education, albeit that it started to evolve before the commencement of the review period. The overall result represents a significant change in the work value of teachers. With regard to policy issues which have had direct curriculum implications, we accept that this has entailed interpretation of those policies by teachers and led to the development and evaluation of teaching strategies and the development of what is termed "inclusive curriculum". We are of the view that the incorporation into the curriculum of social justice, gender equity, aboriginal and multiculturalism issues, has significantly impacted on the work of teachers to the extent that it can properly be regarded as a favourable work value change which must be taken into account in this case. Methodology The submissions on this subject matter by the unions were again extremely extensive. The Government countered in similar vein to what had been put with regard to curriculum, accepting that there had been an incremental change in the nature of the work and an enhancement of the skills of teachers. However, the same skill requirements and the same level of responsibilities had been identified in the 1981 case. Accordingly the Government would only concede the possibility that there had been an incremental change in those skills. We consider, having regard to the following submissions made by the unions, that it is self evident that demonstrable work value changes have taken place. We were informed that teaching methodology was reviewed and revised to ensure more equitable outcomes or opportunities for students regardless of gender, socio economic environment, geographic location or ethnic origin. Mr Lane said that this had been essential so that overt discrimination may be removed and exclusion by omission may be prevented. He said that in the past 10 years there had been dramatic change in teaching methods and strategies as educationalists had been more aware of the development of children and how children learn. As a result increasing emphasis had been placed on individualisation of learning programs. Mr Lane referred to the document "Pathways of Language Development", (Exhibit TTF2 p.204) and we were told that the pathways approach to assessment and learning development in Tasmania, "has now been accepted Australia wide as being innovative and valid and a most appropriate format ... to approach teaching and assessment of students".24 The thrust of the submissions was that effective learning was promoted best by teachers who worked from each student's needs and interests, had knowledge of individual student development and understood how language developed and was fostered. As a consequence, teaching now demanded the development of individual learning programs and strategies for each student. This in turn had resulted in criterion based assessment. Mr Lane submitted that in the last 10 years there had been a reassessment of teaching practices at all levels of schooling. He said that the reassessment was due to changes in curriculum, community expectations, demands for greater accountability, school structures, social change, student behaviour, the teacher/student relationship and the findings of education theory and research in relation to the learning needs of educationally disadvantaged groups. He submitted that:
Mr Lane said that teachers needed to ensure that all students in a class were involved equally in the learning processes and activities at the level and in a way which best suited their capacities and needs. In the result each teacher must be conversant with and understand the concepts of effective education, co-operative learning, group discrepancies, child centred learning, negotiated curriculum, problem based learning, open ended questioning techniques, and discovery learning. Accordingly, teachers have had to further develop the essential skills of monitoring students learning, assessing their progress, recording techniques, devising programs, discussing progress and the planning of future strategies. Mr Lane said that the students today were not passive learners. They wanted to be involved in the negotiation and decision making process and they were encouraged to take greater responsibility in these areas. The teacher had become the empowerer and facilitator. An example of what was involved was given from Section 5 'Teaching Strategies and Pathways" of the Pathways of Language Development document (Exhibit TTF2 at page 229) where the following comments were made:
Mr Lane said that this approach had now been adopted by teachers. He said that this individualisation of teaching methodology had resulted in the acquisition and development of skills by teachers and an increase in their work due to the need to prepare and evaluate learning programs for individual students. Also individual pastoral care and counselling of students allowed teachers to better ascertain the appropriate learning strategies and teaching methods. This coupled with the application of new behavioural management techniques maximised the teaching effort. Mr Elliott added that this area was linked very closely with curriculum and in colleges the same two pressures, that is, the increased retention rate and the Report into Secondary Education: the Future, had combined to produce significant change. Courses now involved substantially increased activity outside the classroom. More courses were being taught experientially compared with ten years ago. The colleges tapped into various specialist areas in their localities to provide new learning experiences for students in, for example, legal studies, catering, journalism. Finding As we indicated at the outset of this section, we recognise and accept that the changes we have canvassed here represent a significant net addition to work requirements of teachers. It is beyond question that the focus of education has altered dramatically in the period under review. The catalyst for those changes had not always occurred since 1981, but there is no doubt in our minds that the environment in which the delivery of education takes place has dramatically altered. This goes beyond the mere enhancement of existing skills as submitted on behalf of the Government. We have remarked earlier that existing skills are obviously a foundation upon which further skills development is based. In this case, however, we are convinced that the changes involved, although incremental, represent a significant net addition to the work requirements of a teacher. Accountability and Teacher Appraisal We were told that this subject heading referred to the means by which the activities of teaching staff, collectively or individually, were scrutinised and commented on by others. Mr Lane said that accountability was not new but had increased and that now, more than ever before, teachers were accountable to their students, parents, colleagues, the hierarchy of the Department and the wider community. Changes in the economic climate had placed greater emphasis on efficiency and quality and this had made the role of the teaching staff far more demanding in terms of the time, knowledge, skills and responsibility required to do the job. Mr Lane submitted that accountability had also increased because parental involvement in schools had increased. It was put that parents, now, were much more demanding and assertive about their expectations of schools. In recognition of this colleges and schools had developed councils which involved parents in the decision-making process. In conjunction with this Mr Lane said that:
In order to review and evaluate school performance and effectiveness, we were told that teaching staff in schools and colleges devised institutional aims and strategies. Mr Lane said that towards the end of the 1980s this process was extended and formalised as the Department asked schools to design, formulate and implement school plans. These plans were reviewed regularly so that the institutions could better measure their performance. The fact that the Department recognised the need for more deliberate and extensive accountability was widened in the draft document circulated by it in August 1990. The draft was tendered as Exhibit TTF5 - Demonstrating Responsibility - Policy Guidelines Relating to School and System Accountability. The Forward to that document contained, inter alia, the following:
The point made in the document was that there was now "much greater pressure for effective accountability within schools and the system" (p.62 Exhibit TTF5). The reasons for this were stated as follows:
Mr Elliott submitted that schools and colleges, in particular, were increasingly required to demonstrate to the Department that
The Government conceded that there had "been an increased accountability",25 but the features addressed by the unions were in evidence prior to 1981. For example, public scrutiny of the system, attacks on teachers by the media, politicians and interest groups were referred to in the 1981 case as being far more intensive and sophisticated than ever before.26 Accountability for educational outcomes was dealt with under the headings of Curriculum and Methodology. Mr Lane submitted further that as learning programs had become more individualised, teachers were required to undertake self appraisals to evaluate the success or otherwise of what they were doing and how they were doing it. In most cases this was done by evaluating what each student had gained from a particular learning activity. This enabled the teacher to gauge how successfully aims and goals were achieved. This in turn resulted in teachers changing the nature and/or style of their approach and being required to seek advice and assistance from their colleagues. The contrast made by Mr Lane was that previously teachers taught the subject contents by utilising the methodology that was set down. Subsequently the student was given a mark for the work performed. Mr Lane said whether the approach worked or not had not been an inherent part of a teacher's program; now it was. Mr Lane, in discussing performance appraisals, informed the Bench that with the introduction of the Tasmanian State Service Act, teachers were appointed as temporaries. Permanency was not granted until at least the Tasmanian Teaching Certificate (TTC) had been achieved. At the beginning of 1980 the TTC was not a prerequisite for permanent appointment. At that time the TTC was usually granted after 2 years teaching experience. Mr Lane said that now three years of training were required before the certificate was granted. Applicants for promotion now required several referee reports, they then appeared before a Promotion Committee. This was portrayed as a change from the earlier processes which relied on suitability for promotion reports which were prepared by the relevant principal and/or supervisor. Further comments were provided by the appropriate superintendent and that was the end of the matter. Finding We accept that accountability of teachers to students and the wider community is not new. However, and this was acknowledged by the Minister, accountability has increased. We consider that this has brought the work of teachers very much into greater focus, particularly with the formulation and implementation of school plans which permit an informed assessment of what has been achieved. When regard is had for the Work Value Wage Fixing Principle, in particular Principle (a), which states, inter alia:
we are in no doubt that the work environment of teachers has altered dramatically. In our opinion it would be an extremely narrow view if we were to support the suggestion that because the changes taken into account in the 1981 case were represented as "more intensive and sophisticated", that subsequent further developments should not now be recognised. Whilst we understand the attraction for the Government to advance the argument that these factors do not represent a change of significant work value worth, this view is not sustainable when regard is had for all of the material placed before us and which we have broadly summarised. Student Welfare The information provided by Mr Lane sought to demonstrate that the socio economic background of students had educational implications. With Exhibit TTF6 he endeavoured to demonstrate that poverty and education were linked in a "cycle of poverty"27 and that in this cycle the characteristics of poor families led to educational under-achievement by their children which in turn led to poverty in the next generation. We were told by Mr Lane that to break this cycle educational intervention is a key strategy against poverty. The thrust of the unions' submissions was that each student had the right to develop his or her abilities to the maximum extent and to achieve this it was essential that the widest range of curriculum choice be made available so that talents could be discovered and their potential realised. In such a way, the unions submitted, the individual needs of students, including those who were gifted and talented, could be taken into account in planning the content and organisation of the educational program. Even in a single class a variety of teaching approaches could be required to meet the needs of each child in that class. Mr Lane submitted in accordance with Exhibit TTF6, p.64 at point 3.24, that individualised learning for students required the teacher to select appropriate learning experiences in consultation with the student. He said that teachers now have to "know each student in a way which was not considered necessary 10 years ago ... teachers must not only consider the academic capacity of each student ..."28, but they must have the knowledge and skill to maximise learning opportunities for all students. Mr Lane made the point that in order for teachers to plan their approach to individual students and in order to gain the knowledge about their individual students, they must spend more time in pastoral care and counselling activities, negotiating and advising students. Mr Lane said:
The submissions made by the TTF were to demonstrate that the role of teachers had expanded beyond concerns of intellectual capacity, academic attainment and student behaviour. The objective of teachers now was to focus on the education of the child as a whole including the physical, social and moral development of each student. We were informed by Mr Lane that in order to achieve this objective teachers sought to ensure the safety, and physical and mental well being of their students. This had led to development of a "protective behaviour program", the aim of which was to provide each student with the strategies and confidence to take action which would enable them to lessen the threat of child abuse and other abuses including drug and sexual abuse. Mr Lane said that the protective behaviour program was an essential feature of health education in Tasmanian schools and colleges. It provided school children from kindergarten through to year 12 with particular protective behaviour models to follow in support of their welfare. To undertake these programs effectively, Mr Lane submitted that teachers must be aware of the health and social concerns relevant to their students. He said:
In that context Mr Lane contended that teachers were required to be presenters and interpreters of ethical positions consistent with their roles. Mr Elliott submitted that the witnesses had demonstrated that an intensive pastoral care program was essential to the success of the whole college or school program. Colleges in particular were "overcrowded", hence it was easy for individual students to lose their identity and for their problems to go unnoticed. "A pastoral care program enables each student to relate to a particular staff member that they know well", he said.29 None of these things was new, but the intensity of the problems experienced by the students and encountered by the teachers was new. Colleges timetabled formal lessons each week to deal with various aspects of pastoral care, including personal growth, health and social issues, employment, and independent living. The Government alleged that in a philosophic and organisational sense pastoral care and student welfare were very high on the responsibility table of practising teachers prior to 1981.30 It was not disputed that in the period under review programs had been developed to focus on particular student circumstances which may not have existed pre-1981. However there was evidence of statements of the late 1970s and early 1980s which indicated that the human environment within the school was being encouraged to be a warm and secure community.31 There was not an over-reliance on corporal punishment as the instrument for effecting change to student behaviour. These approaches were said to be little different from the current requirements of the supportive school environment policy and the recognition of the need for developing a caring relationship between the teacher and student. Finding It is clear from the submissions and the material presented by the unions that student welfare considerations have moved beyond what was contemplated in the late 1970s and early 1980s. It is somewhat perplexing that the employer would reach the conclusion that approaches to student welfare are little different from past requirements. In our opinion there is a stark difference. The considerations required of teachers on issues such as bringing educational intervention to bear as a strategy to break the "cycle of poverty", to focus on the individual needs of students; determining the relevant teaching approach, and other issues we have referred to, support the contention of the unions that pastoral care, counselling, negotiating and advising students are central elements to achieving the desired outcomes. The submissions of the unions demonstrated that the work of teachers had expanded beyond intellectual capacity, academic attainment and student behaviour. We consider that the dynamics of the role of teachers had undergone significant change in the context of work value. Resources and Working Conditions Mr Lane acknowledged that changes in resourcing of schools and the education system and the subsequent changes in working conditions may not be work value related. However, in this case, he considered there had been changes which had impacted on the "work value of the tasks undertaken by teaching staff".32 Reference was made to the Cresap Report of September 1990 and other Departmental initiatives resulting in staff reductions and restructuring aimed at reducing expenditure by $42.5 million dollars in a full year. The following were considered to be some of the major cuts:
Out-of-school teachers refers to teachers employed in support areas such as curriculum. It was the submission of the unions that with those reductions - 1056 employees, including 696 teachers (144 out of school) - the work value of teachers had increased due to larger class sizes and decreased non-contact time (time out of the classroom) with students. It was put by Mr Lane that with the decrease in the numbers of relief teachers, the reduced non-contact time now available to teachers, was further eroded because of the relief they provide for absent teachers. We were informed that in the primary sector, in the event of a teacher absence, that the affected class was divided into small groups and absorbed into other classes thereby increasing the numbers in those classrooms. Mr Lane said that, as there had been a reduction in relief teaching time of approximately 10,000 days and notwithstanding moves by the Department to overcome some of the resultant problems, increased class sizes would continue. This aspect, together with the reduction in the number of out-of-school teachers, who provided advice and support to teachers, had also had an impact on teachers, according to Mr Lane. In work value terms it was submitted that increased class sizes, together with the concept of educating the "whole child" including the offering of wider curriculum to ensure that each child is catered for on an individual basis, had required teachers to develop new skills in classroom and time management. Mr Lane said that teacher reductions had also impacted on Special Education teachers with few now available in primary schools. He indicated that this had resulted in classroom teachers having to acquire the skills and knowledge to meet the demands and needs of students with special learning problems. The point made by Mr Lane was that there are now fewer teachers in the primary sector. He said:
In the post primary area Mr Lane said that the reduction of teacher numbers, following the implementation of the Cresap Report, "has had a profound effect on the nature of the work of teaching staff".33 The examples given related to teachers teaching in subject areas for which they were not trained. We were informed by the unions that teachers normally train for two subjects. Mr Lane submitted whilst teachers:
A further issue raised by Mr Lane related to the fact that a reduction of financial resources to schools impacted on the day to day purchases which could be made. The unions submitted that the work value changes in this regard related to skills required to manage scarce resources. This submission was put in the context that schools had become increasingly independent and self managing. Accordingly, as this had brought with it more accountability, strategic resource allocation systems have had to be developed. This had led to written resources policy statements based on educational goals and priorities which had provided guidance in the management of resources. Mr Elliott put it this way:
With regard to changes in the decision making process which, we were told, had become more collaborative, Mr Lane advocated that teachers have had to:
In the result, contended Mr Lane, all teaching staff have had to develop new skills in consultative decision making and evaluation and they have had to become more knowledgeable about the parameters of the school's operations, issues mainly in the province of principals some 10 years ago. Mr Lane also highlighted that with the reduction in teaching numbers student teacher ratios had significantly increased. The pre and post Cresap initiatives showed that in secondary schools the 1990 student teacher ratio had risen from 13.07:1 to 15.13:1 in 1991 (15.76%). In primary schools ratios had risen from 19.59:1 to 20.99:1 (7.15%). In secondary colleges the 1991 ratio was 13.6:1, whereas if the 1989 staffing formula had been relied upon the ratio would have been 12:1. Mr Lane submitted that the ratio had altered by 11.8 per cent, but that the ratio of students to teachers was far higher than this, given the enrolments that were anticipated in some colleges. It should be noted that the above ratios do not reflect actual class sizes. The ratios represent students enrolled divided by the number of teachers including those who do not have a direct teaching role. Given the increases in these ratios, it is appropriate to conclude increased class sizes. The Government agreed that there was more pressure on schools and colleges than there was in 1981 to ensure "more appropriate and more effective use of resources, particularly .... in relation to financial and human resources", and added this aspect could be recognised, but it was only incremental.34 It was submitted that student teacher ratios were determined as a matter of Government policy and were outside the Department's jurisdiction. Finding Again the submissions and material presented by the unions leave us in no doubt whatsoever that significant work value change has occurred. The Government conceded an incremental change which could be recognised. We make the point that generally all work value increases could be categorised as incremental. It is the extent and significance of this "incremental" change which must be assessed. After all, the Work Value Principle specifically refers to "a significant net addition to work". The summary of the matters raised by the unions illustrates the requirement for new classroom skills; availability of only a few special education teachers in primary schools resulting in the acquisition of those skills by classroom teachers; teacher number reductions resulting in teachers teaching more out-of-subject classes; reduction of financial resources. Those matters and others that we have referred to demonstrate the impact this has had on the work of teachers and the environment under which their work is performed. Assessment and Report of, and on, Students It was submitted by Mr Lane that changes in curriculum, teaching methodology, employment and societal expectations have required schools and colleges to assess and or evaluate, on an individual basis in more detail and using a greater variety of means, the achievements and progress of students at school. He indicated that individual criterion-based assessment of students was found to be essential as a consequence of the foregoing changes which called for all students to be provided with a program of learning experiences appropriate to their individual needs. We were informed this would not be possible unless teachers were aware of the level of attainment and capacity of each student. It was explained by Mr Lane that in order for criterion-based assessment to support learning, it was important that students knew what the criteria were and understood that this formed the basis for assessment of their learning. He submitted that students have explained to them the criteria to be used. In that process it may be that joint criteria for assessment are developed between teacher and student. When asked by us whether that meant that criteria could be different in each school Mr Lane responded:
We were informed that criterion based assessment had been accepted at all levels of the teaching service. It became widespread throughout the primary sector in the mid 1980s. The move into the post primary area began during this time. However it was not until the development of the new Tasmanian Certificate of Education following the report "Secondary Education: the Future" that wholesale acceptance of this approach to assessment occurred in the post primary sector. In Exhibit TTF9, page 2, the following comments are made:
Whilst the mode and nature of assessment used by teachers had expanded in both breadth and depth the assessment program was now an ongoing, and more than likely continuous process. Students, parents, employers and the general community now expected that the reports they received on the student's progress and achievements were broader and more detailed in their content. Reports, whether written or verbal, provided statements which were aimed at giving the recipient an understanding of the behavioural, social and emotional development as well as the student's intellectual and academic achievement, progress and capacity. There was extensive debate between the Bench and the unions about whether or not criterion-based assessment was actually in place now and could properly be considered as a work value matter. Mr Lane had this to say:
We were also informed that the Schools Board recognised criterion-based assessment as an integral part of the TCE. It was submitted by Mr Lane that the TCE "asks for a lot more information and the only way to get that information is through criterion-based assessment and that's why it is fundamental to the aim of the TCE and it certainly is endorsed fully by virtually everyone in the education community."35 In making student assessments teachers had to look beyond identifying the criteria, to applying the criteria. This may also include peer assessment and self assessment. Record keeping had also altered, submitted Mr Lane, to assist in the assessment process. In Exhibit TTF9 at page 55 we were shown an outline of the types of recording methods devised by teachers to keep individual student information relevant to the assessment process. Mr Lane drew our attention to the Department's policy statement, Secondary Education: the Future which included two key principles concerning assessment and records of achievement. These were:
As a result, Mr Lane submitted, these policies required assessment approaches which emphasised student achievement, gave support and direction to learning and involved students in the assessment and recording of a wide range of achievements and experiences. We were informed that verbal reports to parents had increased markedly during the 1980s. The point made by Mr Lane was that verbal reports could now be made by teachers to parents on request and this was said to demonstrate that there was a need for the evaluation and assessment procedures for students to be ongoing. Mr Lane said that:
As with the majority of other claimed work value features, the Government submitted there were no new or additional skills required to implement the new procedures for the measurement of student performance. Finding We consider that criterion-based assessment procedures represent a very clear and fundamental work value change. Assessment is now based on individual criteria which may be developed jointly between teachers and students. In our opinion criterion-based assessment is a precise reflection of the changed approach to the delivery of education where meeting the needs of individual students is paramount. Student Retention Rates Mr Lane informed us that the retention rate from Grade 10 to 11 and further to Grade 12 had more than doubled in the last decade. We were told that this had dramatically impacted on the nature of the work that teachers undertake, altered the way colleges operate and had an affect on other sectors, notably Grades 7 to 10. The union considered, whilst the reasons for the increase were varied, three major factors were able to be identified:
The increase in the retention rate was supported by the Department through the provision of suitable curriculum. Mr Lane said that the increase in the number of students (they have doubled) in secondary colleges had resulted in the development and adoption of new curriculum offerings, and changes in teaching methodology and the approach to pastoral care. We were informed that secondary colleges now offered up to 150 different courses in any one year. Mr Lane submitted that this had involved teachers in devising, designing, developing, implementing, reviewing and evaluating new courses to meet the demands and needs of students. As part of this process colleges were becoming increasingly technologically sophisticated as they have changed to offer a comprehensive subject choice of more matriculation courses, many of which were aimed at providing students with practical employment-related skills. Teaching methodology changes had been at least the equal of developments in other education sectors. Mr Lane indicated that in the early 1980s the emphasis was on teaching the subject and the method used was deliberately aimed at preparing students for the lecture-style approach used in higher education. The emphasis had changed, we were told, from teaching the subject to teaching the student. As discussed earlier, to ensure the success of this approach, teachers were relying on criterion-based assessment. Pastoral care and student counselling were now also a major aspect of college operations, and were an essential ingredient in the student teacher relationship. Mr Lane submitted that matters such as advice, guidance and assistance in areas of course options and employment choices and further education decisions were discussed with students. However, there also had been a tremendous increase in the need for social or psychological counselling on issues such as drugs, family breakdowns, potential suicide, incest, rape and student pregnancy. Mr Lane said that those issues arose because of changed social values and the proliferation of social problems, and had to be dealt with by teachers who, he said, were involved in many hours of individual counselling. In order to provide the quality of counselling required, a concentrated program to develop and improve pastoral care was initiated approximately four years ago. In conjunction with the emphasis on pastoral care and higher retention rates, Mr Lane submitted that secondary schools and colleges have had to completely revamp their administrative structure. We were informed that with increases in student numbers, the proliferation of course options and a wider range of student abilities, the administrative structures of the early 1980s were incapable of meeting the changed needs. Mr Lane submitted that originally those structures in colleges and schools were established on the notion of subject expertise and knowledge. Middle management was dominated by senior masters and mistresses who were responsible for a subject or department area. This tended to result in colleges being divided into an increasing number of administrative units as the breadth of curriculum offerings grew. Mr Lane submitted that:
Mr Lane contended that with this change, classroom teachers became responsible for the co-ordination of activities, forward planning, financial management and resource management at the subject level. Mr Lane said that this "required new skills and knowledge plus much time without any increase in the provision of non-contact time".36 The unions considered that the increase in retention rates, whilst a dramatic change in its own right, was "directly and indirectly responsible for major changes in the what, the how and the why of college operations".37 Mr Lane informed us that whilst the major impact was on teaching staff in colleges, other areas of the education industry had not been immune from this development. The introduction of the TCE (Grade 9-12) was significantly influenced, according to Mr Lane, by "the increased tendency of students to continue their education."38 Along with retention rates, and in order to assist with course selection by students, secondary college teachers conducted Taster Courses (sample courses) to enable students to experience the type of lessons they would have if they enrolled in a particular class. This also involved subject counselling to individual students. The SCSA added that college teachers were now required to teach across the whole spectrum of students from, for example, "the bottom stream of electronics" to a "top flight" of physics students. This, Mr. Elliott said, required a much broader range of skills and knowledge. The Government submitted that a change had occurred. There had been an increase in the number of students, mainly caused by the high levels of unemployment, but unemployment had also been a feature of the 1970s and student retention rates had been a consideration of the earlier work value cases. Finding We agree that there has been a concerted effort by the State and Federal Governments to implement initiatives to encourage students to stay at school. It is readily accepted by us that subject choices have had to be provided to cater for a wider range of courses. Devising, designing, developing, implementing, reviewing and evaluating new courses, together with dealing with counselling issues arising from changed social values, demonstrates the dynamics of the change. A variety of social problems require counselling by teachers and in that regard programs have been implemented to develop and improve pastoral care in secondary colleges. High schools were not immune to this change. The effect of increased retention rates has also impacted on the administration of schools and colleges leading to the adoption of the Common Administrative Structure. Consequently the role of classroom teachers has altered as we have described. On examination of the material presented and the submissions made, we consider that retention rates and the associated matters we have discussed represent a significant net addition to the work requirements of teachers and to the conditions under which that work is performed. Community Participation and Relations Mr Lane submitted that during the 1980s, as a result of increasing demands and the realisation by educational administrators that schools should be more accountable and more open, the development of closer links between schools and colleges and their local communities had begun. We were referred to Exhibit TTF11 where in a COPE document headed "TOGETHER Parent Participation in Primary Schools" (published in 1985) it was stated:
and later:
As well as the links established with parents in the primary school sectors, Mr Lane submitted that in secondary colleges, and in a growing number of schools, there had been a development of successful and active school councils made up of representatives of the school, the parents and the broader community. Mr Lane said that it was the teaching staff who forged these links. He said:
The involvement of parents also extended into the classroom where, Mr Lane submitted, parents work with teachers, and assisted with, say, a language program, maths, cooking or craft activities which we were told was "a very common practise now in primary schools".39 Mr Lane considered that this closer involvement of parents in these activities meant that teachers were required to be aware of the legal implications. Whilst the involvement of parents referred to by Mr Lane was practised in some schools prior to the datum point, he indicated that post COPE it had been accepted as an involvement every school should pursue. Work experience programs were also said by Mr Lane to have necessitated the acquisition of new skills by teaching staff "if they are to better prepare students for introduction to the workforce, arrange contacts with work places and follow up and evaluate such activities to ensure that students and the work place have both gained the greatest value from the program".40 Mr Lane submitted that the whole emphasis was now on developing closer relationships and links with the community. This was fostered by making school facilities available, establishing networks, promoting a positive school image, and working with the media. Mr Lane expressed the view that for community participation, including the business community, to be successful it was essential for teaching staff to have the skills required to foster that development. Public relations skills and the ability and knowledge needed to convince the community of the validity of the schools activities were required to perform the task effectively. The unions claimed that the submissions and exhibit relevant to community participation illustrated that very complex changes were occurring in education and every conceivable effort was being made by teachers to explain those changes to parents in a way they would not have bothered about "10 or 15 years ago".41 The thrust of the submissions made by the Government was that the community was having a greater say in the use of school facilities, in some aspects of the administration of the school, in some aspects of curriculum, in general consultation with teachers and in school councils. However, the claim that this greater contact represented a significant net addition to the work requirements of a teacher was questioned. The unions had failed to address the extent of change which had occurred since 1981. It was said there was no evidence to show that the increasing duties associated with these features, involving additional "teacher time", required new skills. In short, it was claimed it was more of the same, rather than new skills and new work requirements.42 Finding In our opinion the changes to the work of teachers caused by increased community participation that were canvassed in these proceedings, show that what were ideas and concepts, and even those matters that were in the progress of implementation or had been implemented prior to the datum point, gained in momentum during the period of review. The benefit of a datum point is, of course, to enable an objective assessment to be made over a given period of time to establish whether or not significant change has occurred. In that examination it is also appropriate to consider the environment in which the work is done. We consider that the involvement of the wider community in the activities of schools has reached a level where policy initiatives discussed, for example, in the COPE document, titled TOGETHER Parent Participation in Primary Schools, have reached a stage in their development where recognisable and quantifiable change has occurred. An objective assessment of that change is that it has significantly impacted on the work value of teachers. Clearly, the conditions under which work is performed have also altered in a very significant manner in that the involvement of the community, parents, school councils, industry and the media are now required to be fostered by teachers, which was not the case or the expectation in the 1970s. Societal Changes Mr Lane submitted that in the past decade there had been enormous economic and social changes which had also impacted upon schools and colleges. This had forced schools and colleges to review and alter what they do, and how they do it, and to vary the emphasis of their goals to meet or address the societal changes which had occurred. Mr Lane advised us that with the high levels of youth unemployment, retention rates had increased with the expectation that schools better prepare students with employment related skills. He also indicated there was now a greater acceptance and understanding of social justice issues and gender, race and other social equity matters. He referred us Exhibit TTF12 where at page 16 the following statement appears:
Mr Lane submitted that schools were seen as one of the main vehicles for the rectification of these inequities. As a result, he said, the last decade had seen a change in curriculum, teaching methodology and assessment techniques "to ensure that all students have equitable opportunities".43 Mr Lane informed us that child poverty was increasing and that this made the task of teachers more difficult as they attempted to redress "this social imbalance in educational terms".44 He said that the financial ability of schools to provide educational resources was also impacted on as the capacity to impose a levy was restricted. Whilst this was offset, to a certain extent by a centrally determined levy to schools so effected, Mr Lane said this was invariably less than the levy which the school had set. We were also informed by Mr Lane that students with physical and intellectual disabilities were now integrated, wherever possible, into mainstream schooling rather than restricting their educational experience to special schools. Mr Lane submitted:
Mr Lane indicated that no account was taken of the fact that such students would involve the teacher in extra work. With regard to technological change, Mr Lane contended that with the rapid development in this area teachers needed to provide students with the skills necessary to learn and adapt to change throughout their lives. A further societal change related by Mr Lane concerned the change in attitudes to authority which were said to have altered dramatically. This was said to have contributed significantly to new ways of teachers reacting with and to students. Family breakdowns and separation was at a high level. Mr Lane submitted:
As well the role of women had altered. At page 26 of Exhibit TTF12 the following information was provided:
Mr Lane contended that teaching staff were required to develop strategies to deal with these social changes. He said that none of those issues were incorporated into any formal pre-service teaching courses that most teachers would have undertaken. Considerable in-service and/or professional development must be undertaken to understand the issues and to decide on the most suitable action to be taken. Mr Lane indicated that teaching staff were expected to act as a catalyst to promote certain behaviours from students and to promote certain educational outcomes. In the result, Mr Lane said that teachers devoted a great deal of time to learning and extra planning to:
Mr Lane submitted:
Mr Elliott referred also to the demands the changes in society had made on the pastoral care system and instanced youth homelessness as a relatively new phenomenon. Health education was now compulsory; it was not so a few years ago. It encompassed "AIDS, drugs, all aspects of personal relationships, hygiene and so on. And there is no question that teachers have had to reskill to tackle this work."45 He said:
The Government indicated that there was no doubt there had been a degree of change in the last decade, particularly given the pressures associated with the rising levels of unemployment. However, that change had to be placed in the context of similar circumstances existing prior to 1981 which were considered in that work value case. Further, the societal changes should not be regarded as being of the same dimensions as prevail in other parts of Australia. Finding Societal changes as discussed here serve to highlight the necessary interaction between the community and the tasks required to be undertaken by educators to ensure relevant outcomes. We recognise that societal changes have impacted on most of the issues canvassed by the unions under this work value heading, and have created the community expectation that students should be better prepared to meet the requirements of employers and to handle the social, health and related complexities of modern existence. The learning programs devised by teachers to achieve these objectives have contributed to our assessment that the requirements of the Work Value Principle have been satisfied. School/College Development, Planning and Evaluation, and These particular work value subject areas were intertwined. Accordingly, whilst we have separately summarised the material under each subject heading, one composite finding only has been made. We first deal with the submissions in respect of - School/College Development Planning and Evaluation: Mr Lane submitted that schools and colleges had always been accountable to Government through the Department. However he said that educational, economic and social changes have increased the demand for them to be more accountable. As a consequence schools and colleges have been developing statements of goals, aims, philosophies and policies. Mr Lane referred us to Exhibit TTF13 which set out the purpose of school and college planning in the following terms:
Mr Lane indicated initially school plans were internal documents but with greater community participation there had been increased parent and community involvement in the development of these statements. In some schools, with the establishment of school councils, the involvement had become significant. Concurrently with these developments the Department had required the formulation of corporate plans in line with the priorities established by it. Mr Lane said that:
Mr Lane said that the context of the school plan was as follows:
The following were suggested as important elements of the school or college plan:
Teachers and students form the primary audience for the school or college plan. The plan assists them to:
Mr Lane submitted that it had not been uncommon for schools to have mission statements set out for their own internal purposes but that it now was a "requirement of the schools and colleges to do it and it is a fairly recent phenomena ... the last 2 years that in fact .... schools produce such statements...."46 Mr Lane said that this was a vital aspect of the new structure which Cresap put into place because one of the chief roles of District Superintendents was to ascertain how the school was achieving against the school plan. Exhibit TTF13 showed that the Department expected all schools and colleges to engage in this deliberate planning process for and during 1991. We were informed by the unions that the work value of teachers had increased because this planning process reflected a much broader range of activities or resources for which teachers were now responsible. This was in keeping with the policy of the Department for schools to self manage. Exhibit TTF14 indicated that the Department recognised that a key feature of self management was the need for school development planning. Mr Lane inferred that further credence to the significance of the changes involved was provided by a research report from the Curriculum Evaluation Section of the Department. This report, headed School Planning and Implementation of Secondary Renewal, stated, inter alia:
We were told that as the implementation of Secondary Renewal continued the nature of the changes broadened to encompass fundamental changes to the organisation of educational programs and management of the school. This required teachers to acquire new skills, submitted Mr Lane, through specially conducted professional development activities including:
Administration and Devolution of Decision Making and Responsibilities Mr Lane introduced this issue for work value consideration on the basis that devolution of decision making had seen ongoing change in the last decade but that it had accelerated in the "last 2 years ... with the last six months (prior to 26.6.91) being a time of rapid and major change" (in brackets ours)47. The result of the change was:
Mr Lane contended that up until April 1991 the administration of the school system was centralised with the co-ordination and management of work places being undertaken by three regions. These regions were responsible and accountable for implementing central policies and standards, monitoring and evaluating educational outcomes and managing resources. Colleges were not part of the regional system and had more autonomy. Mr Lane informed us that there had been an ongoing devolution from "head office" to regions and regions to schools. With the development of the individualised approach to teaching central control of curriculum content had greatly diminished. Now the role of the centre was to issue guidelines on curriculum to schools and then to provide assistance. Mr Lane indicated that during the 1980s there had been a progressive increase in funds allocated to schools. Concurrently, colleges, as a result of the Hughes Report had assumed increased administrative autonomy. That Report stated, inter alia:
Mr Lane informed us that in the 1989/90 financial year $M11.6 was provided direct to schools and colleges thus requiring greater workplace based decision making. The money allocated included funds previously controlled at the centre or regional level for professional development. Mr Lane contended that the requirement to take on increased responsibilities as a result of the Cresap Report which adopted the position that "devolution of responsibility to the maximum extent possible is inherently good"48, was a revolutionary change. The Cresap recommendations included the elimination of regions and the establishment of districts with maximum devolution to schools. To demonstrate that school self management was adopted by the Government, Mr Lane referred us to a number of exhibits. Exhibit TTF16 a Circular Memorandum to Principals of All Schools and Colleges from the Secretary of the Department stated, inter alia:
and later:
Mr Lane indicated that schools and colleges had the authority to reallocate money to "different purposes"49. He submitted that whilst there was some central monitoring it was the school's or college's responsibility to make decisions about the resources allocated to it. Mr Lane referred us to Exhibit TTF15 which, he said, demonstrated that teachers were involved in the decision-making process, as was the community. At page 90 of Exhibit TTF15 - dealing with Managing the School Resource Package 1991: Planning Budgeting and Accounting - the following comment was attributed to the Department:
Mr Lane submitted that devolution and self-management were well and truly part of the Tasmanian scene and that it was far more advanced in Tasmania than in "any other State in Australia"50 in the Government school sector. A further matter referred to by Mr Lane concerned devolution of equipment inventory recording and management to schools. Under this self-management arrangement schools were given the flexibility to establish their own manual or computerised inventory recording system. Mr Lane said that this was a new responsibility for those in charge of sections, units and schools. Mr Lane submitted further:
Mr Lane also informed us that the Cresap Report clearly outlined tasks and areas of responsibilities which work places, including units and sections other than schools and colleges, have had to assume. The Report stated, at page 61, that under self-management of schools, the balance of the Principal's role was changed. The Report stipulated:
Mr Lane submitted that the impact of the devolutionary change undoubtedly was greatest on principals and other senior staff who needed enhanced skills to lead and ensure staff involvement. Another aspect of devolution addressed by Mr Lane related to intersectional collaboration between teachers consequential to the adoption of the Cresap recommendation concerning the grouping of K-12 schooling within a geographic area. Mr Lane said that this required teachers to have additional skills and knowledge to ensure an understanding of K-12 needs and processes, including special schools. Other issues referred to by Mr Lane relating to devolution which affect the work of teachers, may be summarised as follows:
The SCSA stated that from the colleges' perspective, the catalyst for moves towards devolution had been the Hughes Report of 1982. As a result, colleges were now self managing, being responsible for providing, administering and funding their programs in concert with their local communities. The Cresap Report had also influenced the way in which school-based management should function, although Mr Elliott conceded that Cresap had impacted more dramatically on high schools and primary schools than on colleges. Devolution had changed the role of every teacher in colleges. Teachers have had to become administrators, managers of individual teaching programs or full participants, principally through the committee structure in decision-making. Mr Elliott submitted that teachers, including both college and school teachers, have had to learn new skills including administration, budgeting, human resource management, writing submissions, evaluation of programs, to mention a few. Mr Elliott said:
It was submitted that schools and colleges now had to handle substantially greater sums of money than in 1980. Documents were tendered which purported to show that in 1980 the Elizabeth College received monies totalling $133,909.08; in 1990 the figure was $761,000, and in 1991 receipts were $1,195,000. Payments for the same years were $138,000, $692,000 and $846,000. In respect of the work value headings of school and college development, planning and evaluation, and administration, and the devolution of decision making and responsibilities, the Government submitted, on an overall basis, the question of school planning, evaluation, administration and devolution of responsibilities were activities which were given significant attention as part of the 1981 case. Mr Payne, however, said that "on the basis of the evidence presented there had been, in our view, an increase in some of these activities at the school level."51 Further:
Finding We have taken into account that some of the issues canvassed in this section were discussed in the 1981 case as submitted by the Government. In our view however the evidence of witnesses and the submissions made by the unions have demonstrated a quantum step forward in the planning, evaluation and devolution processes. The quote from Mr Elliott, which we have referred to earlier, was succinct on these issues.
In our opinion the continuum of change represents a significant work value movement from the datum point. Accountability clearly has increased to the extent that school and college plans are now being put in place to meet the educational requirements of all students. Concurrently corporate plans have been formulated to reflect priorities required by the Department. The objective is to achieve consistent programs, strategies and methodologies, and for appropriate evaluation procedures to be put in place. As the community also is encouraged to have input, the school or college plan has become a means by which Departmental, school or college and community priorities are incorporated into an educational program. We consider that this represents a very much broader and in-depth involvement for teachers, justifying work value endorsement. Teachers demonstrably have become responsible for a wider range of resources as a result of the deliberate move to make schools and colleges self managed. Whilst self management has been in progress for a considerable time, it was given further momentum by Cresap which promoted devolution to schools and colleges to the maximum extent. We accept that in Tasmania these processes are far more advanced than elsewhere in Australia. When other initiatives in these subject areas are considered, e.g. intersectional collaboration between teachers consequential to groupings of K-12 schooling within geographic areas, we are satisfied that these subject areas are appropriate for inclusion for our deliberations on the salaries claim. Technology The unions submitted that their intention was to demonstrate how technological change had impacted on schools and the skills required of teachers. Mr Lane tendered Exhibit TTF19 which, at page 34, referred to the Framework for Applied Learning and Technology Education. The document prepared by the Department, outlined a vision for technology education from K-12. It applied to all areas of the curriculum and was designed to guide and support practice. The thrust of the submissions made by Mr Lane was that the future of our society depended upon the wise use, application and development of technologies. The Tasmanian Certificate of Education Information Technology Handbook set out learning objectives, the intentions of which were for students to use a computer as a tool for learning, effective communication, to be generally confident and competent in controlling programs and appliances encountered in daily life, to create original work, to apply logical processes to problem solving and to develop appropriate skills. Mr Lane informed us that these developments had affected schools and colleges in two distinct ways:
Mr Lane submitted there had been a tendency for computer education to develop in a general way from K-12 with computing equipment being distributed within individual schools serving a wide range of subject areas. He said:
Given the widespread use of computers Mr Lane referred us to page 90 of Exhibit TTF19 regarding Educational Outcomes. This dealt with primary schools and the following observations were made:
Mr Lane submitted:
We were told by Mr Lane, in essence, that what had been set out for primary teachers had application to teachers generally. He said:
Further to the contention that technology had also impacted on teachers with administrative work loads, i.e. principals and senior administrators, Mr Lane submitted that they have had to acquire a much greater knowledge of computers. He informed us that this need had arisen because of the increased complexity of schools and colleges and the responsibilities that had been devolved to them. The development of Tasinet, incorporating most schools and colleges within a statewide computer network has resulted in an increased need to know. Mr Lane indicated that as a consequence appropriate skills had to be acquired by the employees concerned. It was acknowledged by the Government that there had been an increase in the use of technology, both in administration and in teaching. Finding The unions' submissions indicate that information technology, information systems and computer science are now offered from year 9 onwards. Additionally, there has been wide integration of computer technology into a diverse range of subject areas. We consider that this has impacted on the work value of teachers in a significant way. Qualifications and Professional Development It was submitted by Mr Lane that it was generally accepted "both here and at a national level that Tasmania has the best qualified teaching service in Australia"52. Mr Lane informed us that over the last decade on an Australia-wide basis, the percentage of 4-year trained teachers had risen from approximately 40 to 50 per cent, while in Tasmania approximately 70 per cent of the teaching service was 4-year trained. Mr Lane submitted that an increasing number of teachers had been undertaking post graduate studies and that this upgrading was seen as essential to ensure improvement in and maintenance of the quality of teaching. Mr Lane referred us to In-Service Education Guidelines, which he said had their genesis in a White Paper on Tasmanian schools and colleges in the 1980s, which indicated that the Government considered that members of the teaching service needed to undertake in-service education mainly because of the rapidity with which changes were occurring in our society. Mr Lane considered that cultural diversity in schools, economic and technological changes and higher expectations had added significantly to the needs in knowledge, skill, attitudes and values, appraisal "and often the reconceptualisation of the teaching role itself".53 Mr Lane said that initial training clearly cannot meet career long needs. He contended that in-service education was "essential to enable teachers to respond effectively to change in many areas, including the social, economic and cultural environment, curriculum content and organisation, pedagogy, student assessment system and school organisation and policy making processes".54 Mr Lane also said:
Exhibit TTF22, Teachers in Australian Schools, indicated at page 26 that "Tasmanian teachers led master degree studies with proportionally more than 30 per cent undertaking this kind of work than their counterparts anywhere else in Australia". Mr Lane also submitted that in the latter part of the 1980s there had been an emphasis on non-award bearing activities relevant to schools and colleges. He indicated that a growing percentage of those courses was provided in non-student instructional time, thus requiring teachers to use an increasing amount of their own time. He adverted to the fact that teachers spend more of their non-attendance time and/or non-instructional time on informal school-initiated training and development than on formal employer-initiated programs. He made the point that those without classroom responsibilities were more able to undertake professional development during the employer's time. We were told by the unions 20.17 per cent of teachers in Tasmania had been involved in non-award bearing, in-service courses on counselling, compared to 11.40 per cent for the national average. Mr Lane submitted that this correlated with the development of the Supportive School Environment Program which involved a great deal of counselling activity. Mr Lane indicated that this program had been a "trend" in Tasmania over the last two to three years and that was one reason why the percentage figure was higher for Tasmania. Finding It is evident that Tasmanian teachers have met the expectations of in-service training as envisaged in the White Paper on this subject early in the 1980s. This training was considered necessary because of the rapidity with which changes were occurring in society. The fact that the pace of change was identified as a reason for acquiring additional skills serves to highlight that the work of teachers, and the conditions under which work is performed, have changed at a very quick rate. Seventy per cent of Tasmanian teachers are at least 4-year trained; Australia-wide it is between 40-50 per cent. They have added to these qualifications by undertaking master degree studies where they also lead Australia in the proportion of teachers involved. We consider that these skills and knowledge acquired through in-service training, professional development and upgrading of qualifications, assist teachers to accommodate the kind of work value changes we have been discussing. However, we consider that qualifications by themselves are a pre-requisite to do the job. They may distinguish performance between teachers and the innovation and depth teachers are able to bring to their tasks. Qualifications usually are taken into account at the point of entry into a profession and, in that regard, the qualifications and training issues raised here should not attract further work value attention. We are of the view that the work requirements dictate work value consideration and we have made our assessments on that basis. Integration Mr Lane explained that:
Up until the early to mid 1980s special education was confined with very few exceptions to the special education facilities established for that purpose. In 1983 a review of special education conducted by the Education Department found that it would be preferable to educate most children together, whether they had special needs or not, and that it was possible to provide special facilities for that purpose in the ordinary school environment. Exhibit TTF23 contained documents said to demonstrate that the integration of students with disabilities into ordinary classes had a dramatic impact upon teachers, administrators and support personnel. The impact was described in the following manner: 1. Effects on teaching staff in ordinary schools:
- preparing non-special needs students to ensure appropriate reaction - changing timetabling, classroom management, teaching strategies and methodology. 2. Effects on teaching staff in special schools were: - preparation of students for transition or change to another school - liaison with parents to reassure them and prepare them for the change - liaison with teaching staff in new school and guidance officers prior to and after the child being moved - assessment of child's suitability for change and on-going evaluation in consideration with staff of new school. 3. Effects on guidance officers: - assist special school staff in assessing suitable children for the move - assist in identifying suitable "ordinary" school situations - assist "ordinary" school staff with preparation, professional development, assessing students, developing strategies and appropriate teaching methodologies. Mr Elliott contended that the main change was the integration of students who were intellectually disabled and who were formerly taught exclusively in special schools, "or as witness evidence showed, were not educated at all".55 Mr Elliott claimed that in 1980 no college enrolled this type of student; in 1991 all of them did. Mr Payne, for the Government, referred to Exhibit M47, which contained extracts from the Department's Annual Report for 1982, indicating that the process of integrating children with special needs into ordinary schools was in place at that time. The Annual Report for 1975 referred to numbers of students in ordinary schools who received special help, or were provided for by special units or with special facilities, within their home schools. Exhibit B2, which was a document tendered in the 1981 work value case, identified integration of special children as a major change in that period. Mr Payne said:
In replying to the Government's rebuttal of his submissions, Mr Lane maintained that the presence of special students in ordinary schools in the 1970s was not a result of integration. He contended that whilst integration did occur prior to 1981 it tended to be ad hoc and not part of a deliberate policy. Deliberate policy had been developed and implemented since the datum point. Mr Elliott supported the submissions of Mr Lane and submitted that the numbers of special students referred to by the Government were, by definition, physically disabled rather than intellectually disabled. It was in the area of intellectually disabled students that the main changes in work value had occurred. Finding We are satisfied that integration of students did take place prior to 1981. As with some other work value issues in this case, not all change was confined to the review period. In work value cases generally the objective is to determine what, if anything, is different in the period of review compared to the period before it. Integration was referred to in the 1981 work value case, but we consider that substantial changes have taken place since then. We were told that intellectually disabled students were previously taught exclusively in special schools. This is now no longer the case with a deliberate policy of integration being pursued in the current work value period. We consider this to impact on the work of teachers and have taken account of it in our assessment of work value. Supportive School Environment It was Mr Lane's submission that the development of the supportive school environment policy was one of the most important changes to have occurred in the last decade in education in this State. It had marked work value repercussions for teachers. To quote from Exhibit TTF24:
The exhibit referred to the growing awareness that traditional approaches to behaviour problems and discipline resulted in students, teachers and the system itself finding it difficult to maximise educational opportunities and outcomes. This trend was in line with developments elsewhere in Australia and throughout the world. When introducing the concept of Supportive School Environment fundamental changes occurred in schools in relation to curriculum, teaching strategies and student assessment. The development and maintenance of positive teacher student relationships was also required. Most teachers had to acquire skills, knowledge, understandings and values which their training and experience had not provided. The content of Exhibit TTF24 dealt with a variety of topics falling within the concept of Supportive School Environment, including disruptive behaviour, behaviour difficulties, improving behaviour and an example of a pastoral care program, together with the Department's policy statement and program of support for schools. Mr Price for the Government referred extensively to Exhibit M50 which was designed to show evidence of change as far back as 1977. In relation to the 1981 decision he stated:
Mr Price claimed that if all schools had not embraced the programs in 1977 then in the period following 1977 to the datum point, implementation would have occurred. This was not to say, however, that in the period now under review particular programs had not been developed to focus on a particular student circumstance. In answering our question regarding the degree of change, the unions, he said, had relied almost entirely on anecdotal reference and evidence and it was an extremely difficult task to provide evidence "which reacts to the level of significance that the federation has attached to its position".56 In summary, he submitted that having regard to the evidence presented it was not possible to conclude that there had been significant change in this area. Finding We accept that Supportive School Environment has undergone significant development to the extent that it is a "Whole School Approach", and that when introduced it resulted in fundamental changes to the way in which teachers interact with students. We recognise the validity that teachers, to be properly involved in this process, have in many cases acquired new skills. Gender Equity The union's submission, supported by exhibits, went to demonstrating changes that had occurred in relation to the education of girls since 1981. Mr Lane submitted that the education of girls had become a major issue for the community, schools and teachers and as a result of the implementation at State level of national policy, teachers were now required to raise awareness of the educational needs of girls and to ensure that the curriculum was "counter-sexist" and "gender-inclusive". Major changes for teachers have been:
These changes were consistent with the objectives stated in Exhibit TTF36, a statement by the Commonwealth Schools Commission of May 1987 entitled "The National Policy for the Education of Girls in Australian Schools". Ms Moran for the SCSA referred to a witness statement by Ms Hanlon who was Assistant Principal at Rosny College at the time of giving evidence. Ms Hanlon stated:
Ms Moran submitted that there had been a rethinking and a rewriting of the curriculum and changes had occurred in teaching methodology and classroom management. Mr Payne for the Government indicated Departmental support for the concept of gender equity and referred to the 1981 case where, under the heading "Anti-Sexist", activities were being undertaken. He also referred to a witness statement which indicated that in a particular primary school gender equity had not been addressed as a specific policy. This supported the Department's contention that gender equity was a continuing development in the system. He stated:
Finding We accept that gender equity issues have resulted in the development of gender inclusive curriculum and that teaching methodology has altered as a consequence. We are of the opinion that those issues are comprehended in the curriculum, teaching methodology and Supportive School Environment issues that we have covered. Clearly policies of a distinct nature are required and we recognise this. School Work Links Mr Lane conceded at the outset that work experience had been occurring in Tasmanian schools since the late 1970s. However work experience was only part of the planning required to prepare students for work and daily life. During the 1980s there had been an expansion of the activities undertaken by students in preparation for their transition to post school life or further study. Exhibit TTF53, a 1988 document prepared by the Education Department entitled "Planning for Work and Daily life in the Curriculum" was presented by Mr Lane in support of an increase in the work value of teachers. In particular he drew attention to the change in emphasis in curriculum whereby the study of work and daily life was included among the most important fields of knowledge and experience. Mr Lane quoted from p.40 of the document:
Teachers in high schools and colleges had increased their links with business and industry for the purpose of developing work experience programs for students and in the process have had to develop skills in the areas of public relations and negotiations. Teachers were involved in training and preparing students for work experience and visiting students in the work place. They were anxious to ensure that employers gained a good impression of the school. He concluded his submission by stating:
In rebuttal Mr Payne pointed to Exhibit M38 which contained extracts from the first annual report of the Work Experience Advisory Committee, a committee established in 1978. This he claimed was evidence that the Tasmanian education system had re-acted to the needs associated with youth unemployment as far back as 1974 when the Work Experience Pilot Scheme was established. By 1979, 5359 work experience placements had been made. Summarising his submission Mr Payne said:
Finding We have formed the view that School/Work Links have further developed in the period under review, to the extent that changes in curriculum have been made to better prepare students for work and daily life. In addition, links with industry have intensified. On balance we conclude, however, that the changes in emphasis and the public relations and negotiating skills referred to by the unions, have already been accepted by us in areas such as Curriculum Development, Methodology and Community Participation and Relations. Multiculturalism/Aboriginal/Language Education In support of this aspect of the claim Mr Lane tendered Exhibit TTF54 which was subdivided under the following headings:-
Some of the changes claimed to have placed new demands on teachers were:
It was claimed by Mr Lane that multicultural schooling required a delicate balance of skills. Students must be able to access mainstream Australian society, but still preserve their own culture:
Furthermore students often had to be treated differently in the amount of teacher time devoted to them because of different abilities, aptitudes and different ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds. In 1988 the Department released its policy statement entitled Languages Other Than English. The implications for teachers arising from this statement were that all secondary schools and colleges were to provide opportunities for students to learn one or more languages, other than English, and to provide a choice of languages where possible. Resultant changes for teachers were documented in an ATF national survey which showed that in 1988, 48 per cent of Tasmanian high school students were offered Asian language courses. By 1990 the figure had increased to 72 per cent. A range of new subjects had been introduced to the curriculum requiring in service programs, training and retraining for teachers to develop language proficiency. Language teachers had experienced increased learning and a higher work loads and the expectation that language studies would be integrated with other areas of the curriculum. Mr Payne for the Government presented Exhibit M43 containing Education Department Annual Reports for the years 1977, 1979 and 1980. He contended that the exhibit showed that the provision of a multicultural education service was "alive and well" in the 1970s. The difficulty for the Government was that whilst it was agreed that multiculturalism had impacted on teachers, the impact and the extent of the change had not been identified by the union. He said:
Mr Lane in reply conceded that multiculturalism was a factor in the 1970s but, at that time, it meant educating "Australian" students about other cultures. Since that time there has been a complete change in the way that students are treated in schools. Students are now integrated into the whole life of the school and the ordinary classroom as far as is possible. Mr Elliott reminded us of the evidence of Mr Poulson which referred to the fact that 36 nationalities were represented in the community of the Elizabeth College, and that they were taken into the mainstream classes. Teachers were encouraged to attend seminars to learn as much as possible about the cultural differences affecting the college. Mr Elliott submitted that these circumstances were not confined to Elizabeth Matriculation College, and were impacting on schools and colleges to a much greater extent than prior to 1981. Finding We have reached the conclusion that the approach to meeting the needs of these students has impacted on the work of teachers in a meaningful way in the context of work value. The new demands placed on teachers, which we have canvassed, should not be discounted against the role they undoubtedly had prior to 1981. Fee Paying Overseas Students Exhibit TTF 55 presented by the unions to further evidence work value changes referred to a Government initiative in 1987 which commenced to market Tasmania as a destination for overseas students. In return for a fee payment students could obtain education at recognised institutions. As a result of the International Student Program, there were 60 fee paying overseas students attending Tasmanian secondary colleges in 1991 and Mr Lane estimated that there would be in excess of 80 of these students in secondary colleges in 1992. Mr Lane submitted that because these students sought additional help, both inside and outside the classroom, from teaching staff mainly due to cultural and language difficulties, teachers were spending a disproportionate amount of time with them. He said:
Furthermore, teachers have had to acquire new skills in communication and an understanding of the cultures concerned. The tempo of teaching and learning has altered due to the presence of the overseas students in the classroom and teachers have had to manage two widely disparate groups of students so that both remain interested and involved in learning. In addition to the two teachers employed from International Student Program funds to look after the every day needs of the students, they represent an additional responsibility for the teachers who work as counsellors within the college. These teachers were at times drawn into personal counselling when problems arose due, for example, to homesickness. In conclusion Mr Lane stated:-
Finding As with Multiculturalism, we accept that fee paying students from overseas countries have an impact on the work of teachers insofar as extra time may be required to be spent with them in the delivery of the curriculum. For those teachers that are involved in this way we readily understand that extra classroom pressures may result. Personal counselling of those students may also be required when problems arise. In the overall context, however, we consider that the issues raised here have been taken into account in areas such as Multiculturalism, Student Welfare, Supportive School Environment incorporating Discipline and Behaviour Management. Salaries Claim - Teaching Classifications Having regard to our work value findings, supported conclusively in our opinion, by the submissions, evidence and other material presented by the unions, much of which we have canvassed in this decision, we have decided to award the $38,950 benchmark salary ($38,000 adjusted by the 2.5 per cent August 1991 State Wage Case) for teachers at Rung 11 in Band 1. In doing so we will further rationalise Band 1 salaries from thirteen to eleven levels. This raises the questions of translation and barriers. Barriers to progression are currently in the award structure for uncertificated 2-year and 3-year trained teachers. It was submitted that 3-year trained teachers should be permitted to progress, by annual incremental steps, to Band 1 Rung 9 with subsequent progression in the scale on a 2-yearly basis, i.e. Rung 10 would be available after the completion of 2 years on Rung 9; Rung 11 would be available after 2 years on Rung 10. It was submitted that such a proposal was in line with some of the developments in some other jurisdictions, and that it was in line with the structure in Tasmania for non Catholic independent schools. The unions did not advocate a similar approach for 2-year trained uncertificated teachers, albeit that automatic progression to Rung 7 in Band 1 was requested to be endorsed. Progression beyond Rung 7 was sought only upon the attainment of qualifications equivalent, at least, to a 3-year trained teacher. We are prepared to open up the salaries scale to uncertificated, 2-year and 3-year trained teachers in Band 1 in the manner requested with the progression arrangements contained in the claim. We agree that for 4 and 5-year trained teachers placement at entry, in Band 1 should be on Rungs 4 and 5 respectively. Progression arrangements are to be those set out in the claim as amended. However, to mitigate the cost of the salary increases, we have decided that the new salary scales should be phased in with half the increase to take effect from the first full pay period commencing on or after 1.1.93, and the remainder from the first full pay period commencing on or after 1.1.94. Incremental adjustments which would have occurred under the existing award shall apply where that salary exceeds the salary established at 1.1.93.
Instrumental Musicians The variations for Instrumental Musicians are endorsed. This variation reflects no more than appropriate salary reference points as is the case now. Salaries in Band 2 We have formed the view that the claimed increases above the percentage increase applicable in Band 1 are not sustainable. Accordingly, we have determined that the following new salaries should apply:
Phasing in for these salaries will be on the basis of half the increase from the first full pay period commencing on or after 1.1.93, and the remainder from the first full pay period commencing on or after 1.1.94. Guidance Officers and Education Officers Guidance and Education Officers are currently classified within Band 1. The submissions of Mr Lane were that Guidance and Education Officers who meet a specified criteria (to be resolved between the parties) should gain access to Band 2 Level 1, to equate with the Advanced Skills Teacher 1. The rationale advanced by Mr Lane was that the role of these employees was to work with teaching staff, to advise them "and in fact, at times probably to set them on the right path".57 Mr Lane contended unless there was a career option available to this category of employee, and as many are ex-teachers, they may leave those areas of work and try and move into teaching. We are not persuaded that this is a sustainable work value argument and this part of the claim is dismissed. Senior Guidance Officer The current award salary for this classification is $38,297 per annum. The award contains the following proviso with respect to this classification:
In these proceedings Mr Lane initially sought the Band 2 Level 3 (AST3) classification level for this category of employee. This was later amended to Band 3 Level 2. Mr Lane indicated that on the evidence presented and because of the acquisition of new district responsibilities and their relationship with District Superintendents "which is akin to that of a school principal"58 that this classification level was justified. We acknowledge that Senior Guidance Officers were also able to demonstrate work value change. However, we were not convinced that this change warranted the increase requested. Accordingly we have decided to retain a separate classification in the award at $42,686 per annum. Phasing in will be half the increase from the first full pay period commencing on or after 1.1.93; the remainder from the first full pay period commencing on or after 1.1.94. Band 3 Salaries We are not able to support the extent of the increases sought by the unions. However, we consider that the work of Principals has undergone significant change in most areas of school and college activity. We have recognised this for teachers, but consider that the impact on Principals, particularly with regard to school self-management and devolution, warrants extra recognition, which is reflected in the salary rates now determined.
Phasing in of these new rates is to be half the increase from the first full pay period commencing on or after 1.1.93, and the remainder from the first full pay period commencing on or after 1.1.94. Principals of Special Schools Mr Lane informed us that the classification level for Principals of Special Schools in Band 3 had still not been resolved between the parties. We were not advised of the final outcome of discussions between the parties on that particular matter which had its genesis in our August 1990 second instalment structural efficiency adjustment interim decision. If the classification level for these teachers has not yet been resolved, then the Commission would be prepared to assist at the request of any of the parties. Directors and Superintendents As indicated earlier in this decision, the unions also claimed salary increases for employees subject to the Teaching Service (Directors and Superintendents) Award. The details of the claim have also been previously set out. Mr Lane submitted that as a result of government initiatives, social pressures, organisational changes and educational changes, the nature of work of Directors and Superintendents (hereinafter referred to as Directors) had significantly changed with regard to the skills and knowledge needed to undertake new and changed responsibilities. The principal work value changes identified by Mr Lane may be categorised as follows:
It was submitted by the unions that the fundamental educational changes discussed earlier in this decision also applied to Directors. These changes related to curriculum development, teaching methodologies, the assessment criteria utilised, the impact of supportive school environment programs, concepts of gender equity, multiculturalism, Aboriginal education, the utilisation of technology across the curriculum, the implementation of integration programs and the holistic approach to education. Mr Lane contended that it was vital for Directors to understand these educational changes and, accordingly, they had undergone the same learning curve which other employees have undertaken. Mr Lane said this was essential if Directors were to provide the educational and developmental leadership which their positions entailed. Mr Lane submitted the change in educational focus involving the recognition of individual differences between schools and colleges, had resulted in Directors requiring the skill and knowledge to understand "such differences and choose the appropriate strategy and approach for each individual institution".59 The general thrust of the submissions of Mr Lane was that Directors needed to fully understand each of the issues and the implications and ramifications of each program in schools. He informed us that many of them had been directly involved in the management and monitoring of educational programs with the provision of advice and assistance when necessary. Mr Lane referred to many organisational changes which had taken place during the review period, the most recent of which was the Cresap Review in June 1990. Mr Lane said:
Mr Lane indicated that the most notable change, "and certainly the one which has impacted most in work value terms on TISEA has been the development of the district structure".60 He submitted:
Mr Lane submitted further that the leadership role of Directors was now highly complex. He contended that for Directors to be successful they had to have a clear sense of direction, have the ability to communicate departmental policy, and the capacity to implement change. Negotiation skills were cited by Mr Lane as extremely important. He submitted that Directors were increasingly required to relate to groups, individuals, organisations in the community, students, parents, teachers and all the support staff in schools. We have accepted that work value changes of a significant nature have impacted on the duties and responsibilities of Directors and Superintendents. However we agree with Mr Payne that the extent of the increases are not sustainable. It appears from the evidence presented on behalf of these categories of employees that, in formulating the salaries claim, regard was had for the salary of the Deputy Director General of Education and the Deputy Secretary (Education). It is apparent that Superintendents wished to retain relativity to those positions and as a consequence decided to pursue salary increases in the order of 24.5 per cent to 33.18 per cent. Mr Payne argued that the magnitude of the increases could create anomalies vis-à-vis other Departmental positions and that it would not be in the public interest if that was to occur. We understand that concern; however, we make the point that the rates of pay for the classifications of Deputy Secretary, Deputy Director General and Deputy Secretary (Corporate Services) were set by the Department at $81,557. We would have thought that regard would have been had for the possible impact of those salary levels elsewhere in the Departmental structure. The Directors and Superintendents claim that they should retain relativity which clearly was not the intention of the Department when it established, on its own criteria, salary rates at $81,557. But more than that, it is arguing in this case that Superintendents and Directors should not move at all. Presumably it formed the view that new salary levels were justified for the Deputy positions, but that no change to other salaries should be made. In our opinion, work value has impacted on these positions, and accordingly we have decided that the following salary scale should apply:
Phasing in of those salary increases should be the same as for classifications in the Teaching Service (Teaching Staff) Award. That is, half the increase to apply from the first full pay period commencing on or after 1.1.93 and the balance from the first full pay period commencing on or after 1.1.94. Education Award An application for the making of a consolidated Education Award should be made in due course by the parties. Operative Date and Order We have already specified the operative dates for the increases we have determined. To give effect to those increases we require the parties to prepare the appropriate draft orders. Hours of Duty, Contact Hours and Excess Hours The Government's application T No. 2884 of 1991, (Appendix C) amended on a number of occasions, sought to establish revised hours of attendance calculated on a fortnightly basis; a fortnightly instructional load, and proposed doing away with the concept of excess hours payments for secondary college teachers. The Government's application proposed that the normal hours of attendance should be changed to 70 per fortnight, exclusive of meal breaks. It was submitted such a change would allow more time for duties other than direct classroom teaching and would provide a more flexible working pattern to cater for individual schools' timetabling needs. The teacher day would be broadened to average seven hours over a ten working day fortnight. It was proposed that where a member of the teaching staff was rostered for supervisory duties during the lunch break, that time would count in the calculation of the 70 fortnightly hours to be worked by a full-time employee. Except in secondary colleges, teaching staff would be required to be in attendance, at school, at least half an hour before the beginning of the first lesson. The hours of duty for teaching staff in a secondary college would be between the hours of 7.45 am. and 5.00 pm., Monday to Friday. Teaching staff could leave the school or college during the lunch break if not rostered for supervisory duties. Where a Band 1 or Band 2, Level 1 Teacher was required to undertake timetabled instruction (as defined) after 5.00 pm., each hour would count as time and a half towards the fortnightly instructional load. The Government proposed that the fortnightly instructional load of full-time teachers classified at Band 1 and at Band 2, Level 1, was to be no more than 46 hours for kindergarten, and for preparatory class to Grade 6, and 40 hours for years 7 to 12, years 7 to 10 being at high schools and years 11 and 12 being at secondary colleges. It was said the allocation of time to "regularly timetabled face-to-face instruction", also spread over a fortnight, would remove confusion, especially in colleges, over what was "instructional load". The remainder of the teacher day would be available for associated and extra curricular activity. The proposal would ensure that teachers were not required to undertake a teaching load beyond that prescribed. This arrangement would remove the need for an "excess hours" provision in the award. The Government defined "instructional load" as "regularly timetabled face-to-face instruction of students". "Regularly timetabled" was explained by Mr Price for the Government in the following manner:
The Government submitted that it would be inappropriate to require a teacher to work beyond the instructional load hours set out given the preparation and administrative activities associated with, or caused by, additional hours being imposed. In elaboration of this position, we were advised that where an absence was predicted to last longer than a week, a temporary teacher would be employed. Where an unspecified absence occurred, of less than a week, a relief teacher would be employed to respond to the absent teacher's instructional load and such other teaching duties as directed by the Principal. The regulatory power to require teachers to teach beyond the hours prescribed would not be invoked. The provision of a penalty payment for excess contact hours therefore was no longer required. It was estimated that an increase of teacher contact hours in secondary colleges would result in savings of approximately $3.4 million in a full year; a marginal saving in high schools and an added cost in the primary sector of approximately 47 teachers which we estimate as approximately $1.4 million. So far as "timetabled instructional load" was concerned, Mr Price said:
The Government was seeking only a marginal increase in timetabled instructional load for high school teachers, an average of approximately .5 hours per week since, on the evidence, high school teachers had timetabled instructional loads of 19 or 20 hours per week. Secondary college students would be able to avail themselves of a six, instead of a five, line day. Some already have six-line timetables. The method adopted would depend on the curriculum activities offered by the college and what courses students select. The effect would be to give students more access to teaching time. Primary teachers' (i.e. Prep. to Grade 6) instructional load would be reduced by between 1 and 1.25 hours per week which would require a range of organisational and management options to be addressed. On the basis of the present number of primary teachers, approximately 1650, there would be a need for an additional 47 teachers. The TTF, by way of application T No. 2887 of 1991, subsequently amended, sought to insert a new clause headed Teacher Contact Hours (Appendix D) which declared that teacher contact hours referred to "that time a teaching staff member is directly responsible for a student or students, and includes teaching time, class teacher and assemblies". For Band 1 teaching staff maximum teacher contact hours was to be 18 per week. In secondary colleges, however, teaching time was not to exceed 15 per week, the remaining 3 hours per week to be utilised by scheduled electives, tutorials, pastoral care and recreational activities involving teaching as distinct from supervising. The application envisaged a gradual phasing in of 18 hours over 5 years for all other teacher groups. For Band 2 teaching staff the same teacher contact hours would apply, but be reduced depending on the amount of administrative work required and the number of equivalent full-time students attending the school or college. Band 3 teaching staff, being Principals and Assistant Principals, were to observe contact hours on the following basis:
Definitions for "assembly", "class", "class teacher" and "teaching time" were also included. The SCSA submitted two applications, T No. 2875 of 1991 and an amending application T No. 3741 of 1992 (Appendix F), dealing with the teaching loads in secondary colleges and related matters. T No. 2875 was withdrawn. The application sought similarly to fix weekly teaching loads of 18 hours for Teacher and Advanced Skills Teacher 1 positions (provided scheduled classroom teaching was 15 hours with 3 additional hours involving teaching, as distinct from supervision, in scheduled electives, tutorials, pastoral care and recreational activities); 12 hours for AST3 positions (on the basis of 10 hours for scheduled classroom teaching and 2 additional hours as above). The application provided for excess hours to be worked on a voluntary basis and paid for at a penalty rate determined by the formula -
Time worked after 5.00 pm. to count as time and one half in calculating total weekly excess hours worked. A number of other provisos were attached to the proposal. The SCSA supported the proposal to express hours of attendance and contact hours in fortnightly terms and was prepared to accept that principle if it was applied to the weekly hours contained in the SCSA's application. However, the Association strongly objected to the increase in "contact hours" from 30 hours per fortnight to 40 hours. The Association considered that the cost saving in colleges of $3.4 million, as estimated by the Government, indicated that pastoral care, electives and tutorials would not be time-tabled for inclusion in the 40 hours. What eventually was timetabled regularly would be determined by the Principal and there was the potential for electives to be discontinued and for tutorials and pastoral care to occur outside the 40 hours. For this reason the Association considered that the "plus 3 should be retained and specified so the Government does not get the chance, by stealth, to unilaterally impose any increase in load which is beyond our members' capacity to fulfil".61 The Association submitted that college timetables currently may, and do, include tutorials, recreation periods, pastoral care and electives. We were urged to ensure that balance was not disturbed. The Association agreed with the Government that if the instructional load was increased to 40 hours per fortnight, then teachers would not be able to cope with excess hours. The Association considered that there was no need to provide in the award that teachers were permitted to leave the college in their lunch break as they were entitled "to do what they like in their lunch hour".62 It was noted that unlike the current standing order the Government's proposal did not specify instructional loads for AST3s or Assistant Principals. It would be a threat to the effectiveness of AST3s and Assistant Principals if their teaching load was to be determined on an ad hoc basis. Generally the Government's proposal would see less time available to allocate to individual tuition. It was claimed that lunch hours were frequently used for this purpose, but that would not be the case under the Government's proposal. Reference was made to the evidence of Mr Poulson and Ms Hanlon in relation to increased responsibilities of management in recent years and the evidence of Mr Poate concerning the devolution of responsibility flowing from the effects of reports made since 1982. This was said to be supportive of the unions' concern that there was insufficient time at present for a teacher to perform all his or her tasks during the school day, and any added teaching time would exacerbate that situation. Further, if teaching time for AST3s and Assistant Principals was increased to meet the exigencies of the Department, the devolved committee structure applying in schools and colleges would collapse. The Association submitted that the award must include defined teaching loads for AST3's and Assistant Principals as set out in its application. That is, 10 hours scheduled classroom teaching plus 2 hours in scheduled electives etc. per week for AST3's, and 5 hours scheduled classroom teaching for Assistant Principals. The Association was concerned that the use of the word "regularly" in the definition of instructional load would allow the Department, for example, to require a teacher to take an absent colleague's class on an ad hoc basis which would not be recognised as "regularly timetabled". This concern was expressed even though the Association conceded that the Department had indicated to us that it was not intended to require teachers to fill in for absent colleagues. On that point, it was submitted that if the Government's proposal was adopted the award should provide for a maximum number of hours of instructional load. The estimated savings of $3.4 million in the secondary college sector suggested that more than 85 teaching positions would not be required, which would impose intolerable strain on the remaining teaching resources. Smaller subjects, that is in terms of student numbers, would vanish from the curriculum such as some languages and specialist matriculation subjects like analysis and statistics, and advanced biology. In addition, new, experimental subjects like catering, tourism studies and automotive studies would also be in jeopardy. The Association claimed the Government's proposals were cost efficiencies rather than structural efficiencies. The SCSA claimed that secondary colleges were already staffed as though all teachers were on 18 contact hours per week; that is, the real workload, because of the use of excess hours, was now 18 hours per week. Pastoral care and electives were deemed to be essential in "the huge educational institutions our colleges have become".63 Those programs were the colleges' way of "reaching out and claiming those students who would otherwise see themselves as anonymous and unimportant cogs in a giant machine".64 Ms Moran declared:
The SCSA requested the status quo in terms of Standing Order No. 1 be included in the award. Excess hours provisions were the best means of coping with absences, but not as a permanent solution. Ms Moran said the Government was asking us:
Mr Billing, for the TTF, supported the notion of flexibility for schools to manage their teaching resource within reasonable constraints imposed by specified fortnightly contact time and applauded the proposition that all K to VI teachers had a right to non-contact time. However, the exclusion of the lunch break from the 70-hour per fortnight on-site time was rejected in the strongest terms. It was suggested that the evidence clearly demonstrated that teachers "do considerable work during most lunch hours".65 Under the Government's proposal, only allocated supervisory work during the lunch break was to be counted toward total fortnightly working hours. Not one of the 12 witnesses supported an increase in on-site requirements, Mr Billing said. If the Government's claim meant that flexibility was improved by facilitating current practices, such as cyclic timetabling and the banking of time for purposes such as parent-teacher nights and staff meetings, the Federation would endorse it. In relation to contact hours, the Federation suspected that, in colleges, teachers would be required to take the current equivalent of 4 certificated subject lines, that is 20 hours per week, but other teaching activities, such as pastoral care or electives would be outside those hours. Sport and recreation which were also seen as part of the school curriculum, would fall outside the 20 hours per week as well. The TTF considered the Government's proposals were deficient in that contact hours were not specified for teachers in Band 2 Levels 2 and 3 or Band 3. Such an omission would leave staff open to exploitation while allowing the employer to neglect the resource needs of schools. So far as the issue of excess hours was concerned, the TTF submitted that there was a need to provide some additional recompense, not just for secondary college teachers, but for all teachers; provided the employment of teachers on excess hours was not at the expense of relief or casual teachers. The TTF argued that the Government's proposals had more to do with achieving a cost-neutral outcome for the special case than having any educational merit. The Federation could not accept any proposal which improved the lot of some while penalising others. The TTF urged us to adopt its (the Federation's) definition of contact hours, and reject the government's proposals which would increase workloads by up to 20 per cent for secondary teachers, by up to 33 per cent for college teachers, and up to a minimum of 15 per cent for kindergarten teachers. Findings: Hours of Duty We consider that the Government's proposal to require teachers to be in attendance for seventy hours exclusive of lunch breaks per fortnight, or an average of 35 hours per week, is entirely appropriate. This arrangement will provide schools with the flexibility to more effectively use their human and material resources. It sits squarely within the structural efficiency principle under which these claims are being processed. The proviso which will enable time spent on allocated supervisory duties during lunch breaks to be included in the seventy hours is also reasonable and appropriate. The requirement for teaching staff to be in attendance at least half an hour before the time of beginning lessons, or in the case of secondary colleges, between the hours of 7.45 am. and 5.00 pm., Monday to Friday inclusive, is the existing practice and is endorsed, as is the proposal to count timetabled activity after 5.00 pm. as time and a half towards timetabled instructional load. Contact Hours The concept of instructional load being averaged over a fortnight received support from all sides and clearly has educational and efficiency merits. We endorse that notion. However, the apparent distrust between the employee organisations and the employer makes the adoption, in full, of either party's proposals difficult, particularly in relation to what represents instructional load. We therefore propose to adopt the hours of instructional load claimed by the Government and an amalgam of the definitions from the Federation's application and from the Association's application to ensure that those important timetabled features of a teacher's work, being scheduled electives, tutorials, pastoral care and recreational activities, count as instructional load. We concur with the Government submission that there should be more equitable conditions across the teaching service. The proposed new instructional load hours will achieve that aim. We also accept the Government's submission that we should not fix an instructional load for Assistant Principals and AST3 classifications. Those managerial classifications should be in a position to determine their own teaching load, subject to the needs of the school or college and to the requirements of the Principal. We consider that the requirement for instructional load to be regularly timetabled is essential for simple and accurate calculation of those hours. To allow instructional load to be accumulated on an ad hoc basis would create uncertainty and eventually lead to disputation. Accordingly we propose to insert a clause in the award which will provide: A fortnightly instructional load for a full-time teacher classified at Band 1 and at Band 2, Level 1 of no more than the following:
"Fortnightly Instructional Load" means regularly timetabled face-to-face instruction of students and includes -
but does not include time with a class for the sole purpose of supervision. Provided that additional teaching activities which are voluntarily undertaken by teaching staff, and are not approved variations of their instructional load, shall not be included in their fortnightly instructional load. We have given anxious consideration to the manner in which new instructional loads could be phased in. The problem is compounded by the disparity in contact hours between the various school and college sectors. In addition, the payment of excess hours to secondary college teachers, which has applied for many years, has further complicated the issue because the standardisation of contact hours means that excess hours will no longer be paid. This, or course, has a direct impact on the take-home pay of some secondary college teachers. If we were to phase in the hours for secondary college teachers, which possibly could mean there would be a need to retain excess hours payments for those concerned, then the cost of what we have determined in this case would substantially increase. Given Tasmania's economic circumstances, that is not, in our view, a viable option. Accordingly we have decided that all new instructional loads shall commence from 1.1.93. Against that, we consider that the phasing in of the new salaries, over what is a relatively short period, should be regarded as a balancing factor. Excess Hours We note the firm submissions of the parties that it would be unfair to require teachers of classes in years 7-12 to carry an instructional load in excess of 40 hours per fortnight; the Government regarded excess hours as being unnecessary in the circumstances and the SCSA claimed the load would be so heavy that their members would find extra hours an intolerable burden. In view of the undertaking from the Government, we find that there is no need for an excess hours provision to be inserted in the award. The parties should prepare the appropriate draft order to give effect to our decisions in these matters. Teacher Year Part of the Government's Application T2884 of 1991 (Appendix C) proposed a new subclause 11A. titled "Teacher Year". The Government proposed that the school year be extended by an additional 5 days per annum, that is, additional to the days already required for attendance by virtue of the Education Regulations and the Tasmanian State Service Regulations, to facilitate school planning, curriculum development, professional development and for any other purpose determined by the principal. It was claimed that teacher absences during term would be minimised if the proposal was accepted and pupil-free days would be eliminated. Furthermore, continuity of the teacher/pupil relationship in the classroom would be enhanced and potential savings would arise in the reduced need for relief teachers. It was proposed that the additional days would not be imposed immediately and that they would be phased in over two years to allow for the re-arrangement of the school calendar year, i.e. 2 days additional from 1.1.93 and 3 extra days from 1.1.94. In opposing the Government's claim the SCSA sought to have the matter deferred pending a review being conducted at a national level of a number of matters including length of the teacher year. In any event, it was contended, conditions of employment should be considered separately from the work value case. It was the SCSA's view that there was no need to increase the school year to provide professional development for college teachers as ample time already existed during student absences from colleges. The TTF disputed the Government's submission that to extend the teaching year would be simply formalising an existing voluntary practice. The Government's case was based on a liberal interpretation of witness statements and any extension of the school year would impact on teacher workloads because of the additional time spent in preparation. Tasmanian teachers already worked more intensively than their mainland counterparts and there was a critical limit to teachers' work, beyond which stress factors affected performance and as a consequence productivity decreased. Insofar as professional development was concerned, the Federation contended that adequate time was available in early December for this purpose and that whilst some cost savings could be achieved, there was doubt as to the capacity of the Department to organise professional development across schools in peak periods. The Federation submitted that a substantial number of teachers was prepared to use vacations, and to attend classes "after hours", to further their professional development and, accordingly, compulsion was not necessary. An option, preferable to an extension of the school year, would be to increase the number of student free days which were minimally disruptive or attach student free days to the Easter break. The Federation rejected any proposal that principals or district superintendents should determine the use of any additional days. Participative decision making should be utilised by peer group involvement in discussion and negotiation. In reply the Government said that the proposal to extend the school year was put forward for a variety of purposes, not merely for professional development. Consultation and collaboration with staff would be essential to enable the participation of staff in a variety of programs at school or district level with minimal disruption to the students' education program. Finding We reject the submission that we should defer a finding on this matter until the results of the national enquiry are known. The organisation of professional development, other teacher training time and school planning during school holidays without the need for so called "student free days", is considered by us as being a reasonable response to the management of a school. Such an arrangement will not impact to any significant degree on those teachers who currently use their vacation time to engage in professional development courses. We note that the Government agreed with the proposition that the Principal and staff would need to consult and collaborate with each other to ensure the most productive approach to such matters. Accordingly we accept the thrust of the Government's proposed new clause, titled Teacher Year, which adds additional days in the manner we have determined to those already prescribed by Regulation. The parties should prepare the necessary draft order. Class Sizes The TTF, with Application T2888 of 1991 (Appendix E), submitted that we should, by way of the award, regulate the size of classes in schools and colleges in order to prevent the imposition of an excessive workload on teachers. The issue of class sizes was an industrial as much as an educational issue because it had bearing not only on educational quality but on conditions of work. The Federation contended that the workload of a teacher was directly affected by -
It was claimed that the Government had already altered the staffing formulae in schools and colleges which had the effect of increasing the size of classes and consequently increasing the workloads and responsibilities of teachers. Class sizes had grown substantially during the 1980s and 1990s. Whilst no conducive empirical evidence was available to substantiate the connection between class size and teacher stress, the Federation maintained that there was a nexus between the two factors. The Federation put forward a draft award provision (Appendix E) which limited class sizes to between 15 and 45 students, depending on the number of teachers per class (two in the case of dual unit classes), and the factors mentioned above in items (a) to (f). Mr Hugo McCann, Academic Dean to the Faculty of Education at the University of Tasmania, gave evidence in relation to class sizes going to perceived problems in the recruitment and retention of highly skilled teachers, the effect of larger classes on teaching performance, student achievement, and on morale and stress in teachers. The witness was unable to be specific about what was the maximum class size which would deliver flexibility and efficiency. He noted that his evidence was about education or class effectiveness rather than economic efficiency. He suggested that on the best evidence he could find in his research, class sizes of 22 in the primary school years, and 25 in high school years were appropriate, with adjustments to take account of the pupil profile of the class. Asked whether teachers in classes of more than 30 could effectively deal with the TCE curriculum, Mr McCann said there would be teachers who would cope and teachers who would do very well; others would run into trouble because of the TCE's focus on communication and literacy. The witness said he opted for a smaller primary school class because of his realisation that literacy and communication skills needed to be well developed in the early stages of schooling. However, although he considered small class sizes improved the quality of teaching, Mr McCann admitted that there had to be a trade-off between economic efficiency and the notion of educational effectiveness. As to the relationship between class size and the recruitment of teachers, the witness conceded that there was no objective evidence to show that intending teachers entering from year 12, or upon graduating from university, were influenced by class sizes. The Federation submitted that class sizes were a factor in the attraction and retention of teachers; that class sizes had a crucial impact on the teaching and learning environment and on student outcomes; and that class sizes were already too big for teachers to respond effectively to the expectations of current policy documents, particularly "Secondary Education: the Future" and "Our Children: the Future". Accordingly, it was possible to justify the setting of maxima in Tasmanian schools and that it was feasible and desirable to set them. The Government submitted that the staffing of schools was not a matter which should be determined by award, rather it was a matter of Government or employer responsibility. The methodology and system used for allocating teaching resources was described to us. Part A of the formula was a per capita allocation based on predicted enrolment; it involved a predetermined sector weighting which had regard to the differences in curriculum complexity and to the educational values to the educational program provided in each of the sectors. Part B of the formula was an allocation based on the educational needs index. The educational needs index was calculated by adding the SES Index (a factor which is determined from information provided by the Australian Bureau of Statistics) to the percentage of students on loan issue or Austudy. Part C of the formula related to the distance of the school from the District Office. There were four district offices in the South of the State, two in Launceston and one each in Burnie and Devonport. Part D of the formula reflected the size of the population centre in which the school was located. The formula was said to indicate a commitment by the community and the Government to distribute resources in as equitable a manner as possible. The Federation, the Government said, had not substantiated its claim in relation to actual numbers of pupils per class and there had been conflicting evidence from the witness. It was claimed that Mr McCann had clearly indicated there were variables which made it difficult for a decision to be made as to the appropriateness or otherwise of a particular class size. Those variables, the Government said, were teaching and learning styles, the nature of the pupils, their ability, maturity, social background and the subject being taught. The prescription of maximum class sizes in the award would create an administrative nightmare; would impact on the employer's ability to finance, manage and allocate its human and financial resources; and would seriously affect the Government's ability to maintain existing educational services. The Government asserted there was no evidence to indicate a connection between class sizes and work-related stress. If we approved the claim, an additional 556 teachers would be required at a cost per annum of $19.6 million based on the claimed salaries. Finding The Federation's claim in respect of class sizes is dismissed. We are not satisfied that at this stage we should endeavour to regulate by award the number of students which a teacher should be required to teach in a class at any one time. We accept that establishment of an arbitrary maximum number of students in any given circumstances would give rise to administrative difficulties and anomalies. This is not to say that there should be no attempt to ensure that class sizes are kept to a manageable and educationally efficient and effective number. We note the evidence of the witness, Mr McCann, and his recommendation that class sizes of a maximum of 22 in primary school and 25 in high school are appropriate and desirable. We are not satisfied that a clear and unequivocal link has been established between class size and work related stress. We accept the Government's submission that an award prescription dealing with class size would impact significantly on the administration of the teaching service and on the provision of educational facilities to the community. Of itself this would not necessarily prevent us from making a determination on this issue. However, at this stage, for the reasons we have stated we will refrain from making any finding on this matter. Senior Staffing Configuration The unions, through identical Applications Nos. 3791 of 1992 and 3792 of 1992 respectively (Appendix G), sought to insert in the award provisions regulating the number of AST3 and Assistant Principal positions in senior secondary colleges, secondary schools and district high schools. It was claimed that the applications reflected the status quo and were based on the Government's current senior staffing configuration proposals. The applications were not seeking an overly generous number of promotion positions. In the senior secondary college area approximately 23 per cent of teachers were in promotable positions, that is AST3s, Assistant Principals and Principals. With the increased responsibilities and changed duties at the management level the number should not be reduced. Any cut-back in the numbers of college administrators would affect stress levels in college teachers. The Association informed us that it desired an award provision to protect the longstanding formula which the Association believed was in danger of being ignored by the Government in order to offset the gains made in the AST1 category. The allocation of AST3 and Assistant Principal positions should be regulated by award as were the classifications for Principals. The TTF endorsed the thrust of the Association's submissions, although expressing the view that the current formula was not "optimal". The TTF was concerned that the Government would move unilaterally to amend the senior staffing configurations given it had made it clear it wished to resile from the agreement and to adjust senior positions in the primary school sector given, amongst other things, pressure from the Tasmanian Primary Principals Association. The Government, in accordance with Section 32(5) of the Industrial Relations Act 1984, formally requested us to have regard to the Tasmanian State Service Act 1984 and attendant Regulations, Administrative Instructions or Employment Instructions issued under that Act, in our consideration of this matter. It was submitted that Section 33(1) of the Tasmanian State Service Act charged the Head of Agency with the responsibility to devise organisational structures for the effective, efficient and economical operation of the Agency, and to assign a classification to each position in the Agency in accordance with award requirements and classification standards. We were asked not to interfere with the Head of Agency's statutory duty and discretionary power to determine how the Agency's structure would be staffed and with what classifications. It was conceded that if management practices were inadequate and had a direct impact on employees, then our involvement would be entirely appropriate. However the issue of promotable positions was not of itself a matter with which we should be concerned. Whilst accepting that the wage fixing principles referred to the need to develop improved career paths, it was argued that that did not necessarily imply that the number of promotion opportunities should be fixed by the award. As an alternative position the Government submitted that the definition of "industrial matter" in Section 3 of the Industrial Relations Act, which excluded matters relating to "appointments, or promotions, other than in respect of the qualification required for advancement" precluded us from fixing the number of promotable positions required in any given workplace. Finding We appreciate the unions' concern that the Government had announced its intention to resile from its previous agreement regarding senior staffing. We also appreciate the fact that it took considerable time and effort to obtain, from the Government, the document on senior staffing upon which the application was based. However, the right to establish the number of positions at any promotable level within an award is a matter which, generally speaking, should rest with the employer. In the absence of any examples of practical difficulties, we consider it unnecessary to include a senior staffing formula in the award. In the event that any specific problems arise, then the Commission could become involved. Accordingly the applications are dismissed. We make no finding in relation to the Government's secondary submission. Teacher Transfers Both the unions made late applications for the Teaching Service (Teaching Staff) Award to be varied so as to make provision for conditions and limitations which attach to the transfer of teachers. (Appendix H and Appendix I) The separate claims were complex and detailed because they covered a wide range of circumstances, and included provisions covering, inter alia:
The SCSA explained their application as a necessary step to preserve the status quo and to provide a form of protection to its members. Mr Elliott outlined the history of events over the past 12 years as they related to what was known as the "Tenure of Employment Agreement" disputes which had occurred in relation to such issues, and the alleged failure of the Government to allow the alleged agreement to be perpetuated. We were told by the SCSA that there needed to be a protective award prescription because the Government now relied upon its prerogative to deploy teachers throughout the State, with individual teachers having appeal rights under the Tasmanian State Service Act. It was emphasised to us that this position was unsatisfactory to the SCSA and its members who felt let down by the abandonment of alleged promises and assurances given in the past to that organisation and to this Commission in other proceedings. The Association claimed that it and its members were being treated inequitably in that the Department had reached an agreement with the then Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia, effective from 1 October 1991, on a number of industrial issues, at the same time it was claiming that, in respect of teachers, such agreements were "illegal". The TTF supported the SCSA submissions in this regard and added that in its view the system of transfers had been working for the last few years but could still be improved and made to work better. Whilst the TTF was always prepared to accept reasonable flexibility in relation to this subject, it objected to the Government having licence to arbitrarily transfer teachers without proper notice, proper consultation, regard for individual circumstances, fairness and equity of treatment. The TTF asked for teachers to have some certainty and guarantees as to their rights in this respect. Mr Lane said we should have regard for Section 32(5) of the Industrial Relations Act and Sections 10 and 13 of the Tasmanian State Service Act. We understood this argument to mean that in making an award in respect of State employees the Commission should have regard for the Tasmanian State Service Act and any Administrative Instructions or Employment Instructions issued under that Act. But, if we were not satisfied that the Act and Instructions referred to provided adequately, or appropriately, for the transfer of teachers then we should accept the need for provision to be made in the award. The Minister for Industrial Relations put to us that we should refrain from making any award provision in relation to the present applications dealing with the question of teacher transfers. In the first instance Mr Willingham based his submission upon a number of separate provisions contained in the Industrial Relations Act and the Tasmanian State Service Act. Reliance was placed upon the fact that the definition of "industrial matter" under Section 3(1) of the Industrial Relations Act did not include a matter relating to:
It was argued that the transfer of a teacher must of itself include an appointment to a different position, although it was conceded that continuity of employment was not broken when a teacher was transferred to take up a different "appointment". However the Commission may deal with industrial disputes relating to the "engagement" of any particular employee or class of employees. Mr Willingham submitted that the words "engagement" and "appointment" as they relate to employees had quite different meanings. He said that it was reliably held that the word "appointment" should be construed as meaning something which occurred subsequent to the first act of engagement. Whilst neither the Industrial relations Act nor the Tasmanian State Service Act defines these words we rely on the fact that the subject matter before us of teacher transfers is clear and unambiguous and is not excluded from the definition of "industrial matter". Rather, the broad definition of industrial matter in the Industrial Relations Act is more than capable of embracing such a subject matter and easily falls into Section 3(1)(v) "... the mode, terms, or conditions of employment". Mr Willingham further put it to us that pursuant to Section 42(3),(6) and (7) of the Tasmanian State Service Act, which deals with "transfer of employees" there is bestowed upon the Head of an Agency an unequivocal right to effect transfers, voluntarily or otherwise. The argument was that the prerogative bestowed upon management was so great, and of such force, that we should not and could not exercise any discretion whatsoever in accommodating the application by the unions. We acknowledge that the Tasmanian State Service Act gives to the Head of Agency or the Commissioner for Public Employment the right to transfer an employee in one Agency to another position in the same or another Agency. However, Section 42 of the Tasmanian State Service Act makes no provision for the setting of the mode, terms or conditions of that part of an employee's contract of service. To this extent we do not agree with the suggestion that the Head of an Agency or the Commissioner for Public Employment has the exclusive discretion to deal with these matters. We draw attention to and rely upon the fact that the Industrial Relations Act is:
We also rely upon Division 2 - General Jurisdiction and Powers of the Commission, of the same Act which provides that:
(g) cancel, under section 68, the registration of an organization." More particularly "Part III, Division 1 - Power to Make Awards and Related Matters" provides that:
Section 34 provides:
These provisions of the Industrial Relations Act are not qualified. However Section 32(5) of the Industrial Relations Act was also raised as being relevant to the consideration of jurisdiction in this case. Section 32(5) provides:
(i) any Administrative Instructions or Employment Instructions issued under that Act; and (ii) any other Act, concerning conditions of employment; and
We specifically requested of the Minister that we be provided with information as to any current transfer policy documentation. The response from the Minister was that there had been a draft transfer policy (TTF Exhibit 89) but that it had remained a draft policy and had never been implemented. However, the Minister's representative put to us in very strong terms that even if Administrative Instructions or Employment Instructions were not currently in place, we should not deal with the present claims on the basis that it was not properly our function given that the Tasmanian State Service Act gave the Minister and the Commissioner for Public Employment respectively, the statutory right to issue such Administrative or Employment Instructions. For completeness we add that it was further put to us that any employee may appeal to the Commissioner for Review pursuant to Section 66(2) of the Tasmanian State Service Act "on the ground that the employee has not received fair or equitable treatment in the employee's employment in the State Service". In our view the Industrial Relations Act gives to the Commission the responsibility and function of award-making in respect of any industrial matters. Section 32(5) of that Act requires that when requested to do so we shall have regard to the Tasmanian State Service Act, any Administrative or Employment Instructions under that Act, or any other Act concerning conditions of employment. Where the Commission has regard for those items it shall, if satisfied that those Acts or Instructions provide adequately or appropriately for such conditions, determine not to include provisions in an award in respect of that condition. From our reading of Section 32(5) we would be abrogating our statutory responsibility if we were to accept the Minister's argument that we do not need to examine the adequacy or appropriateness of existing conditions/provisions when deciding whether or not to include such matters in an award. We acknowledge the right of the Head of Agency or Commissioner for Public Employment to transfer State Service employees, for Administrative Instructions or Employment Instruments to be issued, and for individual employees to appeal to the Commissioner for Review in certain circumstances, but also conclude that this Commission may include transfer conditions in an award in appropriate circumstances. We turn now to the question as to whether the present circumstances are appropriate. The case put to us by the applicants for an award prescription included a desire to preserve the status quo and to give guaranteed protection to teachers who have certain expectations as to the security of their tenure within a school or college. We are sympathetic to these stated objectives. However we were given no examples of the capricious transfer of individuals in recent times to support the need for an award clause, and it would appear that the status quo therefore is satisfactory, notwithstanding the fact that the Transfer Policy (Exhibit TTF 89) which had been relied upon in the past had never been confirmed. We are acutely aware of serious disputes which have arisen in the past in relation to teacher transfers and commitments given to the Commission as variously constituted in relation to this subject matter. We would of course be concerned if consultative arrangements, consideration of individual teachers' circumstances, and general understandings which currently exist were to be arbitrarily removed and give rise to further disputation between the two teacher organisations and the Government. If that were to be the case, the Commission may see a need for including an appropriate prescription in the award in the absence of any other adequate and appropriate prescription. Accordingly, it is our decision not to grant either claim. Public Interest Section 36 of the Industrial Relations Act requires that before the Commission makes an award or approves an industrial agreement under Section 55 of that Act, the Commission shall be satisfied that that award or agreement is consistent with the public interest. The Minister for Industrial Relations exercised his statutory right of intervention in the public interest pursuant to Section 27 of the Act. In this regard Mr Bob Rutherford, Economic Adviser to the Premier, and Mr Don Norton, Deputy Secretary of the Department of Treasury and Finance, co-presented submissions to us, together with Mr Willingham. It was on 5 December 1991 when Mr Rutherford told us of the lack of flexibility available to Government in dealing with the "extra cost" issue if the teachers' claims were granted, and of its incapacity to handle a significant cost increase in wages over and above normal general increases which maintain purchasing power. It was argued that it was manifestly against the public interest to grant an increase of the order sought because of the serious effects on the delivery of government services, the impact on employment in the public sector and the impact on employment in the private sector in the context of the savage international and national recession. We were given the benefit of some observations on the structural nature of the Tasmanian economy, its relationship to the world economy and the national economy. This was followed by some discussion of the international economic environment, its short term prospects and its impingement on the Tasmanian situation with a similar look at the national economic context. After setting the economic scene the joint submissions moved to the budgetary situation, an explanation of the fiscal dilemma, the State's structural problem and how that led to its limited flexibility to deal with these issues. We were also addressed on the State's debt problem as it impinged on the Government's budget. We were advised of the strategy the then Government had in place to deal with that fundamental problem. Next followed an outline of the achievements to date and details of both revenue and expenditure issues, with emphasis upon those areas of the budget which had employment consequences. Additionally, we were apprised of the Government's concerns about the nature of what productivity offsets were available in the public sector, given this budgetary situation. In particular, Mr Rutherford said it had been recognised since the time of the Callaghan Report that Tasmania had a critical dependence upon international economic conditions. He also said that the backbone of our economy depended heavily upon major industries such as mining and refining metals, forestry and associated products, and agricultural production. These exports were governed by world commodity prices and to this extent we, in Tasmania, were price takers rather than price setters. Returns in this regard were generally depressed. Taking into account other factors such as the value of the Australian dollar and the absence of subsidies, or tariff support, there was no capacity for the Government to raise extra revenue through extra charges upon these types of industries to pay for teachers' increased salaries. A number of economic indicators were addressed which indicated generally poor results, with one of the better performance indicators, the retail sector, being described only as "patchy". Dr Norton presented and explained a budget overview for 1991-92 through presentation of Budget Paper No.1, and highlighted the State's net financing requirement and the escalating cost of borrowings over recent years. In a most comprehensive submission we were told that the Government had no flexibility to move away from the strategy then in place if it was to avoid bankruptcy, and that the State's debt servicing costs had increased from 6 per cent to 11 per cent in the last decade. Dr Norton also advised that it was desirable to reduce this cost to 6 or 7 per cent. Other statistical data provided went to such matters as the fact that we relied upon Commonwealth payments equal to 34 per cent of the State revenue and that State taxation currently raises 28.1 per cent of revenue. Dr Norton dwelt also upon the fact that the States, unlike the Commonwealth, had unsatisfactory mechanisms for raising revenue. He said that approximately 30 per cent of the State's revenue came from payroll tax, and that the tax base of the state did not grow commensurately with economic growth. We were advised, in particular, that Tasmania's economic malaise was exacerbated by a significant reduction in real terms of Commonwealth general purpose payments over the past five years. Added to this he told us of the difficulty created by the constraints on the States in relation to borrowing more than the Loans Council's allocation. Dr Norton told the us that Tasmania was still by far the most severely taxed State in the Commonwealth and this translated back to jobs and our ability to attract new businesses or expand existing businesses. Mr Willingham addressed the impression that Tasmania had tacitly supported public statements emanating from the 12 April 1991 Conference of Ministers on the national benchmark for teachers' salaries, by saying that whilst conceptually Tasmania gave in-principle support, it had refused to give unconditional support. This was verified by correspondence from Tasmania's Minister for Employment, Industrial Relations and Training dated 29 May 1991, to the Commonwealth Minister for Industrial Relations. In essence the correspondence said that the Government of Tasmania had a difficult budgetary situation which at that time precluded support for the national benchmark rate without appropriate Commonwealth financial assistance. Mr Willingham also cast doubt upon any suggestion of avoidance of future leapfrogging of teacher salaries by the granting of the present claim, or the likelihood of attracting or retaining the better teachers through higher salaries. Notwithstanding the force of the arguments from Mr Rutherford and Dr Norton against contemplating any increases we were advised by Mr Willingham on 6 December 1991, that the position of the Government in relation to the wages claim was that it believed that no increase in relation to the awards in question should take place for 12 months. However the Government, at that time, believed that what should then happen was that any increases that we might determine as a result of this case should be phased in over a full three year period. He also said that in terms of the economic circumstances faced by the State we should review, perhaps in the third quarter of 1992, whether circumstances have at least remained stable, or improved, so that the process of implementation could take place. He went on to say that if in fact the situation had deteriorated from what it was forecast to be then the Government would want the opportunity to come back and make further submissions. But assuming that the situation did not deteriorate the Government would be submitting that there should be no increase for 12 months; that whatever decision we subsequently made should be phased in over a full three year period following that twelve month hiatus. Following the change of Government, Mr Willingham, on 22 March 1992, withdrew the proposition put to us on 6 December 1991. In their response to the Government's public interest arguments the unions drew attention to the fact that the Government was not relying on the "Economic Incapacity" principle of the Commission's Wage Fixing Principles. Mr Elliott, for the SCSA, criticised the fact that the Government offered nothing new as to the state of the economy and offered no solutions other than to simply wait until the economy improved. One fact which had emerged was that whereas the budget had provided for a 6 per cent rise in salaries during 1991/92 financial year, only 2.5 per cent had to be paid. Accordingly, savings had been made. The SCSA alleged that the Government submission acknowledged that despite public utterances to the effect that Tasmania had a lower cost of living than any other State, no actual work had been done and no submission had been made to verify such a statement. Mr Elliott was concerned by the revelation that cost savings might be achieved through increased class sizes - even though there was an acknowledgement that this must translate into reductions in the quality of education. Mr Elliott expressed disappointment at the alleged failure of the Government to mention the savings of $35 million per year following the implementation of recommendations from the Cresap Report, a sum greatly exceeding the cost of the unions' claims. (This figure of actual savings was challenged by Mr Price as being unsubstantiated.) The union's central thesis was that education was an investment, not just an expense, and should be viewed as very much in the public interest. Much evidence was produced and reliance placed upon the aging of the teaching service and the choices expressed in surveys of youth concerning their distinct disinclination to choose teaching as a profession. Finding We have had the benefit of being provided with detailed submissions outlining the State's prevailing economic circumstances, and being told how they impact upon both the Government's budget and the private sector. We have had regard for these factors and have refused to grant the full extent of the union wage claims above the automatic incremental range (Band 1). In addition, we have decided to further cushion the cost effects of the lesser wage increases granted by us by phasing them in from prospective dates of operation. Other claims, going to conditions of employment matters which would have had the effect of increasing the cost of employing teaching personnel, have been rejected. Conversely, to the extent that we have granted Government claims such as hours of duty, contact hours, elimination of excess hours payments, and the length of the school year, there will be considerable cost savings to be made. There are compelling arguments for recognising that it is consistent with public interest criteria for highly qualified people to be encouraged to enter the teaching profession as their chosen career. This must further enhance quality educational outcomes which are so vital to the community as a whole and to the future employment prospects of young Tasmanians. For these reasons we consider the awards we have made are in the public interest.
Appearances:
APPENDIX A. POLICY STATEMENTS 1. Health Education in Tasmanian School and Colleges, A Policy Statement. Education Department. Tasmania, 1987. 2. Physical Education Guidelines: K-6 Education Department, Tasmania. 1982. 3. Physical Education Guidelines: Secondary, Education Department, Tasmania. 1982. 4. Primary Social Studies Guidelines, Education Department, Tasmania. 1985. 5. Current Changes in Secondary Education, a Paper prepared for the Tasmanian Employment Summit, D. Peacock, Education Department, Tasmania. 1989. 6. Competencies through science teachers' guide. Education Department, Tasmania. 1988. 7. Music in Primary Schools. Education Department, Tasmania. 1988. 8. Music in the Classroom: Education Department, 1990 1. General Guidelines 9. A Framework for Speech and Drama: Education Department, Tasmania 1980. 1. An Introduction and overview 10. Visual Arts in Primary Schools. Education Department, Tasmania 1988. 11. Teaching students how to learn: ideas for teaching information skills. Education Department, Tasmania, 1984 12. Retelling * an effective teaching practice * a powerful evaluation strategy. Education Department, Tasmania 1989. 13. Student Enterprise - a direction. Education Department, Tasmania 1990. 14. Learning Spaces. Education Department, Tasmania 1980. 15. Environment: A Learning Resource (C.O.P.E.). Education Department, Tasmania 1988. 16. Children and Books. Education Department, Tasmania 1983. 17. Children, Language and the Arts. Education Department, Tasmania 1985. 18. Understanding Reading and Writing. Education Department 1984. 19. Basic Handwriting. Education Department, Tasmania 1985. 20. Articulation and Expressive Language Screening Tests. Education Department, Tasmania 1985. 21. Pathways of Language Development. Department of Education and the Arts, Tasmania, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990. 22. Learning to Spell. Department Education and the Arts 1990. 23. Paths K-10 Approach to Language Development. Education Department, Tasmania 1981. 24. White Paper on Tasmanian Schools and Colleges in the 1980's. Education Department, Tasmania 1981. 25. Primary Education in Tasmania, A review for the Education Department by the Committee on Primary Education (C.O.P.E. Report). Education Department, March 1980. 26. Cope Update Responses 1989. 27. Continuity in Education - Cope Update 1990. 28. Early Childhood Education Review - a Discussion Paper. Education Department, Tasmania 1988. 29. Secondary Education: the Future Policy Statement. Education Department, Tasmania 1987. 30. The Schools Board of Tasmania: Handbook for Syllabus Development 1988. 31. Secondary Renewal Syllabus Design. Education Department, Tasmania 1988. 32. The Tasmanian Certificate of Education: A Guide for teachers. The Schools Board of Tasmania 1989. 33. Developing a Language Program. Education Department, Tasmania 1982. 34. A School in a Language Place. Education Department, Tasmania 1982. 35. Parents, Children and Language. Education Department, Tasmania 1983.
APPENDIX B. APPLICATION T No. 2993 OF 1992 Statement of particulars: The claim seeks to vary the award so as to change salary levels and make minor adjustments to the career structure. We also seek to have this award rescinded, and the salary scales and relevant award provisions incorporated into a new Education Award. Further, we seek to have dealt with those matters relating to conditions of service/work which the Industrial Commission has deemed should be finalized as part of the "Special Case". Attachment 1. TEACHING SERVICE (TEACHING STAFF) AWARD Clause 8 Salaries (a) Delete the salary scale in 8A(1) and replace with the following.
PROVIDED THAT: (a) the incremental scale for 5 year trained teachers shall begin on Rung 5, and shall omit Rungs 6 and 9 progressing incrementally in accordance with Clause 17 - Salary Increments, to the maximum of the scale. (b) the incremental scale for 4 year trained teachers shall begin on Rung 4. (c) the incremental scale for teachers who are less than 4 year trained shall begin on Rung 1. PROVIDED ALWAYS that: (a) 3 year trained teachers shall progress incrementally (in accordance with Clause 17) - to Rung 9, where they shall remain for two years before progressing to Rung 10, and two years at this level before progressing to Rung 11. (b) Teachers with less than 3 years of training shall progress incrementally to Rung 7. Further incremental progression shall only occur if the teachers upgrade their qualifications to at least the equivalent of a three year trained teacher. PROVIDED FURTHER THAT: (a) Upon appointment an employee shall be placed on a Rung determined by: (i) the qualifications gained from a recognised tertiary or training institution, and (ii) previous teaching experience. (b) An Education Officer and a Guidance Officer shall, on the determination of the controlling authority, having regard to the tertiary qualifications and practical experience of such an employee, be classified within this band. (b) Delete the salary scale in 8A(2) and replace with the following:
(i) Employees may apply if they have: (1) Reached at least Band 1, Rung 9 and have been recommended by a supervising officer and the recommendation has been endorsed by the relevant Superintendent: or (2) Been on Band 1 Rung 11 for at least 12 months. (Further, we wish to have Guidance Officers and Education Officers able to gain access to Band 2 Level 1). (c) Delete 8A(3). (d) Delete salary scale in 8A(4) and replace with the following:
(e) From Clause 8A(7) Instrumental Musicians, delete the three levels following "The appropriate full-time classifications are" and replace with: 1. Band 1 Rung 1 Teaching Service (Directors and Superintendents) Award Vary the above award by deleting Clause 8 Salaries and replacing it with the following. Clause 8 Salaries
APPENDIX C. APPLICATION T No. 2884 of 1991 1. By deleting paragraph (b) of Clause 11 - Hours of Duty - and by inserting the following new clause: (b) "Hours of Duty for members of the teaching staff who work in schools and Colleges". (i) The normal hours of attendance of teaching staff shall be seventy hours per fortnight. This time shall be exclusive of time allocated for the lunch break. Provided that: Where a member of the teaching staff is rostered to perform supervisory duty during the lunch break, such time shall be included in the above fortnightly hours. A member of the teaching staff, other than in a Secondary College, shall be in attendance every day, at least one half hour before the time of beginning lessons. (ii) Where a member of the teaching staff is not allocated supervisory duty during the lunch break he or she may leave the school or college. (iii) The hours of duty for teaching staff in a Secondary College shall be undertaken between the hours of 7.45 am and 5.00pm on Monday to Friday inclusive in each week. Provided that: Where a teacher classified at Band 1 and at Band 2, Level 1 in a Secondary College is required to undertake a timetabled instructional load (as defined) after 5.00pm, each hour so worked shall be counted as time and one half towards the completion of his/her fortnightly instructional load. (iv) The fortnightly instructional load (as defined) of a full-time teacher classified at Band 1 and at Band 2, Level 1 shall not be more than:
For the purposes of this paragraph "instructional load" shall mean regularly timetabled face-to-face instruction of students. 2. By inserting a new clause 11A as follows: "11A. TEACHER YEAR All teaching staff in schools and colleges shall be required to attend their place of employment for the following number of days per year which are additional to those that teachers are currently required to be in attendance: (a) from 1 January 1992 - a total of two additional days: These additional days can be utilised for such purposes as professional development, curriculum development, school planning, or for such other purposes as determined by the Principal. The Principal shall consult with the relevant District Superintendent in respect of the allocation of such days and their purpose." 3. By inserting a new clause 11B as follows: "11B. WEEKLY INSTRUCTIONAL LOAD The weekly instructional load of a teacher on the incremental scale or an advanced skills teacher shall not be more than: (i) 23 hours for those employed in primary schools and special schools; and (ii) 20 hours for those employed in high schools and colleges. For the purpose of this subclause, "Instructional load" means timetabled instruction of students, but does not include such activities as pastoral care or supervision of sport."
APPENDIX D. APPLICATION T No. 2887 of 1991 Insert a new Clause 18, Teacher Contact Hours, and renumber any subsequent Clause accordingly. Clause 18 Teacher Contact Hours: (i) Teacher Contact hours refers to that time a teaching staff member is directly responsible for a student or students, and includes teaching time, class teacher and assemblies. (ii) Band 1 Teaching Staff The maximum Teacher Contact Hours shall be 18 hours per week. PROVIDED that in Secondary Colleges teaching time does not exceed 15 hours per week. The remaining 3 hours per week shall be utilised by teachers in taking scheduled electives, tutorials, pastoral care and recreational activities involving teaching as distinct from supervision. PROVIDED ALWAYS that in Secondary Schools and secondary sections of District High Schools and Special Schools the Teacher Contact Hours do not exceed 19 hours in any one week for 1992. Teacher Contact Hours for these teachers shall be reduced to 18 hours as from the beginning of the 1993 school year. PROVIDED FURTHER that in Primary Schools and in primary sections of District High Schools and Special Schools the Teacher Contact Hours do not exceed 23 hours in any one week for 1992. Teacher Contact Hours for these teachers shall be progressively reduced to 18 hours by the beginning of the 1996 school year. Such reduction shall occur in the following manner: 1993 22.5 hours PROVIDED FURTHER that Kindergarten teachers who are employed full-time shall have 20 Teacher Contact Hours a week. This shall be reduced to 18 hours a week at the same time as for Primary teachers. Such reduction shall occur in the following manner: 1992-1994 20 hours (iii) Band 2 Teaching Staff (a) The maximum number of Teacher Contact Hours for Band 2 Teaching Staff shall be as set down in subclause (ii). (b) Each school/college shall be provided with Administrative Time on the following basis. (1) Schools/Colleges with at least one Assistant Principal shall be granted 2 hours of Administrative Time a week for every 25 Equivalent Full-Time students. (2) Schools/Colleges with no Assistant Principal shall be granted 2 hours of Administrative Time a week, for every Equivalent Full-Time students. (c) Band 2 Teaching Staff who are allocated administrative/non-teaching duties and responsibilities shall be given Administrative Time from the school's/college's allocation. The nature of the duties/responsibilities and the amount of Administrative Time allocated shall be determined by the school/college Planning Committee. (iv) Band 3 Teaching Staff (a) Level 1 (Principal) The Teacher Contact Hours shall be determined according to the following formula: 18 - enrolment = Teacher Contact Hours (b) Levels 2 - 7 (Principals) (c) Level 3 (Assistant Principal) Please note: The inclusion of the new Clause 18 will necessitate the inclusion of the following Definitions in Clause 7. Clause 7 - Definitions: Assembly means the formal gathering of 2 or more classes for the purpose of either listening to an address, announcements or watching an event of cultural/entertainment value. Class means a group of students who are taught together. Class Teacher means that time when a class is together for the purposes of receiving administrative instructions, and discussing problems which are common to the group. Teaching Time means that time when a teacher is instructing a class and providing the students with educational and learning experiences.
APPENDIX E. APPLICATION T NO. 2888 OF 1991 Statement of particulars: For the reasons set out below, and for such other reasons as the Commission may deem proper, the claim requests that the Industrial Commission establishes a limitation on the size of classes in schools and colleges in order to prevent the imposition of an excessive workload on teachers. Reasons 1. The workload of teachers consists of duties arising from:
(a) the awareness of systems requirements in terms of corporate purposes and goals, the values to be imparted to students and overall community demands both in terms of being an employee of the Tasmanian Government under the direction of the Secretary of Education and the Arts, and of being a participant in the corporate life of the schools; (b) the awareness of the particular requirements of a class or classes taught regarding: 2. That the workload/responsibility of a teacher is directly affected by: (a) the number of students in a class for whom the teacher has teaching responsibilities; (b) the composition of the class for which the teacher has teaching responsibilities; (c) the nature of the activities which occur in a class for whom the teacher has teaching responsibilities; (d) the teaching methodology which a teacher is expected to employ; (e) the method of evaluation which a teacher is expected to employ; and (f) the intellectual/physical/social capacities of the students. 3. That the Government has altered the staffing formulae in schools and colleges for the 1991 school/college year, which has the effect of increasing the size of the classes, and consequently increasing the workloads and responsibilities of teachers. 4. That in terms of the statutory and regulatory requirements, the workload and responsibilities which teachers are performing are excessive, and the increase in class sizes will result in an intolerable workload and responsibilities. Full details of the desired variations to the award are to be found in Attachment A. (Amended Attachment A) Insert a new Clause 10 "Class Sizes" and renumber all subsequent clauses as appropriate. 10. Class Sizes By the beginning of the 1995 school year teachers employed in schools and colleges shall be required to teach up to a maximum number of students in a class according to the following table. (1) Kindergarten
(2) Preparatory, Grade 1, Grade 2 Class
(3) Grades 3 to Grades 10 Classes
(4) Grades 11 and 12 Classes
(5) Classes - with an element of danger
(6) Classes - where physical resources and supervision require restricted numbers.
PROVIDED that for classes into which "special needs" students are integrated a size reduction factor (per student) shall apply on the following basis. Nature of Disability Class Size Reduction Factor
PROVIDED ALWAYS that where students with disabilities are integrated into classes, the Class Size Reduction factor for: (a) Classes with an element of danger; and/or (b) Classes where physical resources and supervision require restricted numbers shall be doubled. PROVIDED FURTHER that the size of non-integrated classes of special needs students shall be determined according to the nature of the student's disabilities.
APPENDIX F. APPLICATION T NO. 3741 OF 1991 The Association seeks to amend its award variation to T.2875 of 1991 by deleting the original wording and substituting the attached. The purpose of the amendment is: (a) to make the intent of the original application clearer by spelling out the references to Standing Order Number One. (b) to include the contact hours of Assistant Principals. (c) to ensure that in the case of teachers who take excess hours classes up to the end of term 3, payment is made for work associated with these classes done after the students have left. Variation Add a new Clause 12 after Clause 11. Renumber all subsequent clauses. 12. TEACHING LOADS IN SECONDARY COLLEGES (a) The weekly teaching load for teaching staff in secondary colleges shall be as follows:
PROVIDED that: (i) the hours of an Advanced Skills Teacher 3 shall comprise ten hours per week of scheduled classroom teaching and two hours involving teaching, as distinct from supervision, in scheduled electives, tutorials, pastoral care and recreational activities; and (ii) the hours of an Advanced Skills Teacher 1 and a Teacher shall comprise fifteen hours per week of scheduled classroom teaching and three hours involving teaching, as distinct from supervision, in scheduled electives, tutorials, pastoral care and recreational activities. PROVIDED ALWAYS that additional teaching activities which are voluntarily undertaken by teaching staff and are not approved variations of their teaching load shall not be counted as part of the weekly teaching load (b) Where the Principal considers it essential for a member of the teaching staff to undertake a teaching load less than that prescribed in (a) above, the prior approval of the Secretary must be sought. (c) Teachers, Advanced Skills Teachers and Assistant Principals may voluntarily accept additional scheduled classroom teaching (excess hours) PROVIDED that the excess hours worked shall be paid at the hourly rate determined in accordance with the following formula: Annual Salary X 1 X 3 (A divisor of 27 is used in respect of weekly hours in order to compensate for the necessary incidental work, including preparation incurred in teaching excess hours and for which no time allowance is made). PROVIDED ALWAYS that excess hours worked after 5.00pm shall count as time and one half in determining the total weekly excess hours worked. PROVIDED FURTHER that excess hours shall not be counted in the ordinary hours of duty of teaching staff as prescribed in Clause 11 of this Award. PROVIDED ALWAYS that no individual is guaranteed continuity of excess hours from one year to another or during a whole year. (d) Approval for excess hours must be given in advance by the District Superintendent. Principals are responsible (except where the District Superintendent has authorised an Assistant Principal to act on behalf of a Principal) for certifying the excess hours for which teaching staff are entitled to be paid. (e) The excess hours worked by a member of the teaching staff shall not exceed one extra class. (f) Where a teacher has taught a class on excess hours up until the end of the formal teaching year, he/she shall be paid excess hours until at least the end of the thirty-eighth week of the school year.
APPENDIX G. APPLICATION T No. 3791 of 1992 and APPLICATION T No. 3792 of 1992 The proposed variation to the Award seeks to include in the Award formulae relating to Assistant Principal and Advanced Skills Teacher 3 classifications. Amend Clause 8 Salaries as follows: 1. Before (3) SENIOR GUIDANCE OFFICER, insert Level 3 Advanced Skills Teacher The number of positions in this category in senior secondary colleges shall be determined by the following formula. Enrolment of: 0-599 students (FTE) 9 positions The number of positions in this category in secondary schools shall be determined by the following formula: Enrolment of: 250-349 students 3 positions The number of positions in this category in district high schools shall be determined by the following formula, in which enrolment refers to secondary students: Enrolment of: 50-149 students 1 position 2. Before (5) PART-TIME TEACHERS, insert: Level 3 Assistant Principal The number of positions in this category in Senior Secondary Colleges shall be determined by the following formula: Enrolment of: 0-499 students 1 position The number of positions in this category of district high schools shall be determined by the following formula, which refers to combined primary and secondary enrolments. Enrolment of: 350-499 students 1 position
APPENDIX H. APPLICATION T No. 3862 of 1992 Replace the present Clause 18: Transition - with the following and renumber any subsequent clauses. 18. Transfers of Secondary College Teachers A. Permanent secondary college teachers appointed up to and including 1988, i.e. all teachers in secondary colleges who had been granted what was previously known as Staffing Status A, the 21 teachers in secondary colleges who were granted permanent status in 1987 and all permanent teachers appointed to an on-going position in a secondary college up until the end of 1988. (i) Involuntary transfer of these teachers between the Don College and Hellyer College, between Launceston and Alanvale Colleges, and between the Hobart, Rosny, Claremont and Elizabeth Colleges will continue. However, involuntary transfers between colleges other than those specified above and to other sectors of the Department of Education and the Arts shall occur only when there is not a full teaching load for the teacher involved. Consultation with the teacher concerned and with the relevant union will take place prior to the transfer. (ii) Review mechanism There shall be an exchange of letters between the parties indicating redress to private arbitration in accordance with Section 61 of the Industrial Relations Act 1984 in the event of a dispute over the proposed transfer of any of the above categories of secondary college teachers. (iii) These provisions will apply to such teachers who fulfil the above requirements but who are on leave or secondment for a period not exceeding three years. B. Permanent secondary college teachers appointed since 1988, i.e. all other permanent teachers appointed to ongoing positions in colleges after 1988, including those to be appointed in the future. (i) Except where there is not a full teaching load for them, involuntary transfers of these teachers shall occur only after a reasonable period of appointment of not less than TWO (2) years. (ii) In effecting involuntary transfers, the employer shall have regard to the distance involved. Involuntary transfers requiring the employee to travel a total distance of more than 50 kilometres shall occur where there is not a full teaching load for the teacher concerned, and only after prior consultation with that teacher and with the relevant union. (iii) Review of transfers (a) A teacher who is aggrieved by a decision of the Superintendent to transfer that teacher to another college, school or section within 50 kilometres of the current place of appointment shall ask in the first instance for a review of that decision by the Director (Human Resources). In seeking such a review, the teacher shall submit a case in writing to the Director (Human Resources). (b) This right to review does not limit the teachers' right of appeal to the Commission for Review under Section 66(2) of the State Service Act if that teacher considers that he/she has not received fair and equitable treatment in relation to a transfer. (c) Any member of an employee organization can seek the assistance of that organization in order to have grievance related to transfer considered further. C. These procedures do not apply to part-time teachers, other than permanent part-time teachers, or to laboratory or audio-visual technicians on the staff of secondary colleges. DEFINITION: A "full teaching load" is one which corresponds to the level of the teacher's permanent appointment, either full or part-time.
APPENDIX I. APPLICATION T No. 3869 of 1992 The application seeks to amend the Teaching Service (Teaching Staff) Award by inserting a new Clause 18, Transfers. This may necessitate the re-numbering of subsequent clauses. The new clause is aimed at outlining procedures for the transfer from one work-place to another of all teachers employed in the Department of Education and Arts. Full particulars of the claim are to be found in Attachment A. ATTACHMENT A TEACHING SERVICE (TEACHING STAFF) AWARD 18. TRANSFERS (I) Categories of Schools/Colleges (a) Category 1. All schools and colleges which are not listed in Category 2 or Category 3. (b) Category 2.
(c) Category 3
(d) Where service has been undertaken in a school (or colleges) which have subsequently been closed, the appropriate category, having regard for the school's location, shall be determined by the Secretary in consultation with the relevant Union. (2) Category 3 Schools/Category 2 Schools (a) All teachers and employees with a personal classification may be required to serve in Category 3 or Category 2 schools, or both, on the following basis: (i) three years in Category 3 schools; or (ii) five years in Category 2 schools; or (iii) a mixture of service in both Category 3 and Category 2 schools. In such cases a calculation will be made to determine the equivalent service in each category. (b) Service in Category 3/Category 2 schools shall attract points on the following basis: Category 3 - 5 points a term Category 2 - 3 points a term (c) Teachers and employees with a personal classification who have accumulated 45 points: (i) if teaching in a Category 3 or Category 2 school - shall be granted a transfer to the area of their choice, if they so request. Such transfer shall occur no later than the beginning of the next school year. (ii) if teaching in Category 1 school - shall not be subject to involuntary transfer to a Category 3 or Category 2 school. (d) For the purposes of this Clause, part-time service in Category 3 or Category 2 school attracts the same number of points as does full-time service. (3) Category 1 Schools (a) Teachers and employees with personal classifications, appointed to a school/college in this Category, shall not be subject to involuntary transfer until they have served that school/college for at least 3 years. (b) For the purposes of paragraph (a) part-time service in a Category 1 school or college shall accumulate as for a full-time teacher i.e. 3 years' part-time service is 3 years' service. (c) Teachers and employees with a personal classification, who have accumulated 3 years service in schools classified as socio-economically disadvantaged: (i) shall upon the request of the teacher/employee be transferred from a school so classified and; (ii) shall not be subject to involuntary transfer into a school so classified. (d) For the purposes of paragraph (c) service for part-time employees in socio-economically disadvantaged schools shall accumulate on a pro-rata basis. (4) Procedures (a) For the purposes of this Clause, a Region shall be defined as follows: (i) North-west and Western - Arthur and Barrington Districts (ii) Launceston and North Eastern - Macquarie and Forester Districts (iii) Hobart and Southern - Bowen, Derwent, Hartz and Wellington Districts. (b) Involuntary transfers of teachers and employees with a personal classification from one region to another, will occur only where exceptional circumstances exists, and after prior consultation with the teacher/employee concerned. (c) Such consultation must at least involve the following: (i) A letter to the teacher/employee which outlines: . the location to which the teacher/employee is to be transferred. (ii) The letter must contain reference to the requirement for a written response by the teacher/employee should that person not wish to be transferred. (iii) Such a response from the teacher/employee must outline the reasons for not wanting to be transferred and/or reasons why the teacher/employee believes that exceptional circumstances are non-existent or not valid. (iv) Teachers and employees with a personal classification who have either: (a) served at least 3 years in a school/area and voluntarily transfer, or and as a result need to change their place of residence, shall be paid transfer expenses as provided for under the Tasmanian State Service Act 1984. (v) Teachers and employees with a personal classification who are involuntarily transferred to a work place which requires that teacher/employee to: (a) travel a greater distance from their residence to the work place than prior to the transfer, and (b) travel in excess of 30 kilometres one way, - shall be paid the Occasional User Rate, as provided for in the General Conditions of Service Award, for any travel in excess of the 30 kilometres. (5) For the purpose of this Clause, the following provisos shall apply: (a) no teacher or employee with a personal classification who has attained the age of 50 years shall be subject to involuntary transfer between or into a Category 2 or Category 3 school without the teacher's/employee's written assent. (b) all teachers in secondary colleges who had been granted what was previously known as Staffing Status A, the 21 teachers in Secondary Colleges who were granted permanent status in 1987, and all permanent teachers appointed to an on-going position in a Secondary College in 1988, will not be subject to involuntary transfer to a Secondary College in another region, or to other schools or work places unless exceptional circumstances exist. The procedure for such transfer shall be as outlined in sub-clause (4)(i)(ii)(iii). (c) Written applications for exemptions from Category 2 and Category 3 service can be made to the Secretary through the District Superintendent in the following cases:
(i) because of the teacher's disability or infirmity; (ii) because the teacher has responsibility for the care of a dependent who would be denied regular medical treatment or physical support systems by the placement. (a) A dependent is defined as a teacher's spouse, or partner in an established relationship, child, parent, or grandparent. (b) "Physical support systems" are defined as services or facilities which are essential to the on-going welfare and well-being of the person concerned. Examples of physical support systems may include the following: 1 T No.3584 of 1991 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||