EdU (December 2009) by Independent Education Union (SA)

Vol 24 Issue 4 Dec 2009

EdU

Independent Education Union South Australia Working with members in non-government schools

and make saving for a special purchase simple and easy.

Like to know more? For further details on the Satisfac Online Savings Account, visit www.satisfac.com.au or phone (08) 8202 7777. This information is general in nature and does not consider your personal needs, please read the Conditions of Use. Fees & Charges apply. Satisfac a Division of Credit Union SA Ltd ABN 36 087 651 232 AFS Lic. 241066 151 South Terrace Adelaide

Contents Secretorial – New IR toys (batteries not included) 4 Farewell to Julie Lundberg

Schools to get financial health check-up

Frankly Speaking – ‘There are swings and roundabouts...’

2009 Reps’ and Delegates’ Conference

Help is at hand for new teachers

Congratulations to Westminster teachers!

2009 SA teacher wage report card

The downside of being nice

Rally for action on Catholic EAs

Too hard or a dream come true?

OHS project – The importance of hazard reports 19

ISSN 1448-3637 Published by Independent Education Union (South Australia) Inc. 213-215 Currie Street, Adelaide SA 5000 Phone: (08) 8410 0122 Fax: (08) 8410 0282 Country Callers: 1800 634 815 Email: enquiries@ieusa.org.au EdU is published 4 times a year and has a circulation of approximately 4000. Enquiries regarding circulation should be directed to the Communications Coordinator, on (08) 8410 0122. Editorial comment is the responsibility of Glen Seidel, Secretary.

Advertising Disclaimer Advertising is carried in EdU in order to minimise costs to members. Members are advised that advertising that appears in EdU does not in any way reflect any endorsement or otherwise of the advertised products and/ or services by the Independent Education Union (SA).

Absolutely Super: NGS placed in top ten super funds

SA Unions Climate Change Conference

APHEDA Ten years of independence in Timor-Leste

Sea Breeze – Rory Harris

A day in the life of a junior primary teacher

Book Review – The Promise and the Price – Ten Years of the Clare Burton Lectures

PD Diary: Juliet A. Paine travels to Hobart for an engaging literacy conference

John Blackwell (Retired) (Vice President)

ESO profile: Shirley Bauer, Samaritan College

Jenny Gilchrist (Prince Alfred College) (Vice President)

Intending advertisers should phone (08) 8410 0122.

IEU(SA) Executive Members Margaret Sansom (Retired) (President) Glen Seidel (Secretary)

Val Reinke (Nazareth College) (Treasurer) Christopher Burrows (Cardijn College) Greg Elliott (St. Peter’s College) Sheryl Hoffmann (Concordia College) Noel Karcher (Christian Brothers College) Marlene Maney (Cardijn College) Stephanie Margitich (Gleeson College) Shirley Schubert (Cornerstone College)

DON’T FORGET TO ADVISE IEU(SA) IF: • You have changed address • You have changed your name • You have changed schools • Your employment status has changed (eg. now working part-time) • You are going on unpaid leave • You are retiring or leaving employment – you can remain a member at a reduced rate • Resignation from IEU(SA) must be in writing Details can be forwarded by email to carlyd@ieusa.org.au, by fax on (08) 8410 0282, or by post.

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

Secretorial

New IR toys (batteries not included) Glen Seidel Secretary Though it’s no longer necessary to avoid embarrassing the Government during the DECS arbitration, with a state election mooted for early 2010, the employers are now lobbying for their quid pro quo: increases in state funding. A much as increases are warranted and necessary, it is disappointing that our members are being used as political cannon fodder in the process.

We were allowed to open our presents early this year. On 1 July 2009 we unwrapped the long-awaited Fair Work Act. Thank you, Kevin. Thank you, Julia. It was just what we had hoped for and we knew just where to use it: the protracted Catholic EA campaign. The Fair Work Act 2009 is laden with great new features. It is to our IR toolkit what a new iPod is to your Christmas stocking, leaving Workchoices looking like another sevenday pack of briefs from Aunty Mavis. But just as many new toys will need batteries on Christmas morning, the Fair Work Act 2009 needs power to run. And that has to be supplied by the membership. It is not unusual for negotiations and campaigns to last over a year where there are entrenched, strongly held positions. This round of Catholic-sector bargaining has returned to the intensity of 2004, after 2006 was uncharacteristically quick and easy in order to sidestep the evils of Workchoices. At the local level, our Catholic employers have been challenged and are bunkering down for a war of attrition, despite the objections of a vocal membership and multiple appearances in ‘the commission’ (now called Fair Work Australia). At the heart of the matter are two important issues:

Independent and Lutheran schools have generally agreed to ongoing pay rises of 5% p.a. They have been convinced that national benchmark rates are inevitable and appropriate and have thereby avoided the acrimony of the current Catholic campaign. Until Workchoices, the legal identity, corporate status and inter-relationships between the seventeen (now sixteen) Catholic employers was not important for day-to-day IR. Operating as one overall sector had been convenient and efficient, but it came at the cost of local ownership of IR by employers and employees alike. In September it became strategically appropriate to attempt to negotiate directly with each of the sixteen employers. This is being strongly resisted by the congregational (order-run) schools, but separate bargaining orders have been made against the two dioceses. Members in many schools are now keen to negotiate local issues at the local level with principals, but have been incensed to be met with form letters and refusals even to meet. Whatever the eventual outcome of the single-interest and scope order applications, members are now aware that their employer does have a direct responsibility for negotiating with them on matters of concern. What do members want? • Wages consistent with national benchmarks. • Workload and other issues addressed.

• how one establishes a market rate for salaries, and

• A timely conclusion.

• the responsibilities of the local employer vis-à-vis the central bureaucracy.

• To get back to the main game: teaching and learning.

The IEU has never conceded that the SA Government pay rates are the sole determinant of Catholic school pay rates. Historically, there have been different outcomes for DECS and Catholic EAs, with the 2006 salary alignment being a pragmatic response to Workchoices, rather than a change of position on the union’s part. In general, the DECS pay rate is used to underpin the Catholic schools EA (and some AIS EAs) to ensure that employees receive no less than the government rate. The IEU position is that professional rates of pay are best benchmarked against a basket of national outcomes.

• A focus on core objectives.

By not negotiating wage increases independently of DECS, the Catholic employers are choosing their relationship with the SA Government over that with their own employees.

And when a resolution is reached, it will be due to the energy generated by the membership, not the new legislative toys.

What will that take? • Persistence at the grass-roots level. As much as the legal process is necessary to clarify the parties’ rights and responsibilities to negotiate in good faith, to undertake industrial action and even who can negotiate, the resolution of the dispute lies with the membership convincing school management that they have strongly held and valid concerns. If that takes a campaign with noise at the cathedral, the wearing of badges and the taking of industrial action, then so be it.

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

Farewell to Julie Lundberg Glen Seidel Secretary Julie Lundberg is leaving after some fifteen years with ANGEE and IEU. In 1994 Julie started as an education and training officer and later became assistant secretary. Her specific area of responsibility was professional issues and she has for many years represented the organisationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s members on bodies such as SSABSA and TRB. Following a restructuring of roles and responsibilities within the office, the position of assistant secretary will no longer continue as it has in the past. Julie Lundberg has accepted the opportunity of a redundancy arrangement and has left our union. Julie has leave accumulated which will allow her to take a break and consider her future. She is looking forward to being involved in ventures in the future which can benefit from her wealth of experience and knowledge. Julieâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s support of members with protracted or complex personal or EA issues will be remembered by those who have benefited from her tenacity and attention to detail. We wish Julie all the best for the future and thank her for her past contributions.

Schools to get financial health check-up The financial viability of non-government schools will be tested annually by DEEWR from next year onwards. In accordance with the Schools Assistance Act 2008, schools receiving recurrent funding must achieve the benchmarks outlined in the Financial Health Assessment Framework. Schools participating in a pilot program this year were assessed on a number of financial indicators and industry benchmarks, including student-to-teacher ratios, enrolment rates, tuition fee incomes, and total borrowings as a percentage of recurrent income. The number of benchmarks met by a school determines its overall ranking, and the level of financial management which must be imposed to ensure financial viability. Outcomes of the trial are currently being reviewed, with a view to implementing the framework in all schools in 2010.

From data made available by DEEWR earlier this year, the IEU understands that, of the 2,700-plus non-government schools, perhaps two to three percent (less than 80 schools nationally) fall into the category requiring assistance with financial management. The IEU has long supported greater transparency in school funding and believes that schools should be financially viable. It is especially pertinent in the context of negotiations around salaries and conditions, and alleged over-staffing. Where a school does cite financial difficulties, union members should be given access to the financial management plans required under the framework. Indeed, union members, with the support of union organisers, should be consulted and involved in the development of such plans. If your school is experiencing financial difficulties, contact your organiser today.

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

Frankly Speaking ‘There are swings and roundabouts…’ Frank Bernardi Organiser

In the many statements and counter-statements bandied about during the Catholic EA campaign, some have caused conjecture and confusion amongst members. Let’s look at a couple in detail. IEU: Employers use interstate benchmarks when considering wages for deputies and principals, but refuse to do the same for teachers and ESOs. Employers: ‘We use DECS teacher salary benchmarks for the EA salaries as that provides a relatively comparable South Australian education salary benchmark. The responsibilities and accountability requirements (for example, employing staff) for CESA leaders differ in many ways from those of DECS leaders. Hence we look to Catholic leaders’ salaries interstate for guidance regarding appropriate salary levels for the local South Australian situation.’ (Taken from Catholic Schools Employers EB Bulletin #4 Appendix). At last, the great mystery surrounding how contradictory salary policies operate in the Catholic education system is solved. In essence, it’s quite simple. Teachers teach – DECS, Catholic, doesn’t matter. It’s the same job. Not so for principals and deputies. Catholic school principals and deputies have ‘different’ responsibilities and accountability requirements than their DECS counterparts. So, interstate Catholic principals and deputies provide the only comparable benchmark when setting wages. Hmmm… ‘Different’. It doesn’t say more responsibilities or greater accountability than their DECS counterparts; just ‘different’. However, using ‘employing staff’ as their example of a difference is curious, given the employers have elected not to implement a transfer system because principals want total control over who a school employs. So, the job of employing staff isn’t being foisted upon them. On the contrary; it is a managerial function they have deliberately chosen. And that’s what enables a principal, in a Catholic school, to tap an employee on the shoulder and offer them the one-year replacement job for next year and not open the vacancy to others. Rather than making their job more difficult, being responsible for employing staff often makes their job easier. It’s certainly an irony that this couldn’t happen in the DECS system, because there the process must be transparent and the system accountable. So no, ‘different’ can’t mean more or greater responsibilities and accountability, but just ‘different’.

If we follow the logic of the employers, that means Catholic teachers don’t have responsibilities or accountability requirements different to their DECS peers. It’s all strikingly similar: same curriculum, same pedagogies, same expectations of students, same duty-of-care requirements, same extra-curricular expectations, same parental expectations, same PD requirements, same assessment methods. According to the employers, it’s just all the same. From St. Ignatius to St. Monica’s; from Roxby Downs to Penola; Catholic teachers provide more of the same. Makes you wonder why parents would bother paying for a Catholic education. So on the basis of employer logic, we do the same job and deserve the same pay, it also naturally follows we deserve the same conditions! Not so. IEU: When the employer says parity with DECS, they mean wages only (forget all the other benefits DECS enjoys). Employers: ‘The employers negotiating team has only talked about salary equivalence with DECS for the reasons given (funding, benchmark comparability, political and the single system nature of Catholic Education). We have not talked about other conditions as there are swings and roundabouts [my emphasis] in these. Some DECS conditions are appealing, others are not; for example, in DECS schools most permanent staff are moved onto another school after ten years whereas your permanent position relates to the Catholic school in which you are employed. We believe to adopt all the DECS conditions would be unpalatable to staff in Catholic schools.’ (Taken from Catholic Schools Employers EB Bulletin #4 Appendix). Thankfully, the employer also does our thinking and decisionmaking for us, with respect to workplace conditions. They know what is ‘unpalatable’ to us. And the one example of a difference in conditions between teachers in DECS and the Catholic system that they continually throw up is the ten-year tenure rule. Another strange example to pick. A ten-year tenure rule means a transfer system must be implemented. Catholic Education has failed to organise a transfer system over the years because principals want the power to control who they hire and how. Hence, employers don’t want it; possibly even less than they imply employees don’t. But it would be nice to think that employees, as professionals, could make up their own mind. Given how stagnant the movement of staff in Catholic schools is (and the number of complaints we regularly receive around the employment process), I’m guessing some, possibly many, may actually thinks it’s a good thing. But we will never know because they know what is best for us! So let’s move past the one condition regularly used to scare employees, and look at a few of the other conditions they believe you are also better off not having (NB Based upon current EA conditions).

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

Table 1: Comparison of entitlements in government and Catholic schools Conditions

Government Schools

Catholic Schools

Salary (top-step teacher)

$70,987

TRT salary

Paid at increment step

Paid at step three

Advanced Skills Teacher

AST 1 and AST 2

AST 1

Long-service leave

9.1 days accrued p.a. for first fifteen years of service, then fifteen days p.a.

9.1 days p.a. for whole career

Transfer system

Yes

Beginning teachers

Minimum extra four hours release per fortnight or part thereof for 0.5 FTE, and above for ‘professional activity’

No additional time release in EA (annual guidelines include an additional pro-rated allowance of 0.1 FTE non-contact time to be allocated to first-year teachers in regional areas only)

Class sizes

No year eight to twelve practical class need be, on average, greater than eighteen students

Tech and Home Ec: 24 students

Bereavement leave

Five days

Two days

Union reps

Five days’ paid leave p.a. for training

One day’s paid leave p.a.

Special leave

All permanent teachers are able to access up to fifteen days of special leave with pay per calendar year, which can be used for: • urgent pressing necessity (one day per request) • compassionate reasons (pre-natal leave, partner leave, fertility treatment leave) (one day per request, but up to three days can be granted) • care of a sick family member (up to three days may be granted)

Special leave for any period may be granted with or without pay and as upon such conditions that are mutually agreed with the employer Paid family events leave: two days p.a. for non-reoccurring family events

Country incentives

• Guaranteed return to metropolitan school following four years in regional school • One term’s leave on full pay after six years’ continuous service • Two terms’ leave on full pay after eight years’ continuous service • One year’s leave on full pay after ten years’ continuous service • Zone system (isolation allowance) with payments of up to $7,108 p.a. for zone-four country schools

• No guarantee of a position upon return to metropolitan area • Assistance with removal expenses staggered according to distance from Adelaide and time spent in country • Once-off $2,500 establishment grant for placements of twelve months or longer

Table 2: National Catholic teacher rates, December 2009 2007

2008

2009

$68,422

$70,987

No increment 2008

28.1.09, 3.75%, Interim DECS

2010

2011

SA Step 10

1.10.07 NSW/ACT

$75,352

$78,667

$81,656

$84,759

01.01.08

01.01.09

01.01.10 (3.8%)

01.01.11 (3.8%)

VIC Level 2-2/E4

$67,517

$75,500

$77,546

$79,648

$81,806

01.01.07

01.05.08

01.01.09

01.01.10

01.01.11

$66,191

$68,839

$71,936

$71,996

$75,236

28.04.08

Interim 4.5%

$71,798

Negotiating

QLD Level 3/4 Lead Teacher (soft barrier) 30.04.07 NT 03.03.08 WA Step 9

$68,217

$73,280

$78,521

01.02.08

01.01.09

01.02.10

$72,310

$76,944

$81,662

5/9/08, 6% interim

05.10.09, 5%

01.10.10, 4%

Step 10

$84,863

TAS Step 13

$67,792

$70,551

$74,706

01.04.07 4.07%

01.04.08, 4.53%

24.06.09, 5.89%

Parity G’tee

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

Parity G’tee

2009 Reps’ and Delegates’ Conference Gerry Conley OHS Project Officer

Health, Safety and BER This year’s conference focussed on the health and safety implications of the Rudd Government’s Building the Education Revolution (BER) program. It was promoted as an education unions’ conference on building safer schools, and for the first time, the annual IEU event was opened to AEU members who were HSRs. In total, 49 IEU and 23 AEU reps, HSRs and members decided that the OHS issues surrounding BER were important enough to take them away from their work on Thursday 3 September. Following a welcome by IEU(SA) Vice President Jenny Gilchrist, the conference began with a panel of union representatives, including Aaron Cartledge, Assistant Secretary of the CFMEU, Lyn Hall, educator with the AEU, and Janet Giles, Secretary of SA Unions. They joined IEU Secretary Glen Seidel in discussing the hazards associated with construction sites on school grounds. Each offered their informed perspectives on how union reps and HSRs can be actively involved in controlling the risks posed to safety of both education and construction workers, as well as students. Having looked at the health and safety issues from a worker perspective, it was time for the employers and SA Government representatives to discuss their approach to the BER roll-out. Brian Adams, Chief Adviser with Industry Strategy at Safework SA, Julianne Flowers, Director of Health and Safety with DECS, Neil Lutz, Human Resources Manager with Lutheran Schools SA, and Steve Byrne, Principal of St Michael’s College, provided attendees with an insight into what their respective organisations were doing to ensure employers met their OHS responsibilities during construction works.

Following this, Amanda Rishworth, Federal MP for Kingston, presented the Rudd Government’s objectives for BER, and the benefits of the various programs planned for schools and communities. She also acknowledged that BER would create health and safety issues and supported the need for union reps and HSRs to be involved as works progressed in their schools. Four workshops in the afternoon covered various educationrelated health and safety issues, as well as those specific to BER. Brian Adams provided an introduction to safe design, and how HSRs could be involved in the process. Sharon Doris presented a workshop on the causes and impact of workload burnout, and explored tools to develop response strategies. Jane Jones’s workshop on violence in schools looked at how education workers can assess potentially violent situations and ensure employers are providing a safe workplace. And the IEU’s Gerry Conley facilitated a workshop managing the increased risk of slips, trips and falls around construction sites. In rounding off a very informative day, SA Unions Secretary Janet Giles joined IEU Secretary Glen Seidel to draw door prizes donated by sponsors NGS Super and Members Equity, before officially closing the conference. Janet thanked all those who helped to make the conference a successful joint-union event, and announced that SA Unions would be looking at developing training for education union reps and HSRs that could allow them access to building sites.

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

Help is at hand for new teachers Bruno Sartoretto Organiser Legal protection These days, it is vital that teachers have adequate legal protection. New laws and the increased responsibilities placed on schools have created a complex legal situation for teachers.

Hundreds of university graduates will enter the teaching profession in February 2010, embarking on what will hopefully be long and rewarding careers. The significance of stepping into a classroom alone for the first time, however, can be quite overwhelming; and the support of colleagues can be vital to successfully making the transition from study to work. It is easy as a graduate teacher to fall into the trap of overcommitment, especially if the position is temporary and there is pressure to impress. Setting reasonable goals is essential. As a profession, we owe our new colleagues every assistance as the complexity of the work of a teacher unfolds. The IEU, too, can provide guidance and support. As members of the IEU, beginning teachers have access to: • information about salaries and conditions • workshops with experienced teachers (see page 26) • legal protection • assistance with managing workloads and other pressures, and

Managing workloads and other pressures Work intensification is a critical issue for teachers and ESOs because, unfortunately, workplace stress is a serious health and safety issue in the education sector. Teachers are entitled to a fair balance of work and personal life. In what is an important first year, beginning teachers must ensure that their work/life balance is fair and reasonable. While participation in the school community is important, it must not compromise classroom teaching standards or employees’ personal health. Beginning teachers who are concerned about their workload should contact their IEU organiser.

Professional development

Salaries and conditions

The IEU provides a range of professional development opportunities; all of which are free of charge to union members.

IEU members have been successful in winning significant gains in wages and conditions across the non-government schools sector. First-year teacher salaries in schools with a union-negotiated agreement are up to twenty percent more per year.

A programme of support for graduates includes the Meet the Principal sessions, at which graduates can meet with principals to discuss the dos and don’ts of applying for teaching positions. There are also seminars (see below) on making the transition to the workplace.

Like salaries, employment conditions can vary between schools. However, the award and union-negotiated agreements generally provide for:

Taking an active role in union activity and learning how issues might be addressed collectively in the workplace can be a rewarding part of being a teacher.

• fully cumulative, paid sick leave

Details of PD opportunities are regularly advertised in EdU, at www.ieusa.org.au, and through union representatives in schools.

• professional development.

• employer superannuation contributions • long-service leave • paid school vacation breaks • maternity leave • family carers’ leave, and • in some cases, salary packaging arrangements.

All IEU(SA) members have access to legal advice and are covered by comprehensive professional indemnity insurance. Any complaint should be handled by the school in a fair and transparent manner, and members always have the right to seek advice from their union. Where a meeting with the employer to discuss a complaint is required, members may seek to attend with a union representative for support.

Most importantly, IEU members should ensure beginning teachers feel welcomed to the school and to the profession, and that they are introduced to the benefits of union membership. If they are to enjoy improved salary and conditions well into their teaching careers, then maintaining a strong union presence in schools is essential.

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

Congratulations to Westminster teachers! Westminster teaching staff negotiated a new agreement during the last two terms, following a successful application to Fair Work Australia for a protected action ballot under the new Fair Work Act 2009. This came about after many months of making very little progress in pursuit of what staff saw as a reasonable and minimal claim. Quite early in the negotiations the staff agreed to remove from the table all non-salary items that had formed part of the original claim in a genuine attempt to maximise their salary claim and expedite the process. This did not eventuate as the school did not improve its salary offer to a point that staff thought would maintain their position in the sector, and put them in a good position for the next agreement.

Louise Firrell Organiser

The most notable thing about these negotiations was the solidarity of the staff. All of the teaching staff worked together and supported each other, particularly when ‘stop works’ were imminent there was a great sense of cohesion. At the end of the day, that was what made the difference between an unsatisfactory outcome and one which staff were comfortable with. Westminster teachers have shown clearly what being united can achieve! (Westminster School is one of only two independent schools in South Australia that has separate agreements for its teachers and school assistants. This is a management decision.)

Their application to Fair Work Australia met the criteria set out in the Act and the school became the first in South Australia to exercise this provision. The union members (the majority of staff) then voted in a ballot organised by the Australian Electoral Commission. The vote was a resounding ‘Yes’ for a range of industrial actions during the following thirty days. The staff planned four separate ‘stop works’, but at the eleventh hour the school made a salary offer that the majority of staff accepted, thus avoiding any further action being taken.

IEU Organiser Louise Firrell (second from left) and negotiating team Mary-Anne Beck, Heather Lines, Peter Walwyn, Steve Wayne and Sarah Vesis

‘Trust bank to look after me’

Online Savings Account

Visit mebank.com.au/greatrate or call 1300 309 374

• Government guaranteed • No hidden bank fees or conditions • No penalty fees for withdrawals • Great rates all the time

Your total deposits with Members Equity Bank (ME Bank) up to $1 million are guaranteed free of charge under the Australian Government’s Deposit Guarantee. The balance of your deposits over $1 million may be guaranteed upon request and a fee will be payable by you. This is general information only and you should consider if this product is appropriate for you. Terms and conditions available on request. Members Equity Bank Pty Ltd ABN 56 070 887 679. 139466/1109

139466_OSA SDA SA-NT advert.indd1 1

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

24/11/2009 11:29:45 AM

2009 SA teacher wage report card School Name Annesley College

Date

2008

1/2/08

1.20%

$69,767

1/8/08

2.22%

$71,318

Burc College

Date

2009

2010

1/2/09

1.93%

$72,697

1/2/10

1.84%

$76,144

1/8/09

2.84%

$74,765

1/8/10

1.81%

$77,523

26/8/09

$52,441

$78,671

1/2/11

$82,605

1/2/11

2.25%

$77,621

1/2/11

2.5%

$79,928

4.75%

$80,769

1/10/09

Date

1/10/07

$68,422

28/1/09

3.75%

$70,987

DECS

1/10/07

$68,422

28/1/09

3.75%

$70,987

Eynesbury Senior College Inc

2/1/08

$71,356

1/2/09

$74,924

1/2/10

Harvest Christian School

2/1/08

3.50%

$63,821

1/10/08

2.5%

$69,109

Islamic College SA

1/2/09

2.25%

$70,664

1/2/10

2.25%

$74,061

1/8/09

2.50%

$72,431

1/8/10

2.5%

$75,913

30/1/09

33%

1/10/09 King's Baptist Grammar School Kirinari Community School Lutheran Schools Mount Barker Waldorf School Pedare Christian College Pembroke School

$70,011

1/2/09

2.5%

$73,411

1/2/10

2.6%

$76,449

1/10/08

2.3%

$71,621

1/10/09

1.5%

$74,512

1/8/10

$77,978

1/11/08

6.5%

$60,775

1/2/08

$69,534

1/2/09

$72,694

1/2/10

$76,372

1/7/08

1.5%

$70,577

1/7/09

$74,148

1/7/10

$77,899

2/8/08

$68,973

2/8/09

$73,801

TBA

30/6/10

4.2%

$69,400

1/2/09

5.5%

$73,212

1/2/10

4.2%

$76,292

1/2/08

$69,379

1/2/09

3% offer

$74,347 $75,834

1/8/08

$72,182

1/8/09

2% offer

1/2/08

$68,951

1/2/09

$72,399

1/2/10

4.50%

$75,657

Prince Alfred College

7/1/08

$73,280

1/1/09

$76,944

22/1/10

$80,021

Pulteney Grammar School

1/2/08

$68,386

1/2/09

$72,341

1/5/10

1/8/08

$70,234

1/8/09

2.5%

$74,097

Step 12

$70,665

Step 12

$74,752

Step 12

$74,752

Step 12

$76,567

Extra Curricular

Seymour College

Step 12

$1,560 $77,433

1/5/11

$80,014

Step 12

$83,461

$70,594

1/2/09

$74,893

1/8/08

$72,711

1/8/09

$76,391

TBA

1/2/08

$69,740

1/2/09

$73,126

1/2/10

$77,351

1/2/11

1/8/08

$71,094

1/8/09

$74,480

1/8/10

$78,868

1/8/11

$75,834

Step 11

$78,851

Step 11

$82,718

Step 11

$80,398

Step 11

$84,264

3/1/08

$68,288

3/1/09

$71,743

TBA $81,143 $82,659

8/1/08

$69,654

Southern Vales Christian College

2/1/08

4.5%

$68,464

St Andrew's School

8/2/08

2.5%

$68,904

7/2/09

2.5%

$72,210

6/2/10

2.5%

$75,732

5/2/11

2.5%

$79,254

8/8/08

2.5%

$70,449

8/8/09

2.5%

$73,971

7/8/10

2.5%

$77,493

6/8/11

2.5%

$81,015

1/2/08

2.50%

$68,604

1/4/09

2.50%

$72,077 1/2/11

TBA

1/2/11

$81,327

St George College

1/10/08

2.50%

$70,319

1/10/09

2.50%

$73,878

St John's Grammar School

1/2/08

3.5%

$69,546

1/2/09

$73,023

1/2/10

$76,674

St Peter's College

1/7/08

$74,137

1/2/09

$77,844

1/7/10

$81,736

$68,501

St Peter's Collegiate Girls' School

1/2/09

$71,926

1/2/10

$76,666

1/10/09

4.5%

$75,163

1/7/10

$78,199

1/2/09

$73,087

1/2/10

$76,010

1/2/10

2.25%

$74,933

1/2/10

>2.5%

$70,232

1/2/10

2.25%

$75,750

St Peter's Woodlands Grammar School

1/2/08

$69,607

Temple Christian College

2/1/08

$68,422

The Hills Christian Community School

1/2/08

2.25%

$68,552

1/2/09

2.25%

$71,671

1/7/08

2.25%

$70,094

1/2/09

2.25%

$73,284

The Hills Montessori School

1/2/08

2.5%

$65,637

1/2/09

$68,262

Torrens Valley Christian School

1/2/08

$69,345

1/2/09

$72,854

1/7/08

$70,732

1/7/09

1.5%

$73,946

Trinity College x4

1/2/08

$69,639

1/2/09

$72,453

1/8/08

$71,032

1/8/09

$7,483

28/1/08

$67,770

26/1/09

$70,509

25/1/10

$74,078

28/7/08

$69,126

27/7/09

$71,920

26/7/10

$75,560

2/1/08

$69,122

2/1/09

$73,601

2/1/10

2.50%

$77,531

2/1/11

2.5%

$81,104

8/1/08

3.75%

$71,457

8/1/09

$75,745

8/1/10

2.50%

$79,317

8/1/11

2.5%

$82,890

1/2/08

4.5%

$70,155

1/1/09

2.35%

$73,176

1/1/10

2.44%

$76,835

1/1/11

2.34%

$79,945

1/10/08

1.91%

$71,498

1/7/09

2.5%

$75,005

1/7/10

1.67%

$78,115

2/1/08

$69,662

2/1/09

$73,842

1/2/10

$76,057

1/2/11

$79,130

1/8/10

$77,578

1/8/11

$81,504

1/11/11

$83,134

Tyndale Christian School Walford Anglican School for Girls Westminster School Wilderness School

4.75%

TBA

1/2/08

1/8/09 Southern Montessori School

2011

$67,396

1/2/08

Pilgrim School

Scotch College

$53,208

Catholic schools

Investigator College

Date

TBA

Willunga Waldorf School

1/2/08

$67,103

1/2/09

$68,473

1/2/10

$71,896

Woodcroft College

1/2/08

2.3%

$70,036

1/2/09

$72,516

1/2/10

$76,071

1/2/11

2.5%

$79,981

1/8/08

1.7%

$71,094

1/8/09

$73,938

1/8/10

$78,203

1/8/11

2.5%

$81,758

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

The downside of being nice Fiona Smith Editor, Work Space Playing ‘nice’ is at the heart of just about every management book that has hit the shops in recent years. Be kind to others and they will follow you, work harder, stay longer and be more creative. Workplace harmony has become the key to success. Well, there’s just one response to all that: Steve Jobs. Jobs, the hugely successful chief executive and founder of Apple has never been known for his niceness. He rates a special mention in Stanford University management professor Robert Sutton’s bestselling book The No Asshole Rule (Hachette 2007) as an example of the upside of bad behaviour. When Sutton keyed Steve Jobs and asshole into Google, he got 89,400 matches. Sutton relates one example, as told to him by a manager only days after it happened: ‘... Jobs started screaming, crying and making threats because the colour of the new NeXT vans (from his now defunct computer company) did not precisely match the shade of white that the manufacturing facility was painted. To appease Jobs, NeXT manufacturing managers had to spend precious hours (and thousands of dollars) getting the vans painted exactly the same shade. ‘Yet the people who tell these stories argue he is among the most imaginative, decisive and persuasive people they have ever met’, Sutton writes. ‘They admit that he inspires astounding effort and creativity from his people.’ There is no doubt that bullying, intimidating behaviour can be effective, as Sutton notes, particularly when it comes to gaining personal power, intimidating and vanquishing rivals, motivating fear-driven performance and perfectionism and to bring unfair, clueless and lazy people to their senses. That is why so many leaders feel justified in using this kind of behaviour at work. However, studies show conclusively that bullies are also destructive – suppressing initiative, raising stress levels to burn-out, discouraging honest feedback, creating an exodus of good staff, and spreading misery. Instead, treating employees with respect is linked with superior financial performance, as shown by the companies that make it onto Fortune magazine’s ‘100 Best Companies to Work For’ list. Sutton says intimidating leaders often mistakenly believe their nastiness is the reason for their success, or erroneously think the methods that helped them connive their way to the top of an organisation are also suitable to lead and manage that organisation. So, treating people with dignity and respect (putting aside anomalies such as Jobs) is more likely to create business success – but there is also evidence to show that being too nice can be a real problem.

A study, Does it Pay to be Nice? by Essex University’s Guido Haineck, showed this year that agreeable women were paid four per cent less than those with more male behaviour traits, equating to a pay difference of £40,000 ($71,725) over a working life, based on a £25,000 annual wage. Mara Olekalns, professor of management at the Melbourne Business School, says being nice all the time can encourage workplace conflict because people are too polite to tackle issues as they arise. ‘We sweep it under the carpet, but those issues fester’, she says. ‘By the time we get to the point where we are not able to be nice any more, the situation can be explosive. It can create more conflict than tackling things head on.’ Think about annoying behaviour by colleagues – say, bouncing a ball near you when you are trying to concentrate on writing a report. If you don’t ask them to stop the first time, you have given them tacit permission to continue. When you eventually snap, you say something in anger and your colleagues are shocked because they didn’t think anyone minded. Olekalns says there is also a gender difference in the way niceness is perceived. ‘Men really get a bonus for being nice, when they engage in extra tasks around the workplace ... things that are not their job’, she says. ‘Conversely, women get penalised for not being nice. We expect women to be more relationship-oriented.’ In simple terms, a man who gets coffee for his workmates will get plenty of slaps on the back. A busy woman who says no to a task is likely to be viewed as difficult or lazy. People who feel compelled to be nice do it because they want to be liked, they want to make others feel happy and they hope it will help them be seen as team players and as enthusiastic can-do workers. But establishing a pattern of nice behaviour can be a trap, Olekalns says. Once a nice person has been overburdened by work, it can be difficult to start saying ‘no’. Olekalns says people who are worried they are turning into doormats need to think how they frame their refusals. You can appeal to the other person’s sympathy: ‘I have so much work to do. I’d love to help out, but I can’t deal with the stuff I already have on my desk.’ You can put the onus on them to make it possible: ‘I’d love to help, but what do you think you could take off my desk so I can clear some time for you?’ These strategies may work better for women because they would be more likely see an appeal for help as bonding, whereas men might see it as an admission of weakness. Republished courtesy of The Australian Financial Review

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

Rally for action on Catholic EAs Around 500 members and supporters from other unions rallied at St. Francis Xavier Cathedral on Sunday 8 November, urging Catholic Education SA to make a pay offer to staff.

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

Too hard or a dream come true? Professor Karen Starr Professor Karen Starr is the Foundation Chair, School Development and Leadership, and Director of the Centre for Educational Leadership and Renewal in the Faculty of Arts and Education at Deakin University, Victoria.

Introduction Trials are occurring around Australia and across education systems to test the veracity and feasibility of various models of job sharing in the principalship [2]. Currently, it appears that Catholic schools are more likely to entertain such arrangements than other schooling sectors [4], although trials are currently underway in government schools in several Australian states. These trials arise from the need to encourage more people into the principalship and to retain experienced principals. There is scarce research in this area in Australia, but job sharing is an emerging trend in the principalship that could grow in popularity. There are many reasons given for sharing the principalship. First is the incumbents’ desire to acquire ‘work/life balance’. With an average working week of 60 hours or more [3], sharing the leadership load is attractive. Principals currently trialling a shared arrangement cite the desire for more personal time, age and stage reasons such as the need to care for ageing parents, and the hope for a transition period to retirement as the basis for job-sharing. Education departments see the part-time/shared option as being attractive to leadership aspirants at a time when there’s a shortage of principals and the ‘baby-boomer’ retirement issue to address. Another reason is an emerging interest in re-designing the principalship, with various constructions being explored [8].

Types of job sharing arrangements There are many possible models of job sharing in the principalship. Here are some of the most common options: • The fractional time, rotating authority model where a principal shares the role for some of the time with a deputy or assistant principal. In this model there is a hierarchy of a substantive principal for most of the time with an acting or associate principal for the rest. • The internship model where an aspirant leader pairs with an experienced principal in order to ‘learn the ropes’, either full- time partners or a part-time, shared arrangement. • The part-time/partial overlap model, where partners are part- time with common time when both are present to ensure thorough communications, hand-over, and joint presence. • The equal partners, co-principal, job-integration model, with two people bearing equal responsibility and equal authority, working for equal amounts of time but not concurrently.

• The syndicate or concurrent model where two people share the role and status at the same time all the time, with each undertaking specific tasks or both sharing all tasks.

• The cyclical or turn-taking model where one person undertakes the principalship for a part of the year with the other taking over for the remainder. Alternatively this model could be configured to have co-principals concurrently present but taking a cyclical swap-over of responsibility. • The educational leader/business manager model whereby tasks are divided through educational or business/ management imperatives. • The temporary sharing arrangement (for example, for a period of time – such as one school term – to enable the principal to have personal time for a particular reason). • The multi-campus or section of school model, with different people leading different sections/campuses. • The super principal model, with one principal responsible for a multi-campus school or for more than one sovereign school, perhaps with a site principal or manager in each school. • A cross-cultural model, with partners from two different cultural backgrounds meeting the cross-cultural needs of a school [1]. The possibilities of job-sharing models appear endless, so there are no doubt many configurations other than those cited above. Each possible model, however, is derived from different imperatives. In some configurations there are no divisions of authority while others follow a main/delegated model of authority. The types of arrangements described above involve two people, but potentially more than two could be involved, and models could be amalgamated to produce more complex exemplars. From the models currently being trialled or underway in Australia, the type of sharing arrangement appears to be decided by incumbents [6]. At present, shared principalships are voluntary and designed to meet the needs of individuals and the school. Obviously approvals for such arrangements are at the discretion of school councils and employing bodies.

Benefits Job sharing provides opportunities for aspirants to gain experience in the role while being supported and mentored by a substantive principal. This may be an attractive option for younger school leaders who would like to have a supported ‘test run’ before taking a deep end plunge into a full-time, sole principal position. In this way, a co-principalship appears to offer enormous advantages for a new principal’s induction. Job-sharing provides a valid and reasonable means of acquiring more personal time – or ‘work/life’ balance. Most large organisations have ‘work/life balance’ policies, even though in education they appear to be more aspirational than mandated or achievable. Sharing arrangements also offer individuals greater scope for professional learning, research, reflection, planning and observations in other schools.

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

A principal wanting to pursue further academic study may find a co-principalship attractive. Joint responsibility may be less stressful when shared, and common feelings concerning isolation and ‘being lonely at the top’ could disappear [13]. The ‘burden’ of running a school could be reduced, especially when difficult problems arise – with two heads, quite literally, being better than one. Job satisfaction could be increased and principals sharing a role would have an automatic internal support base. A joint, democratic approach to the principalship could appeal to those who prefer to work in teams, with reduced hierarchies and formality. Job-sharing in the principalship supports preferences for shared or distributed leadership models, as opposed to sole, heroic leadership notions. If the top job can be shared, so it can model more collegial teambased models throughout the school. There is evidence to suggest that in its current configuration, the principalship is perceived as too complex, time-consuming and demanding to be attractive to some [9; 10; 13]. Hence the possibility of sharing may appeal to groups who are currently deterred or under-represented in the principalship which would have systemic advantages and improve equity in employment opportunities. There may be advantages for school improvement if two people with different personalities, expertise and interests are behind strategic plans and activities. Furthermore, there may be greater opportunities for co-principals to teach for longer periods of time. In the educational leaders/business manager model, a new principal’s lack of experience in financial and business matters could be overcome, although if the head has overall responsibility and authority, s/he would be advised to assume substantial decision-making involvement and business oversight.

Disadvantages There are some obvious downsides to shared leadership models. First is the issue of what to do when incumbents sharing a job fall out. Marriages and friendships can break down, so why couldn’t job-sharing partners? A divided leadership team would be disastrous for the school and the individuals involved and very difficult for a school to resolve. Temperaments, job commitment, personalities and dispositions all come into the equation. For job- sharing to work, there could be no power-plays, no ‘white-anting’, no grizzling about partners behind backs, no exclusion or marginalisation. Trust within the relationship would be an imperative. There are few examples of employment contracts for joint appointments, yet there are an enormous number of considerations that would differ from a sole appointee’s

contract. For example, how would a co-principalship be advertised – or would it simply arise as individuals saw the need and benefits? Would partners be jointly interviewed? Would they receive the same pay (fractionally adjusted) and tenure? What induction processes would be necessary and how would it be arranged? Would the school require a probationary employment period? Almost universally principals work longer hours than they are paid for, so who does the overtime – what hours are required of each partner? What would happen if one partner resigned – what notice Period and succession plans would be required, especially if the shared arrangement had required elimination of deputy or assistant principal positions due to costs? Who takes over if someone is absent or on leave? What happens if one person wished to change their work conditions? How would performance appraisals be conducted – solely or as a team? How would conflicts within the partnership or complaints against a partner be resolved? There is the possibility of resentment if one person were to receive credit for work jointly done or completed by the partner, if one person’s skills were recognised above another’s, or if one person felt imposed upon – or not involved enough – in tasks such as [1] responding to emails. In the same vein, the joint signing of official documents and communications would need to be organised. Partners would need to have equal access to support staff, especially if these people were themselves part-timers. Appointments and briefings would need to be a joint responsibility. It may be rare to find two people equally reliable and capable, yet if this were not the case either the partners or the school community would become resentful and disenchanted with a sharing arrangement. Role overlap or task omission are two obvious pitfalls if communications between the job-sharing partners were not watertight. Furthermore, a shared principalship could incur greater demands and work delegation to the middle level of school leaders and managers, making their working lives more difficult. School councils and others in the school community may be confused about unclear lines of responsibility or delegation. Quite possibly staff or parents may try to play one off against the other, which would undermine one partner.

Making it work Obviously, people sharing one job need to be compatible, have similar values, understandings and philosophical beliefs, primarily about education but about other important areas, such as the number of hours they will dedicate to school work. It appears from the small number of reported cases in Australia, that co-principalships are best implemented when partners choose each other [6].

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

The school community and employing bodies would have to be supportive of a shared arrangement. There would be a need for clear documentation on how the job-sharing is to be executed and budgeted.

[4] Di Stephano, L. (2002) Co-Principalship: An Alternative Model for Schools. In Educare News: The National Newspaper for All Non-government Schools, Issue 122. Camberwell, Victoria: ACER Press.

Conclusion

[5] Clatter, R. & Harvey, J. (2006) New Models of Leadership: Varieties of Shared Leadership – A Preliminary Exploration. Nottingham, UK: National Council of School Leadership.

Research is needed in this field, so it is pleasing to hear that education systems trialling shared leadership models are reviewing how these arrangements are working in practice. Shared leadership roles provide an opportunity to focus on leadership rather than on leaders [14], and enable more people to experience what school leadership actually involves [11]. Shared roles also emphasise continual professional learning on the job as an imperative of a successful principalship. Given the enormous benefits that could be possible, let’s hope the disadvantages can be overcome. This article was originally published in Redress, the journal of the Association of Women Educators, and is reprinted with permission from that organisation.

References [1] Bunnell, T. (2007) The Yew Chung Model of Dual Culture Co-principalship: A Unique Form of Distributed Leadership. In International Journal of Leadership in Education. Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 191-210. [2] Department of Education and Children’s Services (2009) Leaders Trialling Job sharing. In Educations NEWS, SA Government Schools & Children’s Services, Vol. 3, No. 2, p. 13. www.decs.sa.gov.au/mediacentre. [3] Department of Education and Training, Victoria (2004) The Privilege and the Price. Melbourne: Victoria.

[6] Gronn, P. & Hamilton, A. (2004) A Bit More Life in the Leadership: Co-principalship as Distributed Leadership Practice. In Leadership & Policy in Schools, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 3-35. [7] Harris, A., Brown, D. & Abbott, I. (2006) Executive Leadership: Another Lever in the System? In School Leadership & Management, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 397-409. [8] Lacey, K. (2006) Attitudes to Job-Sharing and CoPrincipalship. Address to the iNet Conference, 29 April, 2006. www.cybertext.net.au/inet [9] Macnamara, L. (2006) Principals Lose Their Job Appeal. In The Australian, Higher Education, 23 August, p. 26. [10] Myers, T. (2006) Principals Under Pressure. In Teacher, June 2006, pp. 12-16. [11] NCSL (2007) Leadership Succession: An Overview of Securing the Next Generation of School Leaders. Nottingham, UK: NCSL. [12] Revans, R. (1983) The ABC of Action Learning. Bromley, Kent, UK: Chartwell-Bratt Publishers. [13] Starr, K. (2007) Capacity Building for the Principalship. In The International Journal of Knowledge, Cultures and Change Management, Vol. 6, No. 8, pp. 189-198. [14] West-Burnham, J. (no date cited) Building Leadership Capacity: Helping Leaders Learn. In Meeting the Challenge: Growing Tomorrow’s School Leaders. Nottingham, UK: NCSL.

Save and win with Union Shopper Until March 31st 2010 MeMbers have the chance to win one

of three $500 union shopper gift vouchers*

Simply make a purchase through Union Shopper’s electrical, travel or Motor Market services to be in the running. The more times you buy the more chances you have to win!

*For terms and conditions please visit www.unionshopper.com.au/win500

Participating brands include:

Big Savings for Union Members

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

OHS Project The importance of hazard reports

Gerry Conley OHS Project Officer

Recently, two safety hazards in schools have highlighted the need for all employees to understand their responsibilities in addressing health and safety hazards; particularly the importance of completing hazard reports.

Once completed, a hazard report requires school management to take action. OHSW legislation states that once a hazard has been identified, management must conduct a risk assessment and implement appropriate risk controls.

Hazard reports are vital to any school’s OHSW procedures. They alert school management and the health and safety rep (HSR) to hazards and initiate the process of properly minimising or eradicating risks to health and safety.

And what better form of hazard identification than a written document? A verbal complaint can be ignored, but a completed report form cannot.

At both schools concerned, a number of staff had verbally raised with their HSRs what they believed to be hazards. The HSRs in each case were prepared to take up the issues with school management, and duly asked the staff concerned to complete hazard reports. In both cases, staff declined, saying ‘It seemed too much of a hassle’, or ‘Well, that’s why I’m raising it with you [the HSR]; so you can fill it out.’

All employees have a responsibility to report hazards – in fact, it’s a legislative requirement – and that means completing a hazard report, not just making a verbal complaint to a HSR. OHSW management is heavily legislated, and HSRs can not address hazards to the full extent of their legislated powers if employees are not willing to document their complaint. All schools should have a hazard report form available to all employees. It should be easy to complete, with provision for the name of the reporter, and the location and the nature of the hazard. Most also provide space for any remedial action taken, where that has occurred, and for any recommended action.

With a hazard report that clearly identifies the hazard and the risk it presents to employees, the HSR can present a stronger case when negotiating an acceptable solution with management. Indeed, the more reports the better. Furthermore, management cannot dismiss a hazard report simply by stating that it does not consider the hazard an OHSW issue, as occurred at one school where a hazard report was lodged on behalf of staff performing work in which they had no previous experience. Management must provide feedback to the reporter and the HSR as to why it doesn’t believe an issue would affect health and safety, and why a risk assessment isn’t necessary. If the HSR disagrees, he or she is enabled by due process to take further action and ensure that a proper risk assessment is carried out.

One of the most difficult problems facing HSRs, however, is employees’ reluctance to complete hazard reports for fear of repercussions. Section 56 of the OHSW Act protects any employee who raises a health and safety issue from dismissal, intimidation or threats, and any such behaviour should be raised immediately with an IEU rep or organiser.

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

Absolutely Super:

NGS placed in top ten super funds Bernard O’Connor NGS Super

SuperRatings, an independent rating agency, conducts regular reviews of Australian super funds to determine their strengths, weaknesses and value for money for members. It encourages super fund members to use their website to see how a fund is performing in relation to its peers. The criteria used for assessing funds include investments, fees, insurance delivery, member education, financial planning facilities, employer support and fund governance. As the industry fund which specialises in providing superannuation for employees in the non-government education sector, NGS Super was named in the top ten funds this year for the first time. The Managing Director of SuperRatings, Jeff Bresnahan, said that in spite of the fact that all funds suffered negative returns over the past two years, that ‘whilst it is never good to see super funds suffer the losses they have over recent times, some funds have performed significantly better than others through the various investment cycles of the past five years. This strong relative performance, which in some cases reflects a differential of over six percent per annum between funds, combined with competitive fees and services, has led to consumers in the named funds enjoying results far ahead of many other funds. At this point, industry funds continue to dominate our best value for money fund list. Clearly there are a number of retail funds that offer good value, however many funds, including some not-for-profit funds, have done little to assist Australians’ retirement savings during these turbulent times.’ *Let’s face it; six percent is a considerable difference in fund performance. By now, most Australian workers recognise what an industry fund is and the value they offer due to their not-forprofit ethos and low fee structure. The SuperRatings results confirm that, in general, members in industry funds enjoy solid investment returns and low fee structures, leaving more in their accounts. After all, building an adequate retirement nest egg is what superannuation is all about.

In awarding NGS Super the Platinum Rating, which represents the top fifteen percent of super funds in terms of value for money, SuperRatings also determined a rating of 110 to the Fund for Investment and 110 for Insurance. This rating equates to ‘premium performer in this area – well above benchmark’. It is a strong vote of confidence in the investment selection and governance used by NGS Super in its fiduciary capacity of managing and growing members’ money. It is also pleasing to note the high rating achieved by NGS Insurance, an area which many members only consider at point of need. Enhanced life and incomeprotection insurance provide members with a measure of financial security for relatively low premiums. If you would like to obtain further information as to how your current fund rates against its peers, go to www.superratings.com.au and have a look at their results. The top ten performers can also be found at this site. You may also wish to check out the industry funds website at www.industrysuperfunds.com.au to see which industry funds support the current campaign. Now is a good time to re-evaluate your superannuation direction by seeking information and making informed choices about your preferred fund, investment options and insurance. It’s a matter of taking control of your super and making decisions based on your tolerance for risk. And, of course, seek professional advice if you are not clear about any aspects of the comparison. Source: SuperRatings media release, 15 September 2009 (Disclaimer: The information in this article is general information only and does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. Before making a financial decision, please assess the appropriateness to the information to your individual circumstances and consider seeking independent advice from a licensed or appropriately authorised financial advisor.)

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

Our insurance is of the class!

top

NGS Super offers great value for money* insurance cover for Death and disability as well as Income Protection. Members have a choice of cover options as well as income protection that’s flexible, so you can be sure you have the cover that’s right for you.

For more information, please contact 1300 133 177 or visit www.ngssuper.com.au

* NGS Super was awarded Money magazine’s 2009 Best of the Best award for ‘Best Value Insurance in Super’. Non-Government Schools Superannuation Fund ABN 73 549 180 515

NGS10263_NGS EDU Journal Advert.indd 1

26/10/09 4:48:38 PM

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

SA Unions Climate Change Conference Elenor Davies PA to Principal, Immanuel College IEU member Elenor Davies finds that unions are making ground on the green front. Though I like to keep informed about climate change, the consequences are so huge that I can only take so much before I have to bury my head for a while. Seeing the retraction of glaciers and satellite images of the polar caps diminishing is just too scary. However, I can happily report that I found the SA Unions Climate Change Conference surprisingly uplifting. There are some good people out there doing great things. The first speaker was Ben McNeil, author of The Clean Industrial Revolution. Ben focussed on opportunities to grow jobs through new clean industries, and Australia’s innovative history suggests we are well-placed to lead a clean economic revolution. He showed how ‘investing in, commercialising and exporting the new fuels, materials and technologies will boost economic prosperity as well as securing environmental sustainability’. There is a major shift globally in climate change opinion, and a desire to address our abuse of our environment. We just have to keep faith. People do care, and that makes Governments react. Colin Pittman is Director of City Projects for the City of Salisbury and a man with three exceptional skills: vision, practical application and marketing. His vision is not unusual. Many of us visualise how we would like the world to be. We all want to keep our environment in good shape while still retaining a good lifestyle. But Colin has turned his vision into a reality; adding practicality to dreaming. That makes him rare. Many of us just don’t know where to start.

I also enjoyed the straight-talking, down-to-earth Tony Maher, who is National Secretary of the CFMEU’s mining division. His message was clear: unions representing the so-called ‘polluting’ coal industry are environmentally proactive. To summarise, he said: • Unions have been active on climate change for a long time • Engagement with environmental groups, business and unions is critical for government • The CFMEU’s message is that all industries should take responsibility , because we need all technologies • Debate should be about how we grow, not whether we grow • Polling consistently shows vast support for this position • Community acceptance is possible if properly led by government and stakeholders, and • Unions have a key role in generating community acceptance. Another inspiring and passionate speaker was Katie Flanders, from QPSU, who promoted Union Climate Connectors, a campaign developed by the Australian Conservation Foundation and Australian Unions. If you want to help facilitate action in your workplace, home or community; to build awareness and understanding about the environment while being part of a network of support connectors around Australia; this is for you. Visit www.climateconnectors.org There were eight presenters on the day and the presentations are available on the SA Unions website (www.saunions.org.au).

Colin and his team have built an extensive water-catchment program with wetlands to (put very simply) purify water for distribution throughout the City of Salisbury. The project has been so successful that the SA Government has recently committed to implementing the concept in other areas. Afterwards, I just happened to speak with a resident of Mawson Lakes, and I asked, ‘Did you realise all that infrastructure, wetlands, pipes and lakes all connected to aquifers was right underneath your home?’ He did, because City of Salisbury rate-payers are regularly informed of the expansion of the catchment program. So there you have it: a visionary, engineer, and a marketing whiz. Thank heavens for innovative and passionate Australians. I recommend visiting the City of Salisbury website (cweb.salisbury.sa.gov.au) for further information.

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

APHEDA

Ten years of independence in Timor-Leste Ten years ago, under the threat of bloodshed and destruction, the people of Timor-Leste voted for independence from Indonesia. During the 25-year struggle for Timorese independence, and in the violence that followed the ballot on 30 August 1999, it is estimated that up to 250,000 people were killed and many thousands more were displaced. Union Aid Abroad – APHEDA congratulates the people of TimorLeste in reaching this important milestone, and reflects upon the important role we have played in the country over the past ten years. Australian unions have played a crucial role in the history of Timor-Leste, both in the struggle for independence, and in assisting with the development of this new nation. With the support of individual union members, Australian unions and AusAID, Union Aid Abroad – APHEDA has delivered over $4,317,000 in development assistance to Timor-Leste. Since beginning work in Timor-Leste in 1997, Union Aid Abroad – APHEDA has worked with local partner organisations to train over 5,800 people. Union Aid Abroad – APHEDA’s program in Timor-Leste has included training in a range of vocational skills such as

2010 rep training day Monday 22 February 2010 9am – 3pm Education Development Centre Milner Street, Hindmarsh Prepare for the new school year with workshops and advice on topical issues for 2010. We’ll examine workload burnout, its causes and its impact on education workers, plus tools to respond to this serious health and safety issue. You’ll also have the opportunity to: • meet your organiser and discuss how you can work with them to best represent members’ interests in 2010 • examine the industrial issues facing your school and sector in 2010, and

carpentry, mechanics, blacksmithing, organic agriculture, sewing, handicraft production, and small-business management. We have also trained rural women in literacy skills, supported the development of an independent media through working with community radio stations and newspapers, provided community education through theatre, and supported the university library with resources, books and training. With the support of Australian unions, we have played an integral role in the development and strengthening of a democratic, independent trade union movement. Over 9,000 workers in Timor-Leste are members of unions, and the Timor-Leste Trade Union Confederation (KSTL) continues the struggle to support working women and men to access fair wages and safe workplaces. Timor-Leste still faces many challenges, including widespread poverty, poor education, limited access to health care, and high levels of unemployment. With the support of Australian trade unions and workers, Union Aid Abroad – APHEDA will continue to stand by the people of Timor-Leste and work in partnership with them to develop their country in an equitable and sustainable way.

Sea Breeze Rory Harris on the young father’s lap sits the child maybe six months in front of them blue blanket of ocean to wrap the day flushed cheeked & staring this bonneted mooring against the sea breeze Jun.’08

• review and practise workplace organising skills for your role as an IEU rep. TRT Support will be provided for all financial members who require it, and country members will be eligible for travel assistance in line with IEU travel policy. Call Carly or Gerry on 8410 0122 for details.

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

A day in the life of a junior primary teacher Deb Madgen Teacher earned run around the oval and a game. Oops, a fall. Mop up the blood, apply first aid. Then help sort out a couple of arguments while the other kids are going boonta. Thank God, that’s the recess bell. Can’t rest yet. I need to chat to the child with a yardbehaviour-management plan to remind him about where and how to play.

The day begins at 8:15. I arrive and log onto my computer. Then I log onto the internet to get the day’s memos. Then I log onto Dux so I can record the absences. No time to read the six emails that have already come in since yesterday. They will have to wait until recess. Then I’m ready to set up the first lesson: six reading groups at various levels. Each group needs an activity set up at their literacy centre, so that they have work to do while I’m hearing reading. I organise writing activities. Now the period until recess is ready to go. 8:40. The bell goes and I collect and greet my students with a smile, and listen to ten stories at once as they tell me their very important news. The kids dribble in and I must say at least a dozen times, ‘Have you changed your reader?’, and ‘Do you have your fruit and water on your desk?’

Ten minutes gone. I just have a few minutes to read the emails. God, there are four more. Ten minutes later, I race to the staff room to get a cup of tea. God, that’s good. Heaven. I sit down and – bugger! That can’t be the bell. Off I go again. Twenty minutes later, after I have counselled several groups on resolving yard-play issues, and had an impromptu social-skills lesson, we are ready for maths. Four groups working with concrete materials on open-ended tasks. Full on and noisy.

8:45. The distressed parent of one of my new reception students asks someone to come and get me. Her son won’t get out of the car. I phone the office for help – it’s engaged. I ask the teacher next door to look after my class while I try to coax the child out of the car.

I, like most teachers, have become adept at coming up with just the right questions to keep each student challenged at their particular level. I set up my autistic child on a computer maths program. He can’t handle all the activity in maths time. Bugger. The computer won’t work. He is starting to go ballistic. I phone the office. Thank God, this time I get through and an ESO comes over to help. I set up an alternative task for him. Now that’s organised, where’s my maths assessment folder?

9:00. Finally, we are ready to start the day in the prayer circle. There are six parents with their toddlers joining us, which is lovely but noisy! It’s hard work keeping some of the kids focussed.

12:50. The lunch bell. Find three lost lunches and check everyone is eating. Especially the child whose parent complains she is not eating properly at school. Do those shoe laces for the third time. Disinfect.

I introduce the literacy activities and send everyone off to work. I have to make sure my student with the severe language disorder knows what to do. Then I start hearing the reading groups. Now my ten pairs of eyes and two sets of ears come in really handy as I can hear reading, plus listen to and watch the other twenty children. Not only that, but I can teach each group a new reading skill which is tailored to their exact level! My three pairs of hands come in handy to sharpen pencils and find lost books.

Yard duty on the playground. Mediate four fights, and halflisten to the five children telling me five stories at once. Find the boy who is exposing himself in the toilets. It turns out that he doesn’t know how to use the urinal. Make a note to email the parents about it.

Next is guided writing, once again in groups, where the learning is tailored to each level. I run around like a bluearsed fly to each child, conferencing their writing. I get to ten students; the next fifteen I’ll try to get to in show-andtell time. The literacy block is over. We all go out for a well-

Also, I have to tie up eight shoe laces, and make sure I disinfect afterwards. You never know where those laces have been. Especially the wet ones on the boys’ shoes! Mustn’t forget that lonely kid who I need to support with a friendship group.

1:25. I grab my lunch. There’s a phone call. It’s Frank from the IEU. I’ll never get to eat lunch. I return the call, grab a cuppa, sit down and – you guessed it. That bloody bell. Back in the classroom, there are more stories about the injustices in the yard. Another social-skills lesson; this time with role-plays. I have ten minutes to organise craft while the kids have show and tell. I explain to the autistic boy for the fiftieth time today that the computer is not working.

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

Must phone IT to get that fixed urgently. I quickly set him up with play dough before he has a major spin-out. We get through the craft lesson. How can you make that much mess creating butterflies for goodness’s sake? It takes us forever to clean up, with half helping and half doing their own thing, oblivious to my requests. A bribe works great. Now I’m giving out stickers and the bell is about to go. Still haven’t given out reader bags and notices. Yep, we are going to be late out again. A parent wants to talk to me about some stresses at home that may be affecting her child. I’ve got one eye on the clock. It’s staff meeting tonight. OHS&W. My favourite. Do I cut her short or go late to the meeting? Finally, I get to the staff meeting. I’m the last one there and, as I collapse on the chair, I realise that it’s the first time I have sat down and relaxed all day.

And after doing all this, day in, day out, when I ask my employer to sit down and negotiate my salary, Dr Vin Thomas, their lead negotiator, points to Hillcrest Primary and says, ‘Don’t ask me. Go ask them what your wage rise will be!’ Is that fair? Does that make sense? Does he not understand how demeaning to me, how demeaning to us, as professionals that is? To say my representative, the IEU, cannot negotiate my wage for me – our wage for us – is embarrassing. It undermines all we hear from the Church and Catholic Education about gospel values! Actions speak louder than words. It’s time to act and make an offer that reflects our value to the system and to our communities, instead of hiding behind DECS.

The Promise and the Price – Ten Years of the Clare Burton Lectures Book Review Louise Firrell Who was Clare Burton? In her introduction to the book, Her Excellency Quentin Bryce, the Governor General, describes Clare Burton as ‘a scholar of the highest order… For all in the women’s movement her voice was one of the best known, most genuine and trustworthy in articulating what mattered and what would drive us forward.’ Clare Burton made a significant contribution through her research, publications and activism to the gender-equity debate in higher education, as well as the broader context. The book contains ten years of lectures hosted by the Australian Technology Network’s Women’s Technology Network (ATN WEXDEV). It is a fitting tribute to the Burton’s work, in that it offers an academically sound and readable snapshot of ten years of thinking, delivered by respected contemporary researchers. The first lecture was given in 1999 by Professor Rosemary Hunter on pay equity, a theme still very much an issue of concern ten years later, and was titled The Beauty Therapist, The Geoscientist and the Librarian: Addressing the Undervaluation of Women’s Work. Dr Jocelyn Scott’s 2000 lecture Getting to First Base When You’ve Struck a Home Run: Merit, Equity and the ‘No Change Principle of the Workplace Culture’ explores the gap between the positions women achieve in organisational structures and their expertise. And Professor Barbara Pocock’s 2006 lecture Jobs, Care and Justice: a Fair Work Regime for Australia provides an analysis of the way women’s undervalued work underpins the labour market prosperity that we currently ‘enjoy’.

Published 2009 This book will be a worthwhile read for anyone with an interest in gender and equity issues, whether you are old enough to have burnt your bra, or care about what’s ‘fair’. Information about the Clare Burton Scholarships and ATN WEXDEV may be found at http://www.unisa.edu.au/ staffdev/women/clare_burton.asp

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

PD Diary:

Juliet A. Paine travels to Hobart for an engaging literacy conference Juliet A. Paine Teacher, Loreto College During the July school holidays, I had the privilege of attending and presenting at the 2009 national conference of the Australian Association for the Teaching of English (AATE) and Australian Literacy Educators’ Association (ALEA) in Hobart. This year’s conference theme was ‘Bridging divides: ensuring access, equity and quality in literacy and English education’. A diverse range of guest speakers were featured, including authors Richard Flanagan, Andy Griffiths, and Mem Fox, as well as several notable academics from both Australia and overseas. The main focus of the conference was the upcoming National Curriculum, and the impact this will have on English and literacy teachers throughout Australia. Despite the chill of a wet mid-winter, with snow visible on the top of Mount Wellington, it was a richly rewarding experience to hear knowledgeable experts and network with colleagues from around the country. My own presentation on ‘Quality and rigor in the teaching of poetry in the senior school’ was well-attended, much to my surprise. Despite having a Saturday morning session that left me competing with the popular markets at Salamanca Place, the conference room was full. I presented a series of sequential scaffolds, around which I base my teaching of poetry in years nine to twelve at Loreto College. The audience was warmly enthusiastic and supportive and asked many questions. I am still responding to emails from attendees wanting more information about my presentation. The opening address of the conference was delivered on the Thursday night by renowned Tasmanian author Richard Flanagan, whose novels include Death of a River Guide, Gould’s Book of Fish, and The Sound of One Hand Clapping. I was keen to hear Richard speak, as I rate Gould’s Book of Fish as one of the best convict-era pieces of historical fiction this country has produced. The focus of Flanagan’s address was the liberating power of literature and the way in which the reading of novels can develop a school student’s imagination and expand their view of the world. He employed several examples from his own childhood, such as Kafka’s The Trial, The Iliad, and Tolstoy’s Anna Kaerina, to support his points. It was an invigorating opening address that ultimately reminded the English teachers in attendance of their role in education and engaging children with powerful literature. The challenge of writing and implementing a National Curriculum in 2011 was a central focus of many of the key-note and plenary sessions. Professor P. David Pearson from Berkeley highlighted some of the problems that

are apparent in the US model; especially the notion of a top-down curriculum model that is written in isolation from subject association groups and interested parties. Thankfully, as AATE president Mark Howie highlighted in a later session, this model has been jettisoned in Australia under the Rudd Government. Local subject associations, individual teachers, parent bodies and other concerned groups have all been invited to be part of the process. The hope is that by doing this, the National Curriculum might eventually come to resemble a framework that all teachers are committed to delivering. Overall, the conference was an incredibly rewarding experience, and I would like to thank the IEU for providing me with financial support to attend. I’ve developed more confidence in my own pedagogy in response to the success of my presentation. Furthermore, the conference gave me the opportunity to hear a range of speakers discuss issues such as the upcoming National Curriculum in an intellectually rich and stimulating environment with peers from around the country.

So you got the job! You’re teaching in 2010! You’re ready, but what does the school expect of you? What does the EA say about your work? How do you ask for help without the other teachers thinking you’re incompetent? Where do you put your trust? Who can you talk to about difficult kids or difficult staff?

From grid to GO!

Thursday 18 February 2010 Colonel Light Hotel Light Square, Adelaide 4-6pm Drinks and nibbles for IEU members Come along to talk with union organisers and new and experienced teachers about surviving the classroom and maintaining the work/life balance. Book in today by contacting the IEU office on 8410 0122, or at enquiries@ieusa.org.au

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

ESO profile:

Shirley Bauer, Samaritan College Wendy Evans Organiser Education support officers, Lutheran support officers, and school assistants undertake important roles in our schools, with wide-ranging duties including classroom, library and IT support, groundskeeping and maintenance, youth work and careers counselling, to name but a few. For the first in a series of profiles of non-teaching members, IEU organiser Wendy Evans met Shirley Bauer, an ESO working with special-needs students at Samaritan College in the Mid-North. How long have you worked as an ESO supporting students with special needs, and why did you take up this position? ‘This is my twelfth year. I took the position because it was part-time, and I would get the school holidays off which suited my family life at the time. I was the first ESO to be employed in this capacity at the school and I assisted two students. Our department now has four ESOs and we support over 40 students.’ Can you describe some of the special needs and disabilities that you have had to support? ‘I have supported students with attention deficit disorder, attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity, autism, Asperger syndrome, and specific learning disabilities, including dyslexia, auditory processing disorder, Down syndrome, Tourette’s syndrome, and borderline IQ. My learning has been ‘on the job’. I have learnt from asking questions of the consultant when she visits, and the parents of the students, and I have done my own research and reading. A person from the Down Syndrome Society conducted an awareness workshop five years ago.’ What kinds of activities have you been undertaking with children in the classroom this year? ‘This year I have been assisting students with in-class support; mainly maths.’ What is it about your job that you most enjoy? ‘The aspect of my job that I enjoy the most is feeling that I can make a difference. If a student is feeling frustrated, grumpy, overwhelmed, etc., I may be able to say something or help them to do something that makes them feel a little better. If a student hasn’t been able to comprehend some work and I am able to explain it and see that they are ‘getting it’, it makes me feel fantastic. I hope that I make them feel a little more confident and successful.’

What is it about working with special-needs students that you find most challenging? ‘The thing that I find most challenging is teachers who have not modified adequately to meet students’ needs. If the work is pitched too high, the student can feel frustrated and inadequate, and I have seen this lead to feelings of hopelessness. Teachers have told me that they received little, if any, training at university in disabilities and how to modify for them. The co-ordinator offers workshops and there has been improvement in this area.’ How do you support and work together with the classroom teacher? ‘Up until two years ago, I worked closely with classroom teachers, providing them with information about the student, their disability and their needs, feedback on a regular basis, and I discussed possible strategies. This was when most of my contact time with students was in the Learning Support Centre, working one-on-one or in small groups. My role has been changed to provide support in the classroom. My only contact with teachers now is to sometimes provide quick verbal feedback at the end of the lesson.’ Do you have much involvement with the parents? If so, what does that involve? If not, why do you think that is so? ‘Up until two years ago, I was the main contact person for parents. The new co-ordinator has taken over this role.’ What are the kinds of skills you believe are essential to be able to work effectively with special needs students? ‘The skills an ESO needs to work with students with special needs are flexibility, an understanding of the disability, and an ability to gauge the students’ needs.’ What types of professional development opportunities do you find would be most useful in your area of work? ‘Techniques to assist students with learning difficulties such as dyslexia and auditory processing disorder. Techniques or strategies to reduce the stress of students with Asperger syndrome, to calm a distressed student, and to provide academic scaffolding.’ EdU thanks Shirley for providing an insight into the issues facing ESOs working with special-needs students.

EdU December 2009 IEU(SA)

Independent Education Union South Australia 213-215 Currie Street Adelaide SA 5000 Phone (08) 8410 0122 Country caller 1800 634 815 Fax (08) 8410 0282 enquiries@ieusa.org.au www.ieusa.org.au