Being a casual representative at the bargaining table

Michael Piotto, University of South Australia

All of us have thought about, and continue to think about, strategies for raising, with management, the long list of industrial issues and concerns we have. Have you considered taking the fight for casual staff rights and entitlements straight to management through the enterprise bargaining process?

In my former permanent employment role, I spent 18 months at the Enterprise Agreement bargaining table as the NTEU Professional Staff representative. Currently, I am the NTEU Casual Staff representative at the University of South Australia (UniSA) Enterprise Agreement negotiation meetings. I thought I might write about my experiences so far hoping this might persuade more casual staff to be at the negotiating table (or negotiating screen).

It all starts with choosing a person to be the NTEU representative, and I was fortunate to be approved and endorsed by the local Branch Committee. There were no other nominations as there is a very active casual committee who discussed and agreed to my nomination.

The next step is the development of bargaining protocols with the University management representatives, which occurs before there is any discussion about the Enterprise Agreement itself. This is where agreement is reached on the ‘rules of engagement’ and the bargaining process.

The NTEU argued for the paid time release of the casual representative for eight hours per fortnight (the University agreed to seven), regardless of whether they were required to work at the time when meetings were scheduled. Management was initially not supportive of this idea, and this is where a single word can make a big difference. Management proposed that the casual representative be paid if the meetings were being held ‘at a time that coincides with the work they are scheduled to perform’. The NTEU successfully argued, as the University agreed, that we should be paid if the meetings were being held ‘at a time that coincides with the work they are engaged to perform’.

That single word change meant the Course Coordinators could be reimbursed for contracting out not just my scheduled teaching, such as tutorials, that conflicted with meetings, but also work such as marking assignments, for example. Importantly, it meant the casual representative would be paid for attending the meetings, just like everyone else.

The University also agreed to inform and negotiate with those employing me casually at the local level. This has been a tricky process and required me to meet with and continue negotiations with our unit executives and, at times, unfortunately, their tardy approval of my time release

has meant I have not been able to give my Course Coordinators much notice to arrange cover for my work. It was well worth going through reaching this agreement, as the real value of being present very quickly became apparent at the meetings themselves.

Providing real life context

The NTEU has presented a Log of Claims, many of which affect and impact directly upon casual staff. We have started discussing some of these claims (it is still very early days), and I would like to give an example of the contributions which casual representatives can make which might hopefully influence management’s understanding and perspective of an issue for casual staff.

Under ‘Sustainable and Safe Workloads’, there has been discussion of one of the claims of significance to casual staff:

‘The right for all staff to disconnect from University systems on weekends and outside regular times.’

I was able to provide examples to the University of the context for this claim. I began by explaining that I am required to provide my personal email (for a short period whilst my university email was being set up), and phone contact details to students. I gave examples of receiving student text messages as late as 10.30pm and as early as 6.45am; phone calls after hours and on weekends from both staff and students. I explained that much of the afterhours communications are unpaid and how it felt like I was ‘at work’ or ‘on call’ for an unreasonable expanse of hours.

I said that there was growing evidence that not being able to ‘disconnect’ from work can have serious impacts on staff wellbeing. Most importantly, I was able to state that it is, in fact, management’s responsibility to ensure that staff wellbeing is not adversely affected by intrusion of work expectations and demands into one’s time ‘not at work’.

It is really important for the University management to hear the voices of staff who are directly affected by the culture, expectations and practices within the organisation. There is an expectation that the Union will make these types of claims and, as such, they can easily be dismissed. However, when the real-life experiences of staff are presented to them, it is much more difficult to refute these claims or suggest they are unreasonable.

I am looking forward to future bargaining meetings where there are many more claims relevant to casuals to be discussed. I would strongly encourage any casual staff member to get directly involved in the bargaining process.

Though frustrating and difficult, at times, it is also very educational and rewarding. In the end, it is one of the few remaining mechanisms for being heard and exercising our rights.

Mick Piotto is a Social Work Casual Academic and Tutor at the University of South Australia.