/Nov2010Binder

Page 1

The Independent Voice

November 2010

Journal of the Queensland Independent Education Union

November 2010

1

Volume 10 Number 7

Success and challenges to ET6 •

School Officer Day and World Teachers’ Day page 5

ABOVE: Teachers from St James College who applied for ET6 were awarded the classification; however, they are aware that some members have not been treated as fairly by panels

With the outcomes of Experienced Teacher 6 (ET6) applications in the Catholic sector now being advised there is evidence of very different approaches across the various panels.

Honouring our union achievers

pages 12,13

Where the panel operated in line with the provisions in the agreement and agreed panel training and the criteria were properly addressed by an applicant recommendations for approval are being made consistently. Panels recommendations in the Rockhampton Diocese, for example, have shown a consistency of approach by panels and consistent levels of recommendation have been noted. However, in a number of panels in the Religious Institute schools and Toowoomba Diocese there is evidence in a number of cases of employer nominees on panels reinterpreting the agreement provisions and ignoring elements of the agreed training and applying a personal view of both the process and level of proficiency required. These discrepancies are E:

UPDAT

Winners of annual Literary competition page 16-21

obvious when some panels have a near 100 per cent recommendation rate while other panels have a consistently less than 50 per cent recommendation rate. The merit of teachers across the sector cannot be that significantly wide. It is apparent on the latter panels that some employer representatives failed to adhere to the ET6 provisions in the agreement and ignored elements in the approved guidelines that were set out in the joint training. Panels are underway in the Cairns, Townsville and Brisbane Dioceses. Feedback from panel members in the problematic panels in the Religious Institute and Toowoomba Diocesan employing authorities has suggested that a number of employer representatives and/or Principal or Principal’s nominee have sought to identify “extra” tasks the experienced teacher was undertaking and/or held excessive views of what constitutes various levels of proficiency, arguing that they would expect the

demonstrated levels of proficiency from “all their staff”. Sadly, there is also some evidence in the Toowoomba Diocese that teachers who are not of the Catholic tradition were not being accorded the benefit of the provision in the ET6 schedule which requires panels to take account of a lack of opportunity an applicant has to demonstrate a criterion. Non-Catholic teachers will understandably have not had opportunities to demonstrate the first criterion regarding support of the Catholic mission and ethos where as a matter of employer decision they are not allocated a range of activities associated with the practice of the Catholic tradition. The ET6 provision is clearly about better recognising the contribution of experienced proficient teachers. It is not an opportunity for some employees to attempt to reconstruct an agreed, negotiated outcome. Commendably, the majority of panels have conducted their assessments in accordance with the provisions and agreed training,

resulting in around a 90 per cent recommendation rate. Review panels are now being constituted to conduct reviews expeditiously for those applicants who were not recommended for approval. The review panel mechanism is an integral part of the steps set up to award ET6 classification to ensure fair process and correct outcomes. Where the decision of the initial panel has been not to recommend ET6 status the applicant should protect their interests by immediately informing the employing authority that they are seeking a review of that decision, which will allow the review panel to review and reconsider the application. As review panels meet in the near term, it is essential that ET6 status be recommended for meritorious applicants where the earlier panel recommendation has clearly been based on a redefinition of the agreed and approved ET6 provisions.

Breakthrough in PMSA negotiations

A significant breakthrough on the key employee issues needing resolution has made a collective agreement in PMSA schools possible. PMSA employer representatives have undertaken to seek PMSA and Principals’ approval to a set of in principle positions, including: • Wage dates in 2012 for base pay and allowances; • Back pay of the outstanding 0.5 per cent in 2010;

• Access to long service leave after seven years; • Positions of Added Responsibility (PAR) Coordinator access to accomplished teacher allowance (subject to eligibility); • School Officer Specialist Care Allowance; and • 15 weeks maternity leave exclusive of paid vacation time. Both the employee and employer

representatives have agreed to undertake further work on eligibility requirements for the accomplished teacher allowance. The employer also offered to reconsider its claim for 39 weeks of directed duties in 2012 in consideration of the 30 hours per annum of occasional functions at the school level. Employer representatives have agreed to take the outstanding issues, which were agreed in principle at the small group meeting

on 5 November, to the PMSA for approval. A further group meeting was scheduled for 17 November to deal with any outstanding matters. The final document for employee consideration and ballot will be reviewed by the employee network representatives/SBU employee representatives after the 17 November meeting. A ballot of employees is then possible before end of term in 2010.


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.