Documents Workplace Relations 10.14379.pdf - Chief Minister's ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

LL w -a: 00 Date Se tember 2010 To Chief Minister· • Chief Executive CHIEf MINISTER'S DEPARTMENT • Deputy Chief Executive, Governance From Director Public Sector Management Subject · Legislative Assembly Members' Staff Enterprise Agreement- Negotiations Critical date and reason Agreement to a negotiating position is required ahead of the.next meeting on 6 September 2010. Purpose To brief you on the status of negotiations for a replacement LAMS enterprise agreement, and to seek yonr agreement to a negotiating position on the key issues. Background Five meetings have been held with staff and union representatives to date. A summary of staff claims and the management team's response is provided at Attachment A. It is understood that you wish to pursue three claims: • A reduction in the cap on TOIL more consistent with the ACTPS. • A cap on annual leave accrual. • Restricting termination payments to bona fide redundancies. Issues TOIL and LAMS Allowance The issues of TOIL, including the cap, and the LAMS allowance for additional hours worked are interrelated and not straightforward. Both parties consider the most appropriate way forward would be to undertake a review so that these matters can be proper! y addressed in the next agreement. The review would also examine the administration of the LAMS allowance in the context of the staff claim for the allowance to be paid during paid leave. Annual Leave Currently the LAMS allowance is only paid on days worked and not on any form of paid or unpaid leave. Paying the allowance on paid leave would remove the current financial disincentive to staff taking annual leave. In order for this to be cost neutral the allowance would need to be reduced proportionately. The staff representatives argue that reducing the rate of the allowance would result in staff being financially penalised if they do not use their full annual leave entitlement. On the other hand, paying the allowance on annual leave without reducing the rate of the allowance would result in an additional cost of around $27,000 pa if all staff used their fnll annual leave entitlement. If agreed, the allowance would only be paid on leave taken, and not on accrued leave paid out on termination. Ref:
Gratton, lan From: Duckworth, ian Sent: Wednesday, 1 September 2010 12:36 PM To: Gillin, Peter Cc: Gratton, ian; Viney, Sandra; Wilson, Chris Subject: RE: Draft LAMS EA Brief Folks I agree with Chris' sobservations. Please excuse me if I am not fully across the matters but, although it was very clear the TOIL issue has been on the table, I was not aware of the proposal for 15% for Senior Advisers and above and, if that is a serious option, I genuinely belive it may need to be given further thought as my hunch is that it may solve one problem and cause others. So I tend to agree with Chris's suggestion that the brief be simplified to: (a) advise the CM that the proposal from staff that they be entitled to "have their cake and eat it too" has been rejected; and that the agreement include a commitment to conduct a review for the next round. It could be observed that this issue has raised its head in every LAMS agreement. Re the termination payment, we have been mindful that, even if there is "no change", the clause needs re-writing to Jvercome the fact that it does not currently convey the intended positon (ie as at the last agreement). Of course, there is a change proposed and, while we recognise that, theorietically, the A-G/GSO observation that termination payments should be confined to genuine redundthere is a long history of these payments and so we have supported grandfathering. It has been unclear to us whether, if staff do as they advocat
Page 2:
Recommendation That you agree to th
Page 10 and 11:
Gratton, lan From: Sent: To: Cc: Su
Page 15:
3. Do staff in other parliaments in
Page 22:
From: Gillin, Peter Sent: Tuesday,
Page 27:
u. w - 0::: 00 Date To From Subject
Page 30:
If these arguments are not accepted
Page 39: With regard to the management of an
Page 47: Gratton, lan From: Sent: To: Cc: Su
Page 50: Recipient McAiary, Luke Gillin, Pet
Page 55: Sandra Viney Ass Mng HR & Work Env
Page 61: .,., d" AL1 AL1 AL1 AL2 AL2 AL2 AL1
Page 66 and 67: Gratton, fan From: Sent: To: Cc: Su
Page 68: From: Coyles, Laurel Sent: Tuesday,
Page 75: Attachment A The proposal to reduce
Page 80 and 81: ) DRAFT WITHOUT PREJUDICE LEGISLATI
Page 82: The Government's Position (with sta
Page 92 and 93: Legislative Assembly JVlembers' :St
Page 94 and 95: Legislative Assembly Members' Staff
Page 97: Without Prejudice Legislative Assem
Page 100: • • • Under consideration. Lo
Page 105: Collective Agreement- Staff Log of
Page 109: From: Sent: To: Subject: Ian Viney,
Page 113 and 114: LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY MEMBERS' STAFF
Page 120 and 121: Gratton, lan From: Sent:· To: Subj
Page 122: Gratton, lan From: Gratton, !an Sen
Page 126: Gratton, lan From: Sent: To: Cc: Su
show all

Documents Workplace Relations 10.14379.pdf - Chief Minister's ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?