QUEENSLAND INDEPENDENT EDUCATION UNION INDEPENDENT EDUCATION UNION OF AUSTRALIA – QUEENSLAND & NORTHERN TERRITORY BRANCH BRISBANE 346 TURBOT ST SPRING HILL QLD 4000 PO BOX 418 FORTITUDE VALLEY
Phone: 07 3839 7020 Fax: 07 3839 7021 Freecall: 1800 177937 Email: enquiries@qieu.asn.au Internet: www.qieu.asn.au ABN: 45 620 218 712
Tuesday, 6 July 2010
princ23
PRINCIPALS’ BRIEFING
ALL QUEENSLAND DIOCESES
Update on Negotiations for a New Agreement Dear Colleagues Negotiations have occurred in each Catholic Diocese in Queensland for a new collective agreement covering Principals employed in that Diocese. Principals have repeatedly advised that they wish to see consistent outcomes across the five separate sets of negotiations. The Directors for their part have been open in disclosing their state-wide meetings to develop a consistent response to the claims by Principals. The negotiations in each Diocese have thus revealed a high level of commonality between the Directors on the majority of issues. This is both positive and problematic for the outcomes Principals have consistently endorsed for negotiations. However, there are also some differences in positions emerging which are again both potentially positive and problematic for the outcomes Principals have sought. This briefing sets out the status of negotiations across the five dioceses for the information of Principals. Further negotiating meetings are scheduled in the early part of the term and subsequently your specific advice on the status of negotiations will be sought. However, you may at this stage provide any feedback on the attached proforma.
Log of Claims Following advice from Principals a common log of claims was presented to each Diocese. Principals have provided feedback supporting the highest possible level of commonality between Agreements. A full copy of the log of claims which was developed following consultation with Principals is available on your union’s website. www.qieu.asn.au
Employer responses – Diocese by Diocese The main points in the Principals’ Log of Claims, and the response of each Diocese, is set out below: Wages: In addition to increases commensurate with State government outcomes (4.5% from 1 May 2009, 4% from 1 July 2010, and 6.5% from 1 July 2011) Principals have claimed a further increase from 1 April 2012. The quantum of this further increase is a amount equal to two weeks salary (approximately 3.8%). It has become apparent that the Diocesan Directors again commissioned Mercers (a management consultancy company) to conduct a review of the remuneration of Principals. Your representatives have asked for a copy of this most recent review to assist Principals in considering their employer’s position on wages. Brisbane: Will match the State outcome of 4.5%, 4% and 6.5%. The employer is considering the employee proposal for a further wage increase. Access to the Mercer report has been consistently denied in each negotiation as it is 'a report to the Directors'. Cairns. Will match the State outcome of 4.5%, 4% and 6.5%. The employer seems receptive to an argument that the work of a Principal in a Catholic school is different from that of a Principal in a state school and hence an argument for a further increase. At the last negotiations (on 16 June 2010) Cairns appeared to be bound by a collective decision of the Directors not to release the Mercer Report. Rockhampton: Will match the State outcome of 4.5%, 4% and 6.5%. The employer did not appear to recognise any justification for the further claim. At the last negotiations (on 25 June 2010) Rockhampton seemed to indicate that the decision of the Directors not to release the Mercer Report may be subject to review. Toowoomba: Will match the State outcome of 4.5%, 4% and 6.5%. Access to the Mercer Report has not been provided. Townsville: Will match the State outcome of 4.5%, 4% and 6.5%. The employer indicated it had difficulty conceptualising the justification for the further claim. At the last negotiations (on 24 June 2010) Townsville seemed to indicate that the decision of the Directors not to release the Mercer Report may be subject to review. Differential between Principal and Assistant Principal: As a part of a review of the wage differential between Principals and Assistant Principals, your representatives have proposed that the classification of Principal Level 1 be deleted from the classification scale. Consequently, the ‘lowest level’ would be a primary school of between one and 180 students. This change would result in the entry point for a Principal being $92,007 pa compared to the maximum rate for an AP being $91,829 pa (both rates as at 1 May 2009). Hence the Principal would always be on a higher rate than an Assistant Principal. Brisbane: The employer is considering the proposal. The proposal has not been rejected. Cairns: The employer has identified a desire to further consider this proposal. The proposal has not been rejected. Rockhampton: The employer has indicated that this may result in ‘flow on’ effects, and has consequently indicated that it wants to further investigate the proposal. Toowoomba: The employer is considering the proposal. The proposal has not been rejected. Townsville: The employer has indicated that this may result in ‘flow on’ effects, and has consequently indicated that it wants to further investigate the proposal. Additional ‘special character’ allowances points for OSHC, Kindergarten or Pre-prep (two points each), and supervising building projects, including BER (three points):
Brisbane: The employer has offered one point each for OSHC and Kindergarten or Pre-prep. BCE has granted its Principals an extra three days leave for 2010 in recognition of their supervision of BER projects. The employer has made no formal response to a request for an on-going provision. Cairns: The employer has offered one point each for OSHC and Kindergarten or Pre-prep. Rockhampton: There is a preparedness to consider OSHC and Kindergarten or Pre-prep, and we believe one point will be offered. The employer has tabled a list of the Principal’s responsibilities in relation to OSHC. Whilst an additional three day’s leave have been provided to Principals (in recognition of a range of commitments, including supervision of BER projects) the employer wants to continue to have the ‘flexibility’ to recognise such commitment outside of the formal Agreement structure. Consequently, there has been no progress on recognising the responsibilities associated with building projects as part of the proposed Agreement. Toowoomba: The employer has offered one point each for OSHC and Kindergarten or Pre-prep. Townsville: In relation to OSHC and Kindergarten or Pre-prep the employer expressed a desire for there to be a consistent position across Queensland and indicated that it is still considering its position. An extra two days leave has been granted in recognition of the supervision of BER projects, but these are definitely seen as being outside the Agreement. Sabbatical: Your representative have tabled provisions which make explicit the entitlement of a Principal to unused sabbatical leave and allowance where an appointment as a Principal comes to an end. The tabled provision also guarantees portability between Queensland Dioceses. Brisbane: The employer is considering the proposal. Portability will be agreed. Cairns: The employer seemed open to further discuss the Principals’ proposal. Rockhampton: There appears to be a recognition of the need for portability. The employer is considering the Principals’ proposal. Toowoomba: The employer is considering the proposal. Portability will be agreed. Townsville: The proposal from Principals is being considered. Portability appears to be agreed in principle. Further, there is agreement to annexe the existing sabbatical policy to the Agreement. Expectations of Availability: Principals have asked for the identification and implementation of measures to address the developing 24 hour day, 7 day per week, 52 week per year work expectation. (The previous Agreement recognised a similar issue under the heading of work intensification.) Your representatives are currently seeking one week of additional leave. Brisbane: The employer is considering the proposal. Cairns: The employer seems receptive to the argument that mechanisms should exist such that Principals are not expected to be available 24/7/52. Rockhampton: The Director has stated that there is no expectation of 24/7/52 availability. The employer has also stated that the reality of ‘out-of-hours demands’ had been factored into the Mercer review of wages. Further, there have been statements which appear to indicate that there is a belief (on the part of the employer) that Principals are only entitled to four weeks annual leave. Toowoomba: Whilst an additional two day’s TRS have been provided to Principals (in recognition of a range of commitments, including supervision of BER projects) the employer wants to continue to have the ‘flexibility’ to recognise such commitment with any future provision outside of the formal agreement structure. Townsville: The employer has identified an expectation that Principals be available in the first week of the Christmas vacation. Discussion has taken place regarding processes which would reduce the number of requests made to Principals during vacation periods.
Expectations of Availability: Employee representatives have tabled a clause which requires consultation with Principals prior to the introduction of any changes which impact on the work of Principals. The proposal does, however, recognise the ultimate right of the employer to make decisions in relation to the workplace. Brisbane: The employer is considering the proposal. Cairns: The employer is considering the tabled proposal. The employer believes that existing mechanisms can provide sufficient consultation. Rockhampton: The employer believes this should occur through existing structures. Toowoomba: The employer is considering the proposal. Townsville: The employer has suggested that this could occur through the general consultative mechanism in the Agreement. Assistant Principal Position: We have asked that the ‘trigger point’ for the appointment of an Assistant Principal in a substantive position be reduced from 451 to 401 students. Brisbane: The employer is considering the proposal. Cairns: The proposal was not rejected, but the employer indicated that support could be provided through additional staff members. The proposal will be considered further. Rockhampton: The employer was stridently of the view that this request should only be considered through the review of PAR positions which will occur as part of the ‘Schools’ Agreement. Toowoomba: The employer is considering the proposal. Townsville: This was recognised as a valid concern, but it was stated that an action should occur through the review of PAR positions which will occur as part of the ‘Schools’ Agreement. Study Assistance: We have asked that assistance be provided toward the costs (both course costs and associated costs) of participating in formal study and that this be quantified in the Agreement. Brisbane: The employer is considering the proposal. However, it believes the current sabbatical provisions allow for flexibility to use these for study. Cairns: This employer quantified a level of assistance in the previous Agreement. Rockhampton: The employer stated that it provided sponsorship for the attainment of Religious Education qualifications. It appeared that other study was seen by the employer as falling within the ‘sabbatical’ provisions. Toowoomba: The employer is considering the proposal. Townsville: The claim by Principals is being considered by the employer, however, it has been noted that the employer currently reimburses HECS for Masters qualifications. Teaching Principal: Your representatives have asked for a review of the teaching requirements for Principals. Brisbane: The employer was not in favour of granting full release. However, it was noted that in some smaller schools the Principal could arrange full release by ‘trading off’ certain hours. Cairns: The employer has advised that such a change would have a significant cost impact. In light of the Principal’s broad leadership role (including in teaching) the provision of full release was unlikely to be supported. Rockhampton: The employer has indicated that it is not open to the concept of full release and that a range of administrative flexibilities currently exist which should satisfy the needs of Principals. Toowoomba: The employer was not in favour of granting full release. However, it was noted that in some smaller schools the Principal could arrange full release by ‘trading off’ certain hours.
Townsville: The employer has advised that its smaller schools receive a more generous staffing allocation. It was suggested that any further consideration of this issue should occur through the Staffing Committee. Tenure: We have sought a guarantee of a position as a Principal as opposed to a position as a teacher. In addition we have asked that the ‘parachute clause’ refer to Experienced Teacher 6 rather than Leading Teacher or Senior Teacher. Brisbane: The employer is considering the proposal. Cairns: Tenure as a Principal is not agreed. The employer has agreed in principle to the inclusion of Experienced Teacher 6. Rockhampton: The employer has advised that there have not been any identified problems associated with tenure in Rockhampton, therefore there is no reason to consider a change. Agreement in principle exists to refer to Experienced Teacher 6 in the parachute clause rather than Leading Teacher. Toowoomba: The employer is considering the proposal. Townsville: Tenure as a Principal is not agreed. Agreement in principle exists to refer to Experienced Teacher 6 in the parachute clause rather than Leading Teacher. Motor Vehicle: Principals have asked for the provision of a vehicle which is funded by the CEO. Brisbane: The employer believes that the current situation is acceptable. Cairns: The employer indicated that it was not convinced of the need to change the existing policy where a car could be factored into a school budget. Rockhampton: School cars are provided for the far west primary schools and these vehicles are garaged at the school. The employer indicated the possibility of reviewing existing policies. Secondary schools have a car which is paid for through the school budget. Toowoomba: The matter will be discussed at the next negotiating meeting. Townsville: The employer believes that the current situation is acceptable. Prior Service: We have sought the recognition of prior service as a Principal when determining the incremental step within the applicable classification level. Brisbane: The employer is considering the proposal. Cairns: Agreed in principle. Rockhampton: The employer has indicated that such recognition occurs in practice, and consequently is prepare to agree in principle. Toowoomba: The employer is considering the proposal. Townsville: Agreed in principle so long as it is limited to service in a Catholic school. Formal Qualifications: Principals have sought clarification concerning the formal qualifications required for appointment as a Principal. Brisbane: The matter has been clarified with an internal memo. Cairns: The employer indicated that no concerns have been raised in this regard. Rockhampton: The employer indicated that no concerns have been raised in this regard. A copy of the QCEC policy was recently distributed to Principals. Toowoomba: The matter is not at issue. Townsville: The employer indicated that no concerns have been raised in this regard.
Working Party outcomes: The existing Agreements contained a commitment to a number of working parties. This ranged from a state wide consideration of sabbatical to Diocese specific groups to consider (for example) OSHC and the needs of Principals in small schools. Without attributing blame it is noted that these working parties were not established. Consequently, an overarching group, with set meeting dates (at least once per year) should be established to ensure that such commitments are actioned. Brisbane: The employer is considering this proposal. Cairns: The employer is considering the tabled proposal. The employer believes that existing mechanisms can provide sufficient consultation. Rockhampton: The employer is considering this proposal. Toowoomba: The employer is considering this proposal. Townsville: Whilst there is some general support for the concept, the employer does not want to establish any mechanism which would be seen as a continuation of the SBU for the life of the Agreement. Job Share: Principals have requested consideration of the introduction of job share provisions. Brisbane: The matter has yet to be formally tabled in negotiations. Cairns: Whilst this request is still being considered, the employer is not generally in favour of job share for Principals.. Rockhampton: The employer is not open to the concept of job share for Principals. Toowoomba: The employer is considering this proposal. Townsville: The employer is prepared to discuss the need for job share during the life of this Agreement. Flying Start Initiatives: We have requested a commitment to discuss changes which may emanate from the Queensland Government’s policy initiatives. Brisbane: The employer has established a working group of Principals to consider the matters arising. Cairns: The employer has indicated that informal discussions with Principals have commenced. However, this issue is not seen as appropriate for inclusion in the formal Agreement. Rockhampton: The employer indicated that whilst it was prepared to have discussions with Principals, it did not want to make a commitment to negotiate until there was more definite information. Toowoomba: The employer is considering this proposal. Townsville: The employer will consider the request, but has indicated that sufficient consultation may be provided for under the general ‘consultation clause’. Appraisal: Principals have requested that different requirements apply for new Principals compared to an experienced Principal. Brisbane: The employer is considering the proposal. An internal process has been giving consideration to the matter. Cairns: The employer is considering the tabled provision. Rockhampton: The employer indicated that existing policies adequately cover this issue. Toowoomba: The employer is considering this proposal. Townsville: This is agreed in principle.
Long Service Leave: Principals asked for additional flexibility in taking Long Service Leave. Brisbane: The desired outcomes should be achieved by reflecting provisions from the ‘schools’ agreement’. Cairns: The desired outcomes should be achieved by reflecting provisions from the ‘schools’ agreement’. Rockhampton: The desired outcomes should be achieved by reflecting provisions from the ‘schools’ agreement’. Toowoomba: The employer is considering this proposal. Townsville: The desired outcomes should be achieved by reflecting provisions from the ‘schools’ agreement’. Salary Packaging: Principals asked for the ability to choose alternative providers of this service. Brisbane: The matter has been resolved with advice to Principals as to how they can clarify any charges being made. Cairns: We have been advised that there have not been any identified problems associated with this issue. Rockhampton: We have been advised that there have not been any identified problems associated with this issue. Toowoomba: The matter has not been raised in negotiations. Townsville: Salary packaging services are provided ‘in house’ and at no cost to the Principal. Travel Allowance: Additional days for travel required due to the absence of services in the location where the Principal resides. Brisbane: The employer believes adequate provisions are in place and are reviewed regularly. Cairns: The desired outcomes should be achieved by reflecting provisions from the ‘schools’ agreement’. Rockhampton: The desired outcomes should be achieved by reflecting provisions from the ‘schools’ agreement’. Toowoomba: The matter has not been tabled in negotiations. Townsville: The desired outcomes should be achieved by reflecting provisions from the ‘schools’ agreement’. Mechanical matters: Discussion has taken place regarding the identification of provisions from the preexisting Award and Agreement which need to be replicated in the new Agreement. There should not be any argument over these issues. We are currently awaiting the provision of draft materials from the employers representative. Next Steps: A further round of negotiating meetings will occur in July. Principals will be contacted at this point seeking advice about the various positions which have emerged in those subsequent negotiations. In the short-term you are invited to provide any feedback on the enclosed proforma regarding the current status of negotiations. Please feel free to contact me (tburke@qieu.asn.au) or John Spriggs (jspriggs@qieu.asn.au) if you wish to clarify or discuss any matter. Kind regards
TERRY BURKE SECRETARY
PRINCIPALS
FEEDBACK SHEET
Name: …………………………………………………………………………………………………… School: …………………………………………………………………………………………………... Diocese: …………………………………………………………………………………………………. Please provide feedback by identifying the issue and your comment: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. PLEASE RETURN TO THE IEUA/QIEU Fax: 07 3839 7021, or email to: tburke@qieu.asn.au or jspriggs@qieu.asn.au