Review PUBLIC
SECTOR
www.cpsu.asn.au
April/May 2013
More Answers Needed
Jan McMahon and Premier Jay Weatherill
With the State Budget looming in June and a State election in March next year, the Public Service Association is steadfast in its push to obtain answers from both the Government and the Opposition on their future plans for the public sector. “It is vital that all parties make their intentions clear ahead of the next election,’’ said PSA General Secretary Jan McMahon. “We are demanding full disclosure on the issues of job security, and job and service cuts,” Ms McMahon said. Premier Jay Weatherill, who also holds the Treasury and Public Sector portfolios, gave some insight into his views on the public sector during his recent attendance at the PSA Council meeting on February 8.
Addressing the meeting, Premier Weatherill described the public sector as “government in action” and noted that as the largest employer in South Australia it was the Government’s responsibility to be a model employer. He acknowledged there was significant debate in the community about the size of the public sector, but called for a “rational debate”. Ms McMahon said the Premier had been made very aware the PSA would “continue to fight for job security and to fight against mindless job cutting aimed at the appeasement of the business lobby”. The PSA remains concerned with the nearly 6,000 Government job cuts. The PSA has also had the ear of Opposition Leader Stephen Marshall with PSA President Lindsay Oxlad and General Secretary Jan McMahon taking the opportunity to brief the new Liberal
Leader on a range of issues specific to the public sector in a meeting shortly after his appointment. High on the agenda was discussion of Mr Marshall’s intention to establish an Audit Commission should the Opposition win power – an option that’s been ruled out by the Government. “It’s clearly a matter of great concern to our members, given the historical precedents,” Ms McMahon said. The Dean Brown Audit Commission in 1994 resulted in the slashing of jobs, the freezing of wages and considerable privatisation. Now, there are current examples being played out across the border, with Audit Commissions resulting in the recent slashing of thousands of public sector jobs in Queensland and New South Wales. Cuts to services and jobs in Queensland are yet to be fully released, but have already been deep and painful, resulting in demonstrations and anger. There is similar unrest in NSW amidst attempts to cut back or overhaul shift work entitlements, sick leave, leave loading, health and safety and a raft of other hard won conditions and entitlements. “PSA has called on the Opposition to spell out what its intentions are ahead of the next election and to tell voters before they go to the polls just which services and entitlements they intend to cut,” Ms McMahon said. “Just as we are calling on the Government to state its position on job security - a major area of concern for our members.” At this stage neither party has committed to “tenure” beyond the life
of the current Enterprise Agreement, which expires on June 30 next year. “Given South Australia’s ageing workforce, its difficulty in attracting and retaining public sector workers and the loss of corporate knowledge as a result of job cuts, there is no logical reason to remove job security,” Mc McMahon said. This is particularly so with new measures introduced by Government dramatically reducing the number of excess staff by requiring Agencies to employ these people ahead of employing new staff. Premier Weatherill has agreed to attend PSA Council again in his capacity as Treasurer after his first Budget is handed down in June. Meanwhile the PSA will have a further meeting with Mr Marshall to seek clarity on his policy position in relation to the key issues of importance to its members. “The PSA expects both parties to advise of their vision for the future of the public sector or face a sustained campaign until they do,” Ms McMahon said.
Opposition Leader Steven Marshall
BUDGET DEFICIT STEADY
AGE FOR A CHANGE
DISPUTE OVER CHILDREN
Page 3
Page 4
Page 9
Dispute Over Danger to Children