A Better Way to Bargain: Thank you for your thoughts
6 July 2010, 1:22pm
We have received a staggering response to the Better Way to Bargain survey, which closed Monday.
More than 7000 responses came in and there are stacks in pigeon holes and envelopes still making their way in to the CPSU.
A huge thank you to all those who took the time to fill in the survey. Your responses will be used to form CPSU's position on the Government’s plan to streamline pay and conditions in the public service.
An initial look at the results reveals:
87 per cent of respondents feel the current way of organising pay and conditions is not efficient
Only a third know the Government determines key service wide industrial conditions without any negotiation with employees or unions, but a massive 92 per cent thought there should be negotiations on those points
When it comes to back-dating pay increases, 92 per cent indicated the APS should be brought into line with State Government and private sector.
Pay and access to leave were named as the top concerns you would like the Government to address.
Please note that not all the survey responses have been received at this stage so these figures, while reflective of the final results, may change slightly.
Many survey respondents left written comments. Here is a sample of what you’re saying about a Better Way to Bargain:
“I would like to see more provisions that allow people to more easily move (or be seconded to) other agencies.” RA, AusAID.
“When I joined, the whole of the APS was billed as "your career service" now it is hard to change departments because of all the hidden changes to the conditions.” MP, Australian Taxation Office.
“I think the professional classifications should remain for certain occupations/functions, while also being streamlined across the APS.” SN, Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.
“I actually believe all the conditions related to pay, flex, etc should be negotiated centrally with only things like service delivery hours and shift work being included for critical agencies.” DC, Fair Work Ombudsman.
“Merit promotion is critical in retaining existing staff and attracting new staff.” HD, Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research.
“Industry standards should be negotiated centrally. Surely that would be more efficient and fairer.” SN, Australian Security and Investments Commission.
“My concern is how a standard agreement will treat professional positions. As a legal officer I have some concerns that some special arrangements will need to exist to allow for wages and conditions comparable with the private and State sectors.” AM, Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions.
“I want the Government to negotiate pay for the entire public service – it will save time, resources and a great deal of frustration from employees. The Government is supposed to be an example to other employers and set fair and honest standards.” JD, Centrelink.
“So many times people are ‘moved’ into positions ‘at level’ which leaves no career prospects open for those who wish to stay in the local area.” JS, Defence.
“I do not agree with the Federal Government imposing a three percent pay cap and believe that the CPSU should fight such decisions as they will over time severely reduce our living standards.” SS, Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy.
The next phase of the campaign will include:
A full analysis of the survey and reporting back
Taking details to consultative committees within agencies
Finalising our position through the upcoming Regional Delegates Conferences in July and August and Governing Council in September.
Comments(10)
Posted by:JB - 15 Oct 2010, 10:58am I agree with anonymous. These matters should be handled with care and with an eye to the full range of implications for workers. Moving to equal pay across classifications could result in long term pay freezes and also to the loss of staff. Also I think that by tackling theses issues from the perspective of pay misses the point. I would like to see the issue of classifications addressed first across agencies and more importantly between Canberra based staff, and state office based staff in the Eastern states as compared with staff in non-eastern states. Having worked in different agencies at different levels my observation is that there is a significant difference for people at the same level in terms of degrees of responsibility. That is, even within agencies, an APS 6 in a state office often has a greater range of responsibilities than an APS 6 in Canberra or an Eastern states office. This can also be true between agencies. Sometimes the differences between agencies has been addressed through pay. So I have greater responsibilites than my counterparts in another agencies, and I also get paid more, isn?t that fair? So the issue is not just about pay disparities, it is also about ensuring that we apply classifications in a more standard way.
Posted by:Anonymous, DVA - 30 Aug 2010, 7:57pm I think CPSU should take a long hard look at the impact on prospective super benefits that will be felt by those in agencies with higher salaries if there is a freeze or reduction in future pay increases for those people. This is of particular concern to those who are within 5 or so years of age retirement. I am not happy about the idea of losing out on pay as well as having lower than expected retirement benefits so those in lower paying agencies can catch up.
Posted by:Jezza - 26 Jul 2010, 6:59pm We shouldn't have to always be doing these enterprise agreements. We should have certain conditions that can't be traded and pay rises linked to inflation. All that's happened with these agreements is we trade off more and more conditions. If these keeps up we will end up like the USA where bosses can ban you from drinking and smoking in your own time and can even drug test you.
Posted by:BBB at CCC - 22 Jul 2010, 2:52pm Although the focus seems to be on pay it isn't only remuneration that will be affected by an APS wide agreement. For example at my agency we have great leave entitlements, including paid sick leave of up to 52 weeks in any one instance, more than the usual 4 weeks annual leave per year, extra agency wide holidays and generous time off in lieu provisions.
Although I am not overly concenred about having smaller pay rises compared to our poor cousins in less well paid agencies I do very much object to having our other conditions that we bargained hard for being stripped back.
I want to see detail from the CPSU and the Government, not just generalities and rhetoric.
Posted by:MN - 16 Jul 2010, 8:37am I can not believe the attitude of ATO employees, i would like to come and have you sit with me for the day. I am a Centrelink social worker, i have completed 8 years at university and yet you believe i am not as skilled as you guys! Try dealing with daily suicide calls, mothers living in cars with their children and trying to find them a place to stay for the night and people with mental health issues. You deal with the WORKING Australians ONLY, and with comments such as yours, you should not have the right to work for the Australian public! If you believe that DHS staff should be paid based on merit, then Centrelink staff should be earning a hell of a lot more than you!
I agree with anonymous. These matters should be handled with care and with an eye to the full range of implications for workers. Moving to equal pay across classifications could result in long term pay freezes and also to the loss of staff. Also I think that by tackling theses issues from the perspective of pay misses the point. I would like to see the issue of classifications addressed first across agencies and more importantly between Canberra based staff, and state office based staff in the Eastern states as compared with staff in non-eastern states. Having worked in different agencies at different levels my observation is that there is a significant difference for people at the same level in terms of degrees of responsibility. That is, even within agencies, an APS 6 in a state office often has a greater range of responsibilities than an APS 6 in Canberra or an Eastern states office. This can also be true between agencies. Sometimes the differences between agencies has been addressed through pay. So I have greater responsibilites than my counterparts in another agencies, and I also get paid more, isn?t that fair? So the issue is not just about pay disparities, it is also about ensuring that we apply classifications in a more standard way.
I think CPSU should take a long hard look at the impact on prospective super benefits that will be felt by those in agencies with higher salaries if there is a freeze or reduction in future pay increases for those people. This is of particular concern to those who are within 5 or so years of age retirement. I am not happy about the idea of losing out on pay as well as having lower than expected retirement benefits so those in lower paying agencies can catch up.
We shouldn't have to always be doing these enterprise agreements. We should have certain conditions that can't be traded and pay rises linked to inflation. All that's happened with these agreements is we trade off more and more conditions. If these keeps up we will end up like the USA where bosses can ban you from drinking and smoking in your own time and can even drug test you.
Although the focus seems to be on pay it isn't only remuneration that will be affected by an APS wide agreement. For example at my agency we have great leave entitlements, including paid sick leave of up to 52 weeks in any one instance, more than the usual 4 weeks annual leave per year, extra agency wide holidays and generous time off in lieu provisions. Although I am not overly concenred about having smaller pay rises compared to our poor cousins in less well paid agencies I do very much object to having our other conditions that we bargained hard for being stripped back. I want to see detail from the CPSU and the Government, not just generalities and rhetoric.
I can not believe the attitude of ATO employees, i would like to come and have you sit with me for the day. I am a Centrelink social worker, i have completed 8 years at university and yet you believe i am not as skilled as you guys! Try dealing with daily suicide calls, mothers living in cars with their children and trying to find them a place to stay for the night and people with mental health issues. You deal with the WORKING Australians ONLY, and with comments such as yours, you should not have the right to work for the Australian public! If you believe that DHS staff should be paid based on merit, then Centrelink staff should be earning a hell of a lot more than you!