frontline
National Women’s Journal
NTEU
As we come marching, marching in the beauty of the day
Small art and love and beauty their drudging spirits knew
A million darkened kitchens, a thousand mill lofts gray,
Yes it is bread we fight for but we fight for roses too.
Are touched with all the radiance that a sudden sun discloses,
As we come marching, marching we bring the greater days
For the people hear us singing:‘Bread and roses! Bread and roses!’
The rising of the women means the rising of the race.
As we come marching, marching we battle too for men,
No more the drudge and idler - ten that toil where one reposes,
For they are women’s children, and we mother them again.
But a sharing of life’s glories: Bread and roses! Bread and roses!
Our lives shall not be sweetened from birth until life closes;
As we come marching, marching in the beauty of the day
Hearts starve as well as bodies; give us bread, but give us roses!
A million darkened kitchens, a thousand mill lofts gray,
As we come marching, marching, unnumbered women dead
Are touched with all the radiance that a sudden sun discloses,
Go crying through our singing their ancient cry for bread.
For the people hear us singing:‘Bread and roses! Bread and roses!’
OUR UNIVERSITIES MATTER NTEU’s new campaign and bargaining agenda Parental leave Casual and Sessional staff Contract Research staff
AFTER THE APOLOGY Indigenous women respond
Inquiry into Paid Parental Leave The Battle for Bennelong
●
●
Social inclusion
Why I’m a NTEU member
Volume 16 October 2008 ISSN 1322–2945
●
NTEU Elections
Women’s Action Committee (WAC) Delegates
A ACADEMIC STAFF DELEGATE G GENERAL STAFF DELEGATE TELEPHONE FAX EMAIL ADDRESS
b
NT WAC Delegates A Lynette McKee b (08) 8946 6596 lynette.mckee@cdu.edu.au
QLD WAC Delegates A Susan Douglas b (07) 5459 4452 sdouglas@usc.edu.au
G Tracey Newman
G Carolyn Cope
NTEU NT Division PO Box U371, Charles Darwin University, DARWIN, NT 0815 b (08) 8946 7231 (08) 8927 9410 nteunt@iinet.net.au
NTEU QLD Division 1st Floor, 27 Cordelia Street, SOUTH BRISBANE, QLD 4101 b (07) 3846 2355 (07) 3846 5977 b.williams@qld.nteu.org.au
b (08)
8946 7842 traceye.newman@cdu.edu.au
WA WAC Delegates A Kathryn Sauer b (08) 9266 7123 ksauer@health.curtin.edu.au
b (07)
3138 3235 c.cope@qut.edu.au
G Kathryn Clarke
b (08) 6304 2109 kathryn.clarke@ecu.edu.au
SA WAC Delegates A vacant
NTEU WA Division PO Box 3114, Broadway LPO NEDLANDS, WA 6009 b (08) 6365 4188 (08) 9354 1629 waoffice@nteu.org.au
G Johanna Hall
b (08) 8201 2175 johanna.hall@flinders.edu.au
South Australia Division NTEU Office, Humanities Bldg, Flinders University, BEDFORD PARK, SA 5042 b (08) 8201 2656 (08) 8201 3807 nteu.flinders@internode.on.net
ITEPC Representative Leona Oliver b (02) 9351 9443 l.oliver@usyd.edu.au
b (02) 6773 2694 fran.blackbourn@une.edu.au
ACT WAC Delegates A Pamela Roberts b (02) 6125 0060 pam.roberts@anu.edu.au b (02)
VIC WAC Delegates A Cathy Brigden b (03) 9925 5915 cathy.brigden@rmit.edu.au
G Christine Holmes b (03)
9685 9349 caholmes@unimelb.edu.au
National Office Contact Details 1st Floor, 120 Clarendon St, SOUTHBANK, VIC 3006 PO Box 1323, SOUTH MELBOURNE, VIC, 3205
(03) 9254 1910
G Fran Blackbourn
NTEU NSW Division Level 1, 55 Holt St, SURRY HILLS, NSW 2010 b (02) 9212 5433 (02) 9212 4090 nteunsw@nsw.nteu.org.au
G Stacey Durrell
National President Carolyn Allport b (03) 9254 1910 callport@nteu.org.au
b
NSW WAC Delegates A Julie Lee b (02) 4921 6815 julie.lee@newcastle.edu.au
(03) 9254 1915
nteunat@nteu.org.au www.nteu.org.au
NTEU VIC Division Level 1, 120 Clarendon St, SOUTHBANK, VIC 3006 b (03) 9254 1930 (03) 9254 1935 office@vic.nteu.org.au
6201 5094 stacey.durrell@canberra.edu.au
NTEU ACT Division G Block, Old Admin Area, ANU, CANBERRA, ACT 0200 b (02) 6125 2043 (02) 6247 1032 actdiv@nteu.org.au
TAS WAC Delegates A Margaret Lindley b (03) 6233 2461 margaret.lindley@dpac.tas.gov.au
G Catherine Behrens
b (03) 6226 2518 Catherine.Behrens@utas.edu.au
NTEU TAS Division Private Bag 101, University of Tasmania, HOBART, TAS 7001 b (03) 6226 7575 (03) 6226 2172 rbinnie@tas.nteu.org.au
National Office National Officers National President.................................Carolyn Allport Vice-President (Academic).................Gregory McCarthy Vice-President (General)................................Jo Hibbert General Secretary.........................Grahame McCulloch National Assistant Secretary.........................Ted Murphy Officers & Central Resources Unit Executive Officer–President......................... Mark Probst Executive Officer–General Secretary... Anastasia Kotaidis IT Manager............................................. Michael Riley ICT System Administrator/Help Desk............ Tam Vuong National Indigenous Officer.....................Adam Frogley Administrative Officer–Resources.............. Tracey Coster Administrative Officer–Reception................. Tim Rodrigo
Recruitment & Training Unit Coordinator............................................Eleanor Floyd National Organiser.................................Michael Evans National Publications Coordinator................ Paul Clifton Membership Records Officer.............. Melinda Valsorda Administrative Officer.............................. Julie-Ann Veal
Research & Policy Unit Coordinator................................................ Paul Kniest Policy & Research Officers........................... Emma Cull Terri MacDonald Resources Officer....................................Alex Scholtzer
Finance Unit Coordinator............................................ Jenny Savage Industrial Unit Coordinator............................................Sarah Roberts Finance Officers.......................................... Gracie Ho Senior Industrial Officer (Strategy & Policy)..Ken McAlpine Joanne Dunn Industrial Officers.................................... Josh Cullinan Jayne van Dalen Robyn May Alex Ghvaladze Industrial& Indigenous Resource Officer..... Kelly Drayton Tamara Labadze Joyce Wong
frontline
National Women’s Journal
NTEU
Cover story OUR UNIVERSITIES MATTER
Editorial 2 NTEU National President Carolyn Allport.
STOLEN GENERATIONS
NEWS Australia to sign CEDAW Women in power Rudd ‘Education Review-olution’ 3 PARENTAL LEAVE INQUIRY
After the Apology 16 NTEU Indigenous women share their thoughts on February’s National Apology to the Stolen Generations.
Photo by Jason Froome ©2008
Investing in people and society 4 NTEU will campaign during 2008 to reinvigorate Australia’s universities under the banner of Our Universities Matter – Investing in People and Society. Collective Bargaining 2008 A new round of Collective Bargaining in higher education institutions has now begun.
5
Life as a contract researcher: vulnerability, gratitude and luck 6 NTEU members Christy Newman and Jennifer Washington discuss the difficulties of life as an academic casual.
NTEU MEMBERSHIP
Towards paid leave for parents 7 Australia remains one of the few countries that, absurdly, does not have some form of national paid maternity leave for workers. NTEU parents stand up 9 Andrea Brown and Robyn Warren discuss why they gave evidence in support of paid maternity leave. NTEU’s submission
Why it’s good to be a member 20 Kate Borrett and Annabel Beckenham on what union membership means to them. THE BATTLE FOR BENNELONG
11
SOCIAL INCLUSION When McKew took on Howard 22 Cathy Rytmeister recalls the Your Rights At Work campaign to wrest Bennelong from John Howard.
frontline
is published once a year by National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU), PO Box 1323, Sth Melbourne, VIC 3205 Australia. ISSN 1322–2945, ABN 38 579 396 344
Ph: 03 9254 1910 Fax: 03 9254 1915 Email: nteunat@nteu.org.au Current and previous issues available online at: www.nteu.org.au/publications/frontline Editor: Carolyn Allport Production & Design: Paul Clifton Editorial Assistance: Emma Cull, Anastasia Kotaidis
Creating opportunities 12 The Rudd Government’s social inclusion agenda involves a commitment to increase the participation of students traditionally excluded from higher education. Social inclusion, the market and CQUniversity 13 CQU’s re-branding provides an insight into the tension between social inclusion and the market faced by regional universities.
NTEU ELECTIONS Women take 50% of key elected positions for the first time 24 Women’s representation in NTEU has now reached 54%, with women holding 49% of all elected representative positions.
A better deal for students 14 Cuts in the public funding of our universities have had a significant impact on students.
All text and images ©2008 unless otherwise noted
vol.16, October 2008
frontline
1
EDITORIAL
Showing Australia that women matter Carolyn Allport, NTEU National President
W
omen matter in politics, and in the 2007 election we saw an increased number of women take their seats in our national Parliament and in the Ministry of the Rudd Government. They include the Deputy Prime Minister, Julia Gillard (Education, Employment, Workplace Relations, and Social Inclusion), Penny Wong (Climate Change and Water), Nicola Roxon (Health), Kate Ellis (Youth and Sport) Justine Elliott (Ageing), Jenny Macklin (Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs), Tanya Plibersek (Housing) and a further three women serving as Parliamentary Secretaries. Looking across their responsibilities, it is clear that political women are making an impact in the rough and tumble bear pit of our national Parliament. While Australian women were among the first in the world to have the right to vote and the right to stand for Parliament, our progress has still been glacial. In the 2007 election, the number of women elected to the House of Representatives increased from 25% to 27%, with the Senate numbers remaining the same. Finally to have Quentin Bryce (right) appointed as Governor–General showed Australia that women are indeed everywhere. During her career, Quentin Bryce has worked as a lawyer, a public servant, the Queensland Director of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission and then as the Federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner. From 1997 to 2003, Bryce was principal and CEO of Women’s College at University of Sydney. Such recognition of the public work of women is critical in advancing the status of women, albeit that politics remains largely the province of men. Importantly, the new Government has proposed that Australia sign the UN optional protocol which allows women to make complaints to the UN when all domestic avenues for review have been exhausted. This edition of Frontline is therefore both a celebration, and a time for a stock-take of unfinished business. We celebrate our work in setting high leave standards for maternity, paternity, parental and caring of family members, full funding of research costs, improving conditions for casual and research only staff
2
frontline
vol.16, October 2008
and bargaining for increased targets for Indigenous employment. We also asked a number of Indigenous women members the reaction they had to the Government’s apology to Indigenous peoples. Inside you will find stories of the lives of research colleagues employed on short term contracts, the positive experience of NTEU members in taking parental leave, and the latest information on a national paid maternity leave scheme. Two members, Annabel Beckenham (Canberra) and Kate Barrett (South Australia), talk about why they believe it is important to join the Union. We also look at what is possible for the future. Australian students pay some of the highest tuition fees in the world, and the HECS debt rose to $13 billion in 2007. Reports that have come out during this year have shown that university students risk being left behind with income support much lower than comparable overseas institutions. While the number of scholarships has risen with the new Government, our students still pay near 37% of their course costs in fees. Students can also be at risk from changing international markets, with exchange rates and course costs also pricing Australian institutions out of the market. In a final flourish, I urge you to read the fascinating experience of what was the election contest of the 2007 election, with the star quality of Maxine McKew. As we move towards the end of the year, I wish all our readers a fabulous and sunny summer break.
NEWS
Australia to sign UN Protocol for women’s rights
T
he Federal Government has tabled a National Interest Analysis which proposes that Australia accede to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).
Women in power
A
visual representation of the percentage of women in power throughout the world is provided by Women in Politics: 2008, published by the Inter-Parliamentary Union and the UN Division for the Advancement of Women. The map, which includes women in parliaments, ministerial positions and as heads of State or Government, can be downloaded from www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/public/ publications.htm.
The Optional Protocol allows Australians to make complaints to the United Nations about the protection of women’s rights and gender equality when all domestic avenues for review have been exhausted. The proposal to accede to the Optional Protocol will now be considered by Parliament’s Joint Standing Committee on Treaties, which will report by 10 November 2008. The 2007 NTEU Women’s Conference undertook significant work in examining the Protocol, particularly in relation to the Trafficking of Women, and its effectiveness in protecting women. The conference also examined NTEU’s role in using this Protocol in campaigning for labour rights, as well as human rights, for women and children everywhere.
The Rudd ‘Education Review-olution’
S
ince the November 2007 election of the Rudd Government, the political landscape has changed significantly. While it is still early in the term, the indicators are that the new Government represents a significant cultural shift in the overall approach of Government to universities and higher education overall. This change is evidenced in the multitude of reviews and inquiries currently focusing on the sector. In the last 6 months alone NTEU has submitted responses and attended hearings on nine separate inquiries, ranging from the controversial issue of a national scheme for paid maternity leave (see p.7) to the all encompassing Bradley review into Higher Education. NTEU’s submissions to all reviews can be viewed at www.nteu.org.au and are also located on the various Government websites. It is clear that the Federal Government has taken its policy platform of the ‘Education Revolution’ quite seriously, and with some justification. The reviews highlight the fact that there is no shortage of problems faced by the sector, such as the need for improving funding for both education and research, the lack of support for institutional infrastructure and the urgent need to plan for the replacement of a rapidly aging academic workforce. However, NTEU is adamant that there must also be recognition of the unique and diverse role that Australia’s universities play within the higher education sector. In support of this view, the Union recently launched the ‘Our Universities Matter’ campaign (see p.4), which addressed many
of the problems noted by the Review. Importantly, however the campaign goes further, calling for legislative changes guaranteeing academic freedom and institutional independence. This policy campaign is also part of the Union’s wider industrial campaign, calling for improvements in the industrial rights and workplace conditions of staff following the recent removal of higher education’s WorkChoices style legislation (known as HEWRRs). NTEU also continues to support the removal of anti-student union legislation and the calls made by student organisations and others in the sector for urgent action on the issue of student welfare and income support (see p. 14). The task of rectifying the problems of the sector, inflamed by almost a decade of under funding and stifling regulatory controls, is a formidable one. However, it is a task that the current government appears to have determined to be a necessary one. We should be aware, however, that changes being considered are likely to have far-reaching consequences, and that policy decisions made today will determine the form and function of Australia’s higher education sector for some time to come. vol.16, October 2008
frontline
3
NATIONAL CAMPAIGN
Investing in people New national campaign
N
TEU will campaign during 2008 to reinvigorate Australia’s universities under the banner of Our Universities Matter – Investing in People and Society.
Our key policy initiatives are: • A Charter for University Renewal, the centrepiece of a national alliance for increases in public funding and protection of intellectual freedom. • Our Collective Bargaining Log of Claims (see Key Bargaining Claims, p. 5) • A discrete Universities’ Act that provides a separate legislative framework for universities. • A Statement on Academic Freedom and University Independence that provides a mechanism for senior university staff, organisations and prominent individuals to support the Charter. • A National Petition that is an opportunity for all university staff – and all Australians – to show their support for the Charter.
Why our universities matter Universities are important civic and educational institutions. While they differ in their character, operations and governing structures, it is by their commonalities that they are internationally recognised as universities – institutions that encompass teaching and research activities, that create new knowledge and disseminate it to all parts of society. This is why higher education is defined as a ‘public good’. A key feature which distinguishes universities from other higher education institutions is their role in research and research education – particularly, the education of postgraduate research students at Masters and PhD levels. This is critical in the creation of new knowledge as well as new scholars.
4
frontline
vol.16, October 2008
Universities are important because they educate undergraduate and postgraduate students, produce high quality research and scholarship, create skilled graduates for our professions, engage with communities, business, governments and other organisations to disseminate knowledge, provide services, and generate social and economic benefits. They maintain freedom of enquiry through informed and critical commentary, in both the scholarly world and in public debate.
NATIONAL CAMPAIGN
and society Collective Bargaining 2008
A Making our universities better Over the last 11 years, universities have battled against inadequate funding, excessive federal government interference, increasing privatisation and corporatisation, and undermining of the principles of freedom of inquiry and expression. The advent of a new federal Labor Government that has publicly committed itself to fixing some of the problems in higher education caused by its predecessor, coinciding with a full round of Collective Bargaining, presents us with a unique opportunity to harness the public policy debates about the future of the sector and relate them directly to the issues we want dealt with in bargaining. The Rudd Government has announced major reviews over the next 12 months into the higher education sector’s future directions, research quality assurance and funding mechanisms, and research training. The ‘Review of Australian Higher Education’ will report on the sector’s future direction, its capacity to meet the needs of the Australian community and economy, and the options available for ongoing reform. This will include improving the sector’s funding arrangements and developing funding ‘compacts’ between the Government and institutions. The reviews into research will look at a replacement for the discredited Research Quality Framework (RQF) and developing the next generation of researchers. NTEU will seek the support of staff, universities and the community in campaigning for real improvements for the sector from the outcomes of these reviews.
new round of Collective Bargaining in higher education institutions has now begun. This time bargaining will involve a push in all NTEU Branches for revival of conditions lost under the Howard Government’s Higher Education Workplace Relations Requirements (HEWRRs), including regulation of fixed-term and casual employment, detailed procedures for discipline and redundancy, and union rights. As well as regaining lost conditions, NTEU is pursuing two important new claims: significantly improved pay and conditions for sessional staff, and better job security and career paths for research staff. Both casuals and research staff have had inferior pay and conditions for too long, especially given the value those staff have to universities. Bargaining will also see us work towards building on existing conditions relating to: • Parental leave – improved leave arrangements and better return to work conditions • Carer’s leave – more flexible working arrangements in relation to caring responsibilities • Workloads and staffing levels – substantive and clear regulation of workloads for academic and general staff • General staff classifications – fair and clear reclassification procedures • Superannuation – better super for fixed-term and casual staff not receiving full entitlements • Intellectual freedom – guaranteed protections for staff engaging in public debate • Indigenous employment – Indigenous employment targets with an implementation committee, as well as senior Indigenous positions • Job security – improved security of employment for all staff. Branches are now working steadily towards a new Agreement at each and every university. To get involved in your local campaign, contact your Branch (see www.nteu.org.au/bd) and attend your next Branch members’ meeting, where the progress of the campaign and further ways to get involved will be discussed.
Photo by Jason Froome vol.16, October 2008
frontline
5
casual and sessional academics
Life as a contract researcher
Vulnerability, gratitude and luck Christy Newman University of New South Wales
A
s a contract researcher employed on grant money, there are countless ways in which my working life is typified by vulnerability and gratitude. Yet even while there may be little opportunity for the kind of continuity of employment that is necessary for developing strong and resilient research careers, I know I’ve been particularly lucky. This is because I have had mentors and supervisors who have made it possible for me to find continuous research work (variously full time and part time) since completing my PhD. I moved up a level between contracts because I was qualified for a position that was happily funded at a higher level. I got pregnant at ‘the right time’, at the front end of a research contract and between two phases of data collection, so I was eligible for paid maternity leave and did not lose intellectual ownership of my component of the project. I had considerable flexibility in returning to work, because of the particular nature of the grant I was employed on and the attitudes of my employers. I have had the opportunity to be self-directed in the conduct of my work, due entirely to the particular supervisory style of the grant Investigators. And I have had support from senior colleagues in developing my own research track record including first-authored journal articles and research grants of my own. All of this luck is, however, completely dependent on developing and maintaining positive relationships with the right people. Here’s hoping they still like me when my current contract runs out!
Jennifer M Washington University of Adelaide
I
began employment with the University of Adelaide in 1989 on a fixed-term, grant-funded contract to do research in the Faculty of Science after completing a BSc at the University. I have remained in this type of employment for the university ever since: seven contracts over 18 years! The fixed-term contracts have ranged from one to four years with the longest stint being nearly seven years (two consecutive contracts). As you can imagine, a lot of skills and knowledge are acquired during such a period. If grant funding no longer exists due to unforeseen circumstances (in this case the drought reducing agricultural funding), then skills are lost when staff have to find employment elsewhere. In my case, I have found it very stressful looking for new employment every one to three years. In each case I had to learn new skills to adapt to the project requirements. As a mother of two young children and a mortgage, this means considerable personal and financial stress. I have to balance not only work and life, but also to produce significant research findings within a short period of time with no long term financial or career security. It is a lot to ask. If I was given the opportunity to continue my work in my chosen field at the University, I would be very happy to do so. However, there does not appear to be any mechanism within the University to fund grant funded researchers once the grant income is exhausted, even though extremely useful research knowledge could come from the projects’ extension.
THE WEBSITE FOR CASUAL & SESSIONAL ACADEMICS 6
frontline
vol.16, October 2008
parental leave
Productivity Commission Inquiry
Towards paid leave for parents Terri MacDonald Policy & Research Officer NTEU National Office
D
espite the mountainous volumes of research and evidence demonstrating the economic and social benefits of paid parental leave, Australia remains one of the few countries that, absurdly, does not have some form of national paid maternity leave for workers. Oft quoted statistics that compare Australia’s conditions internationally highlight this deficiency clearly. While Denmark and Norway have the highest level of maternity benefits (Norway provides 96 weeks of paid maternity leave while Denmark provides 52), only two OECD countries – Australia and the US – fail to guarantee any form of paid leave to new mothers. Fathers, in turn, are granted paid paternity leave or paid parental leave in sixty-five countries; and thirty one of these countries offer at least 14 weeks of paid leave. British workers who are new parents average 25 weeks between them; German employees 30. With the political emphasis currently on productivity and market-driven economics, the argument that Australia ‘can’t afford universal paid maternity leave’ is often made by employers. Leaving aside the relative costs, it is therefore useful to examine the provision for paid parental leave in play in countries that have low production and labor costs. Even here, Australia lags far behind: Vietnam provides for 4–6 months at 100% of wages, China provides for 90 days at 100% and Indonesia allows for 3 months at 100%. Both the Philippines and South Korea allow for 60 days at 100% of wages, while Thailand allows 100% for 45 days, then 50% for another 45 days. The current standard for parental leave in Australia is the right of access to unpaid maternity leave, for a period of 52 weeks leave at the birth of a child. First granted to all award employees in 1991 by the Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC), it subsequently became enshrined in legislation in the Industrial Relations Reform Act (Commonwealth) 1993. The provision was then inserted into the Workplace Relations Act (Commonwealth) 1996 and, in 2006, included in the Australian Fair Pay and Conditions Standard under the WorkChoices legislation. In terms of paid maternity, or parental leave, there has been considerable debate. In 2002, this culminated in an inquiry by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC), the purpose of which was to review options for paid maternity leave and make recommendations to the Government. continued overpage... vol.16, October 2008
frontline
7
parental leave
Paid parental leave... Following the inquiry, HREOC recommended that the Commonwealth federally fund a maternity leave scheme from general revenue that: • Provided for 14 weeks leave, at federal minimum wages (currently set at $522.12 per week). • It be accessed by all working women, inclusive of casual, part-time and self employed, who have worked 40 weeks of the past 52 weeks with any number of employers and/or in any number of positions. Reaction to the proposal was mixed, with opposition to the proposal on a number of grounds. One objection was that, given Australia’s 52 weeks unpaid parental leave provision and access to the so-called ‘Baby Bonus’ (which provided for a lump sum payment on the birth of a child, irrespective of income), paid maternity leave was seen as not necessary. Other objections were that paid maternity leave amounts to ‘middle class welfare’ (in comments attributed to the Coalition’s Senator Minchin), and that the related costs of a universal paid maternity scheme would be prohibitive (despite international evidence to the contrary). Other opposition included objections to the enforcement of a mandated provision, with a preference for enterprise specific and negotiated outcomes. Finally, the philosophy of individual choice has been used to argue against the need for a specific policy, with the argument that paid maternity leave discriminates against women who stay at home. The Howard Government chose to ignore the recommendations of the Inquiry, arguing that the ‘Baby Bonus’ payment was a sufficient substitute. However, the bonus amount fell far short of the minimum 14 weeks income earned by most working women, nor did it address entitlements such as long service leave and super. In April this year it was announced that the Productivity Commission would undertake a public inquiry into paid maternity, paternity and paternal leave. The Inquiry was to concentrate on support for parents of newborn children up to the age of two years, with the objectives being to: • Consider the economic, productivity and social costs and benefits of providing paid maternity, paternity and parental leave. • Assess the current extent of employer-provided of paid maternity, paternity and parental leave in Australia. • Identify the models that could be used to provide such parental support and assess these against a number of criteria. These include their cost effectiveness; impacts on business; labour market consequences; work/family preferences of parents; child and parental welfare; and interactions with the Social Security and Family Assistance Systems. • Assess the impacts and applicability of the various models across the full range of employment forms (such as the selfemployed, farmers, and shift workers). • Assess the efficiency and effectiveness of Government policies that would facilitate the provision and take-up of these models. 8
frontline
vol.16, October 2008
Draft report released The Inquiry finished its series of public hearings (held nationally) and is considered the 223 submissions from the public, community groups, professional bodies and unions, which include the ACTU’s proposal for a national, federally funded program allowing for a minimum14 weeks paid maternity leave. The Productivity Commission Draft Report was released at the end of September, recommending a taxpayer-funded parental leave scheme of 18 weeks at the adult minimum wage, covering all employees, as well as the self-employed and contractors. The leave would be generally paid regardless of pre-birth income, and is subject to taxation (there is also no access to family tax benefit B). To be eligible, a person must have worked an average of 10 hours per week, with one or more employers, with continuous employment for the 12 months prior to the date of the expected birth. For those who are ineligible for paid parental leave, a new maternity allowance of $5000 (non-taxed and non-means tested), together with other financial support, will be available through the social welfare system. The scheme would also provide for 2 weeks paid leave to over 225,000 eligible fathers/partners, even if the mother is not eligible for paid maternity leave under this scheme. The ‘paternity’ leave can overlap with the paid parental leave. Importantly for NTEU members, the draft scheme proposes that the tax payer funded entitlement of 18 weeks is to commence upon the exhaustion of any employer funded parental leave entitlement and must be commenced within 6 months of the birth of the baby. This means that, should the scheme be accepted in its current form, university staff eligible for paid parental leave under their collective agreements must take and complete this leave within six months in order to then be eligible to take the tax payer funded leave. Should this not occur, however, and the woman only takes the existing employer funded entitlement, the mother/primary carer would instead qualify for the maternity leave payment of $5,000. The draft report also includes the option of using the scheme to ‘top-up’ existing entitlements. The proposal also requires employers to make superannuation contributions for the period of the tax payer funded scheme, capped at a maximum of 9%, (even if the employee normally receives a higher rate). Currently, the employer superannuation contribution for most university staff is 17%. NTEU’s response to the draft report will aim to ensure that universities and their employees are able to access the scheme to provide improved parental leave benefits to eligible staff. A copy of the Draft Report can be downloaded at www.pc.gov.au/ projects/inquiry/parentalsupport/ draft. The final report is expected to be handed down on 28 February 2009. Left and Previous page: Kerrie and Matt Hardin with son Patrick. Photos by Ross Gwyther.
parental leave
NTEU parents stand up for paid leave
F
our NTEU members appeared before the Productivity Commission to give evidence in support of paid maternity leave. Andrea Brown and Robyn Warren explain why they appeared.
Andrea Brown Victoria University
W
hile learning the ropes as a new single mother, I experienced quite quickly and altogether, the challenge, exhaustion and reward of motherhood. The learning curve was steep. I could hardly imagine doing it without a significant period of paid leave and the considerable support that brings. • As a gender equity initiative, paid parental leave provides While the NTEU parental leave provisions are exceptionally more appropriate support to working mothers as the ones good, I know many women do not receive any paid parental who move in and out of the paid labour force in much leave. If they do, it is of a significantly limited duration. Particigreater numbers than their male pation in the recent Productivity counterparts. Women continue to Commission Inquiry into Paid bear the burden when it comes to Maternity, Paternity and ParenWomen continue to bear the burden when it combining paid work and parenttal Leave prompted me to think comes to combining paid work and parenthood. Paid leave thereby lessens the disadvantage that hood. Paid leave thereby lessens more thoughtfully about how a lack of employment and career continuity can the disadvantage that a lack of and why I consider paid parenoften bring... employment and career continutal leave to be so valuable. ity can often bring, including pay My contribution to the recent equity, reduced superannuable NTEU submission and appearsalary and career progression. ance before the Commissioners, lead me to a more compre• A considerable period of paid leave improves employee hensive appreciation of the multitude of benefits associated with loyalty and commitment to the extent that I proposed and paid parental leave that are supportive, sustaining and almost actioned a return to work plan early. Improved employee indispensable. They include: morale and staff retention. • My capacity as a single parent to operate viably and remain financially independent. Having a baby is expensive and Below: Andrea and baby Mali those costs must be met. • Greatly improved capacity to exclusively breastfeed for a minimum of 6 months, perhaps more, widely recognised as important to infant and parental health and well-being. The issue of bonding, learning how to breastfeed and establishing a partnership with your baby is challenging, takes time and concerted effort. I am quite sure that returning to work early would interfere with these objectives in the most detrimental manner. • As a senior General Staff member, I have improved continuity of service for the purpose of accumulating entitlements and importantly, have maintained superannuation contributions (both employee and employer) for a longer period. vol.16, October 2008
frontline
9
parental leave
Standing up for parental leave... Robyn Warren Queensland University of Technology
I
was more than happy to appear before the Commission to show my appreciation and support for the parental leave that NTEU and QUT have supported. While trying to conceive, during the pregnancy and following our baby Bailey’s birth, it reassured me that my contribution and skills as a QUT staff member were highly valued and suggested to me that my employer was supportive both financially and philosophically of an extended period of leave and of the value of parenting to the individuals involved and the wider community. We were empowered to look after the health and well being of myself and our child and enabled to manage a significant period of change for our family. After the birth of Bailey, we encountered a few medical issues in those first few months and have experienced the usual joys and challenges that face a new family in the first year. Thanks to my ability to access part time pay over a period of 12 months we realised many benefits: • We have a happy, healthy child and family and though we are biased we can say we have a lovely happy little person who inspires us to be better and who has changed our lives forever. • We had the opportunity to develop positive skills and habits that have carried through to my return to work with mornings and evenings of most work days being happy exciting times with our child. • We persevered with breastfeeding which has many health benefits for mother and baby alike. • I was able to recover from a C-Section. • We did not have to declare ourselves bankrupt with medical bills. • We had the time/ space to try things or repeat things until they worked. • We had the opportunity to develop confidence in our parenting abilities and form networks with other parents or professionals that have been invaluable and by no means least. 10
frontline
vol.16, October 2008
Above: Robyn’s son, Bailey Below: Robyn and partner Chris with Bailey soon after arriving home.
• We were afforded the time to wait until quality childcare became available. I have returned to work focused, motivated and I have a sense of loyalty and gratitude that QUT has made a commitment to me as an employee and values work life balance. Paid parental leave provides both quantity of time and precious quality of time in a period of significant change, physically, emotionally and psychologically for the entire family. Like many families today we do not have a lot of family support so I could not have foreseen returning to part time or fulltime work at 6 weeks of age as some people must. Now, as I return to work I am acutely aware that other issues still need to be addressed as a matter of high priority in order to retain staff following a period of leave (and encourage people to have children). These include policies and work
parental leave
culture regarding a parent’s return to work, access to childcare, and equitable access for fathers to paid parental leave. Many workplaces have policies in place to ensure a smooth transition back to work but the implementation of this is critical. Managers, HR and others need to be aware of planning for staff to return to work, and ensure the staff member is connected to and informed about workplace changes during maternity leave and genuine consultation needs to occur regarding any changes that impact on one’s future career paths. Staff returning from parental leave need to be involved in planning for work hours, rosters, location, work functions and ensure that taking a break does not interfere with an established or developing career.
...‘it takes a village to raise a child’. There is very little of the village left in our modern society but paid parental leave goes some way into making individuals feel like they have some community support.
Availability of childcare is another critical factor enabling a return to work. We had our name on the waiting lists of at least a dozen childcare centres or family day care providers with our first ‘day’ (singular) becoming available when our little person was 10.5 months. This quickly increased to 2 days and will soon be 3 days when he reaches 15 months. While there are many acknowledged health and bonding benefits when maternity leave is paid, paid parental leave should be an option available to all parents regardless of gender. My partner is actively involved in parenting Bailey and fathers as well as mothers should be enabled to provide a high quality of care for their children through paid paternity leave and provisions for both fathers and mothers to return to work with flexibility. We like to say that our baby Bailey was a product of both ‘love and science’, having been eventually conceived through IVF. A year down the track another quote rings even truer in my head: ‘it takes a village to raise a child’. There is very little of the village left in our modern society but paid parental leave goes some way into making individuals feel like they have some community support. It also offers some degree of certainty in terms of job security, future career planning and finance in what is one of the most uncertain times in one’s life. I cannot put a price on the experience myself, my partner and my child have undergone in the last year, but needless to say my family and I are loyal to our employer QUT and to the NTEU. How do you say in five hundred words or less thank you for helping us through the most amazing, wonderful, scary, beautiful, challenging and rewarding year? It is my hope that a national paid parental leave program can be made available to all workers, including self employed or casual staff. The prospective benefits to employers, the community and families is huge and creative solutions on how this can be funded need to be explored. It might be corny to end by saying we are ‘investing in the future’ but I believe an investment in children, education, health and the community has benefits for all.
NTEU’s submission to the Inquiry
N
TEU has been at the forefront of advocating for improvements to the work/life balance for higher education staff for a number of years, and in doing so has won significant industrial outcomes in relation to parental leave. Advances made by the Union include improved paid parental and maternity leave provisions (now at a minimum of 26 weeks), better leave options for work/life situations (such as carers and adoption leave), nominal caps on academic workloads, and more flexibility in employment arrangements. In our formal submission to the Productivity Commission Inquiry, NTEU detailed the provisions currently available to higher education staff, and outlined that the benefits of these provisions were already being seen, not only by the staff accessing them, but for their employers and the wider community. The Union felt it was a priority that paid maternity and parental leave should be extended nationally, giving all working Australian women access to a provision that is seen in most other countries as a fundamental entitlement. NTEU’s submission made the following recommendations: 1. That the Australian Government ratifies the Maternity Protection Convention C183 of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). 2. That the Australian Government set a standard of 26 weeks as the minimum entitlement for paid maternity and parental leave, structured as 26 weeks paid maternity leave for all mothers of new born babies, funded by the Government at the federal minimum wage ($522.12 per week), with 12 weeks of this leave alternatively available to another parent if she or he is to be the primary carer, or a parent adopting a child under the age of 5. 3. That for those parents in paid employment, the Australian Government further guarantee income at ordinary time earnings for the period of leave referred to in (2) above through the National Employment Standards (an employer-funded top-up). This standard is based on existing entitlements in the higher education industry as well as the level set by the ILO and the WHO and includes 14 weeks paid maternity leave for working mothers (the ILO standard) and an additional 12 weeks to assist in the physical recovery of birth and allow for breastfeeding to be established during those first vital months (WHO standard). 4. That the Australian Government ensure that employers who currently provide paid parental leave to their employees continue to fund such leave in addition to the entitlements set out in (2) and (3) above.
vol.16, October 2008
frontline
11
social inclusion
Social inclusion
Creating opportunities T
he Labor Government’s social inclusion agenda involves a commitment to increase the participation and success of students traditionally excluded from higher education. This is linked to attempting to ensure an adequate supply of highly skilled graduates that are able to meet Australia’s changing labour market needs, as well as meeting the party’s social justice and equity principles. Providing those traditionally excluded from higher education with educational and financial support to participate can also provide both the individual and the broader society with enormous social and economic benefits. The Union supports the Government’s social inclusion agenda and recognises it as critical in redressing the disadvantage experienced by groups such as Indigenous students and those from low socio-economic status (SES) backgrounds. These students are significantly under-represented at Australian universities, with the total number of Indigenous students attending university in 2007 making up less than 1% of the total student population. This is less than half of the corresponding population reference value of 2.5%. Similarly, the proportion of low SES students attending university has remained relatively unchanged over the last decade, with such students making up approximately 15% of places compared with a population reference point of 25%. Supporting these students to gain access to university is critical to improving the long term employment, health and economic
opportunities of both the individual and the broader community. It is also critical in terms of recognising the social and economic disadvantages experienced by Indigenous students in particular, and meeting our social justice obligations. The Union believes that the opportunity to gain access to university should not be limited by social or economic impediments. Increasing the participation of students from disadvantaged backgrounds will require the provision of alternative entry and articulated pathway programs from school through to university, as well as the provision of structured academic and financial support for these students once enrolled. The Union is committed to working with the Government to help develop and implement strategies that can increase the participation and success of able students, particularly Indigenous students and those from low SES backgrounds.
Photo by René Mansi 12
frontline
vol.16, October 2008
social inclusion
Social inclusion, the market and CQUniversity Margaret Lee NTEU Queensland Division Secretary
I
n June this year, Central Queensland University ‘re-branded’ itself as CQUniversity, adopting a modernist shield as its logo and a new slogan: ‘Be what YOU want to be’. This costly exercise comes on the back of a period of financial difficulty, contentious restructuring, ‘process re-engineering’ and staff cuts, a gradual fall in domestic student numbers and then a sudden collapse in international student numbers in 2007. Some staff have welcomed the new brand, others have taken a critical, even cynical, view or argued that ‘Be what YOU want to be’ is an outdated slogan. However, the re-branding process is more significant for the insight it provides into the tension between social inclusion and the market faced by regional universities. CQUniversity has around 20,000 students from 100 countries. In 2007, 7,788 were international students. There are ten campuses spread across three states: six in the Queensland regional towns of Rockhampton, Mackay, Gladstone, Bundaberg, Emerald and Noosa and four city campuses in Brisbane, the Gold Coast, Sydney and Melbourne (pictured, below). The number and dispersal of its regional campuses present organisational and cost difficulties, especially given the small size and diverse nature of
the student population and with only 17.4% of students enrolled at the regional campuses. Nevertheless, CQUniversity is renowned for its equity, bridging and preparatory programmes. These programmes include STEPS (Skills for Tertiary Education Preparation Studies, WIST (Women into Science and Technology), TEP (Tertiary Entry Programme for Indigenous Students) and LIFT (LIFTing Hurdles to University). Almost half of all domestic students are from low SES backgrounds, many are mature age and 43% study by distance or flexible mode. CQUniversity ranks in the top 6 universities with respect to students from regional and remote areas, Indigenous students and students with a disability. At the same time, it performs well on graduate employment and income measures. CQUniversity is thus well placed to implement the Rudd Government’s social inclusion agenda. But there is something of a divide between the regional and city campuses. Almost all the full fee paying international students study at one of the city campuses, while all the domestic students are either distance or enrolled at the regional campuses. The city campuses are in the heart of town, and only the Gold Coast campus is not housed in an office tower. The international students’ experience of university life rarely includes regular interaction with domestic students. Further, they are taught CQUniversity courses by staff, mostly casuals, employed by a private company, Campus Management Services (CMS). CQUniversity now owns 100% of CMS, but maintains arms length dealings and the actual internal accounting arrangements are not entirely clear. What is clear is that the University relies on the volatile international market for more than 50% of its income and that the regional loading of 7.5% from the Commonwealth is insufficient. When international student enrolments fell by 35% in 2007, income fell by $41m and the regional operations, staff and students, have suffered. CQUniversity’s re-branding exercise reflects its need to restore the international student income stream. It is a stark example of how social inclusion goals are put at risk when a university is at the mercy of the market. Photo by Paul Clifton vol.16, October 2008
frontline
13
social inclusion
A better deal for students Emma Cull Policy & Research Officer NTEU National Office
C
uts in the public funding of our Universities over the last decade have had a significant impact on students’ financial security while studying, their capacity to balance paid work and study, and, for some groups, their ability to participate at all. The introduction of legislation under the previous Government that prohibited universities collecting a fee to support the work of student organisations has also significantly undermined the services and support that are available to students at university. As part of its 2008 campaign to reinvigorate Australia’s universities, the NTEU is advocating to secure a better deal for students. Building opportunities for students to participate in higher education, particularly for those students traditionally excluded from university, such as Indigenous students and those from low socio-economic status (SES) backgrounds, is critical to improving the long term employment, health and economic opportunities of both the individual and the broader community.
Student fees and debts
Over the last decade universities have experienced real cuts in public funding. The most obvious visible effect of this on students is that tutorial classes, which typically had 8–12 students in the 1980s, now often have 20 or 25 students. This has led to constantly increasing workloads for academic staff. For students, it means over crowded lecture theatres and tutorials, and less access to staff and assistance. In addition to mounting levels of student debt, declines in government funding have led to course cuts and closures, and inadequate resources for libraries and other vital university infrastructure. Without increased funding, the burden of financing our universities is likely to continue to be shifted onto the shoulders of students and their families. For some students, this will impact on their decision about whether or not to seek access to university in the first place. Indigenous students and those from low SES backgrounds are significantly under-represented in Australian universities. While there are numerous and complex reasons for this under-representation, debt aversion and the costs associated with attending university cannot be discounted from the equation.
Photo by Paul Clifton
The costs of attending university, both in terms of increased fees and rising living are a significant and growing burden on all students and their families. Between 1996 and 2006, students’ contribution to the cost of their university education through HECS fees increased by more than 70%. While the system of an income contingent loans scheme such as HECS means that course fees are deferred until students are earning close to $40,000 per year, rising fees means debt levels are also rising. In 2006 the total HECS debt was around $13 billion. Students who graduate with huge debts are often faced with deferring many important life decisions like when to buy a house or start a family.
The impact of funding cuts
14
frontline
vol.16, October 2008
Photo by Giovanni Portelli ©2008
social inclusion
Financial support Meeting living costs while studying is another significant challenge for many students, leaving many students with inadequate food and/or housing. Research carried out by Universities Australia entitled Australian University Student Finances 2006, showed that students were worse off in 2006 in financial terms than in 2000, when the previous study was undertaken. A significant proportion of students reported that their financial circumstances adversely affected their capacity to study effectively, especially students who were engaged in extensive paid work during semester. The number of students undertaking paid work whilst studying, as well as the number of hours they worked during semester had also increased. NTEU believes that current income support measures are not only inadequate, but that increasingly strict eligibility criteria means that many students who are in need of support are not able to access it. Providing educational and financial support for students is crucial to ensuring students, particularly those traditionally excluded from entry, are able to participate and succeed at university.
Improving student services Legislation introduced under the previous government, which prohibit universities collecting a universal fee to support the work of student organisations has had a profound effect on student support services, social interaction and the broader community life of universities.
The ‘student experience’ of attending university is not just about formal teaching and learning. It includes the extra-curricular activities organised and controlled by students themselves. Student organisations have traditionally filled these roles, providing various academic, representative, social justice, welfare, sporting and recreational services. These activities also benefit the wider community, particularly in regional areas. Some universities have directly supported their student bodies and/or maintained some of their services, but these arrangements cannot be maintained indefinitely without further financial support or repealing the so-called VSU legislation.
Looking to the future Cuts to public funding for our universities have had a significant impact on students as well as staff. Students have progressively been faced with increasing course costs and rising debt levels, overcrowded lecture theatres, reduced course offerings and less services and support. This has detrimental impacts on the participation and success of all students, particularly for equity groups. Increasing the level of public funding for our universities and the level of financial support for students, in addition to providing students with a representational voice on campus, is critical not only to ensuring social inclusion and equity principles are being met, but also that Australia’s universities are able to produce highly skilled graduates that are able to meet the changing labour market needs of a knowledge economy. vol.16, October 2008
frontline
15
indigenous
Stolen Generations
After the Apology
Today we honour the Indigenous peoples of this land, the oldest continuing cultures in human history… We apologise especially for the removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families, their communities and their country. For the pain, suffering and hurt of these Stolen Generations, their descendants and for their families left behind, we say sorry.
Photo by Tracey Johns ©2008
I
n February 2008, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd delivered the National Apology to the Stolen Generations. Frontline asked a range of NTEU Indigenous women to relate their feelings of the day, and how they feel the nation has progressed since.
Bronwyn Fredericks Monash University
O
n 13 February 2008, I was with other Aboriginal people in Brisbane. As we watched the Apology on TV, we cried as well as yelled and cheered at various points he made. We hugged each other tightly as we watched others demonstrate outpourings of deeply held emotions. Their emotions intertwined with our emotions and it was almost overwhelming. Such was the strength of feeling that day. The Apology provided a formal public recognition of the upheavals wrought by colonialism on Aboriginal lives and a human recognition of the pain, hurt and frustration that Aboriginal people have experienced and witnessed in their lifetimes and the lifetimes of people before us. There are thousands of Aboriginal people who as a result of past removals and acts of colonial violence might have been lost to their families, died, suffered terrible abuse and maltreatment, felt isolated, alone and confused or don’t know who they belong too. The apology acknowledged these past acts. It is also about the future and processes of reconciliation and healing. In this the apology can not become merely a symbolic gesture. It needs to 16
frontline
vol.16, October 2008
have on-going impacts, address the reality that inequalities and iniquities still exist and that the struggles continue. I see the apology as a signpost for change. I also understand that in the future, the apology and what follows will be how Kevin Rudd will be judged. I now wait as to how Kevin Rudd and this Government will address issues associated with the unequal power relationships; compensation; the NT intervention; poverty; health; education; Native Title; sovereignty; and the current discussions around Indigenous representation. The Apology revealed the reality of colonial violence and delivered an agenda that is not just an Aboriginal one. It is shared by the rest of Australia. Kevin Rudd demonstrated this when he said: …and we have our minds wide open as to how we might tackle, together, the great practical challenges that Indigenous Australia faces in the future. Let us turn this page together: Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians, government and opposition, Commonwealth and state, and write this new chapter in our nation’s story together. From his words and from the outpourings of support that came forth in Letters to Editors, chat lines, websites and television and talk back radio programs, I now also wait to see how more non-Indigenous Australians might take up their responsibilities to redress the inequalities and iniquities in Australia in spheres where they can have influence: no matter how big or how small. I call on NTEU members to think about what you can do and act on those thoughts.
indigenous
Alma Mir Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education
I
thought I did not have much to say about the historic apology, other than I found it spiritually uplifting and emotional. I always thought it affected someone else, someone else’s family. Then on that day in February, while attending an NTEU conference, and watching the apology on TV, it hit home. It affected my whole family. Our brother was ‘stolen’ away in 1961. Not by bureaucracy but by stigma – my Mum is black. My brother’s father was white. He did not stick around. She was 16. This was the secret in our family, one of many. Mum had a son four years before me, and her mother and aunties arranged for her firstborn to be adopted. She never said a word until 1991, when a young man presented himself to our family asking for our Mother. Our brother, Thomas, was actually ‘stolen’ away from Mum and given to foster parents. He did not enjoy the idyllic childhood that me and my two brothers did outside of Batchelor – he was beaten and shifted from one foster home to another. So, what does the apology to the Stolen Generations mean to us? It gives us an excuse to unwrap the past, not forget the wrong, but seek and give forgiveness. And we hope to move forward because now we can talk about it. Its not hush hush. Mum doesn’t feel guilty now, or empty. Her son is OK now. In the end the policies and acts of past governments affected us all, and an apology is not going to be the sage that heals wounds, but it was a statement by an Australian Prime Minister to the international community recognising that there is a Stolen Generation. Now what would be even more remarkable is if Australia signed the Indigenous Peoples Declaration of Human Rights, and upheld Australians’ fundamental human rights without prejudice.
Lynette Riley Koori Centre University of Sydney
T
he National Apology, as presented by the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd on 13 February 2008, was one of those ‘wow’ moments in a person’s life. Why did I have that reaction? First it was an open admittance of a key strategy used in Australia in cultural genocide of the First Australians. The Apology took this hidden history from the ‘out of sight’ cupboard and placed it on the world stage; as a significant chapter in this country. Secondly, it was an acknowledgement for Indigenous Aus-
Maree Graham Indigenous Outreach Office University of Western Sydney
I
t is difficult to convey the deep feelings that I have about the apology to our Stolen Generation. The collective national emotion and sheer excitement generated around the event was palpable, with thousands heading to Canberra for it, and public screens being erected in most major cities for a live, national broadcast of the event. Many of my local community made the long journey to the nation’s capital to witness the historic event. Far from the grounds of Parliament House, my work community at UWS also experienced mixed emotions and celebrated together with an uplifting ceremony watching the live broadcast. I had many reservations about participating in any ceremony I felt it was a deeply personal time for me and I wanted to spend time with my family to reflect on the past and to contemplate our future as Indigenous Australians. Despite those reservations, I did go along and was astounded by the outpouring of support for the apology. I believe Prime Minister Rudd’s words to be genuine and sympathetic, with a strong sense of rapprochement that might enable the nation to finally move forward towards a real reconciliation. Albeit the speech was a symbolic act, it has come to mean so much more than simply saying sorry. It is true that the apology will not alter the condition of hurt our people continue to endure, the hurt won’t end, nor the misery and inequality that sees our people with a life expectancy 17 years less than non-Indigenous Australians. But it was a fundamental and necessary step towards Australians coming together to address a national crisis which needs urgent resolution. For me, a proud Aboriginal woman from Dubbo, if there is one thing that I can provide my people with, it is empowerment through access to increased educational opportunities.
tralians of the grief and despair that this period rort for them as individuals and as communities. Bringing this denigration and disregard to light, now provides Indigenous Australians’ with an avenue to present this hidden history and the effect on them emotionally and culturally. For many people this means they can cleanse feelings of hate and resentment and move forward with their families. Thirdly, I was awed by the response from so many nonIndigenous Australians; that they recognised, felt, understood and accepted our collective pain. The greatest healing available to people is when you can share your suffering in an open forum; this then allows you to develop personal and community strategies for progression. This Apology gave me hope that we can develop as a nation, and build a relationship based on a real understanding of our collective and emotive pasts.
vol.16, October 2008
frontline
17
indigenous
After the Apology Jenny Caruso School of History & Politics University of Adelaide
P
ort Hedland is so far away from Adelaide, as is Broome, Karratha and Byron Bay, but we are eternally connected, simply because those are the places we live, the brothers and sisters and our mother. How we got there is a story carried in the hearts of the Aranda, the Walpiri, Jaru, Pitjantjatjara, Kukatja, Ngaatjatjarra and all the other nations of our people in this place called Australia. To us it is no story; it is the truth of our lives the burden which was thrust upon us to carry - it is the truth of my life. We did not create this burden. This nation is our nation, we are the pulse of the land, and I have felt that pulse over all the years of isolation – that, they could not still. On 13 February, 10,000 people came to Elder Park on the edge of the Adelaide CBD, traffic, trains and constant noise, but the only noise I can recall was the splashing fountain and the Prime Minister speaking. With his words placed the weight of the burden where it belongs, and turned possibilities for changing the situation for us into probabilities. I woke on February 14th to a different country than the one the sun had risen on the day before and I believe that brave words have created the foundation for new vistas. I don’t need the passage of time to look back to know that it was a watershed day in the history of this nation.
Frances Wyld The Unaipon School University of South Australia
O
n the day of the National Apology I was teaching a summer school intensive and decided in consultation with members of the teaching team to go ahead with the planned activities. When Kevin Rudd spoke those words I was driving past the place of my own birth and wondered if this apology would be the catalyst for a rebirth for this country and its attitude to Aboriginal people. I thought of my family and friends who have been affected by child removal, some of them in Canberra to witness the Apology first hand. In the week leading up to the Apology I had asked people from the Stolen Generations what it meant to them. One friend said ‘How can I forgive if they don’t apologise?’ I took hers and others words with me into the lecture. Afterwards in the tutorial the group engaged in a role play and I made all the students Nungas for the day. I could feel their empathy; the Australian Government had just apologised to my family and the floodgate of grief could be opened and healed. Halfway through the role play I lost my voice and a student took over as narrator. Did the Apology give Aboriginal people the right to heal and grow strong again, or have we experienced more of the same since? Personally since then I have sought a speaking position to talk of the disadvantages and advantages of being an Aboriginal woman and I am going to keep talking until I lose my voice and a million people can step up and speak for Aboriginal justice in my place.
Helen Bishop Centre for Aboriginal Studies Curtin University of Technology
M
y reaction to the apology was ‘thank goodness’ it has finally come. A small word Sorry is. It holds more than its simple voicing can imagine. Sorry has an enormous influence on the ability to forgive. Indigenous people have been vindicated by its utterance their life experiences are real. Sorry suggests to me that Indigenous people lives will now be influenced by life sustaining, virtuous acts. Saying Sorry seeks forgiveness for wrong doings: for the harm caused, that such harm never occur again. One does not (in genuine apologies) go about doing those things that caused the original harm, does one? It isn’t the honeymoon period stemming from family violence is it? The abused partner forgives the abusive partner at their Sorry,
18
frontline
vol.16, October 2008
hoping the pattern of abuse stops? This apology suggests that a different set of behaviours, attitudes and activities can occur to break the cycle of abuse. So it is I assume that this apology which comes from the heart of Federal Government intends to engage Indigenous people as adults in all matters that are of concern to them, that they will taste the fruit of prosperity, goodwill and longevity. I look forward to Indigenous people being treated as cognisant, vibrant contributors to the fabric of Australia’s identity, culture and social conscience and fulfil their ancient stewards role in this glorious land. This Sorry leads me to believe that a new way of conducting diplomatic affairs with Indigenous people will come about soon. I am I guess very hopeful.
indigenous
Davina B Woods Moondani Balluk Indigenous Academic Unit and School of Education Victoria University
A
Nellie Green Ngarn-gi Bagora Indigenous Centre La Trobe University
T
s a descendant of a man taken as a baby from his parents, family, community and country in far north Queensland in the mid 1880s, I cried. It was pleasing to hear that the Apology extended to my grandfather’s surviving descendants. He however is long gone, passed to the Dreaming.
ravelling to the long-awaited Apology was always going to be emotional, but I was anxious and unsure of what to expect. So, it was with much anticipation, nudged by an elbow of trepidation that I set off on one of the most important journeys of my well-journeyed life!
It is said that it is never too late to make amends. Perhaps this is true but making amends is more than just saying the word ‘Sorry’. Saying sorry is only the beginning, as my mother always told me ‘actions speak louder than words’. This is a sentiment that the late Sir Ronald Wilson agreed with in his statement that: An Apology begins the healing process. Apology means understanding, a willingness to enter into the suffering. It implies a willingness to do more. Vital for healing, a National Apology without action reflects indifference and apathy towards Indigenous Australians by the Commonwealth Government. Barely a calendar month after the Apology, the Education Minister, Julia Gillard, failed to include or even allude to Indigenous Australians in a speech entitled ‘A Higher Education Revolution: Creating a Productive, Prosperous, Modern Australia’. Further, on 15 April 2008, Ms Gillard confirmed the membership of the National Curriculum Board. Despite the PM’s promise to ‘harness the determination of all Australians, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, to close the gap that lies between us in life expectancy, educational achievement and economic opportunity’ not one person on the National Curriculum Board is an Indigenous Australian, or even a person who has strong ties to Indigenous communities. Some may argue that Indigenous Australians are innately included and that to include us separately would be marginalising. I argue that omitting mention of Indigenous Australians and stating that we are innately incorporated is assimilationist. All politicians who joined in celebrating the National Apology, no matter which party they represent, need to scrutinise themselves, consider Sir Ronald Wilson’s statement, and take up the challenge of doing more. In considering what else they can do, they should educate themselves. Surround themselves with aides who have a full appreciation of Indigenous Australian aspirations and history, people who understand the diversity within Indigenous Australia and have an understanding of local cultures and protocols. Simultaneously Australia’s politicians must better enable Australian education systems from preschool to postgraduate level to hear the Indigenous Australian voice. How many politicians know by whom the term ‘the Stolen Generations’ was coined? Is it even important for them to know these facts? Yes! Yes it is, ‘history informs the past the present and the future. It is our duty to learn history’s lessons.’ The most important question is, ‘How meaningful does the current Commonwealth Government intend to make the National Apology?’
The Welcome to Country took too many years to eventuate, but at last this long overdue measure of respect had finally happened. Imagine the enormity of such an occasion. As an Indigenous person, I felt so proud as I heard Aunty Matilda House-Williams welcome ALL of us, and a stranglehold of whiteman’s ‘tradition’ was humbly and historically, enveloped in an even older tradition of my people, grounded in respect, regard and recognition. By the time Wednesday morning came around, I considered turning round and running far away from Capital Hill, back to my family. If they weren’t scattered from Darwin to Perth and Geraldton to Melbourne, I may just well have! But we were there for a purpose, a reason and it wasn’t by mistake either. People, black and white, young and old, were gathering at a fast pace, and it felt great to wander into the crowd, full of an energy so positive and optimistic. Glances of acknowledgement, nodding of heads, weary yet hopeful smiles – the unspoken communication between those present was a great reminder to me of the humanity and commonality that surrounds us. Faces all about us, most unknown yet still familiar; and then the first person I actually recognised was Uncle Larry Walsh! A sense of calm washed over me then, as we followed Uncle to where his family sat on the grass. I felt safe to be there. As 8.55am approached the expectancy had lifted somewhat. More embraces, more conversations were taking place, but then a still silence followed as the image of the Prime Minister appeared on the big screens outside. Everyone watched intently as he began, all eyes focussed on that face… The words spoken by Kevin Rudd that day had, and continue to have, a profound effect on me. As an Indigenous person, whose family has been affected irreversibly by the forced removal policies and legislations of the past, part of my Spirit remains on the lawns of Capital Hill, seated in the significance of that day. It sits there in remembrance of my brother and sister who were removed and it stands there strong in honour of my mother, who, along with so many others, bore the brunt of such callous acts. I am also reminded of the non-Indigenous friend who accompanied me on this journey, who believed in the rightness and significance of this Apology, and didn’t have an issue with the words ‘Sorry’ being said on his behalf. I am grateful and appreciative of his generosity, because, after all, it is about walking forwards together, acknowledging the past, and also recognising, with hope, the potential for our common future. What an amazing day to be part of, to witness, to feel and to experience. I truly cherish the feeling of hope that I’m now walking with in my own country. vol.16, October 2008
frontline
19
membership
Why I’m an NTEU member Kate Borrett University of South Australia
A
new colleague recently asked me about why it’s good to be a member of the NTEU? Without hesitation, I was able to take an impassioned side-step into my office and produce a ‘Make a difference… Join NTEU today!’ membership form. There are many sound and simply common sense reasons why it’s good to be an NTEU member.
Finding out more about your professional rights, strategies for negotiating with your employer to resolve disputes, defending your existing working conditions and seeking clarification about procedures in Collective Agreements represent some of the many reasons why it’s good to join the NTEU. Not only is the NTEU in close reach of the University of South Australia’s city campuses, it is the largest union covering professional staff and therefore gives members a strong and expert voice on matters relating to the quality of Australian tertiary education. The NTEU offers its members an opportunity to talk to or meet with a Branch Organiser and experienced Industrial Officers about a wide range of issues. I have found that many of my university colleagues are not fully aware of their rights at work. For instance, at times female colleagues face obstacles, in contravention of gender, equity and family friendly principles, when pursuing fractional employment which impacts upon their chances of gaining contract or continuing positions. The services offered by the NTEU ensure that professional and academic staff are provided with advice when confronted with such situations. Industrial Officers are also able to provide support with reclassification or promotion, redeployment, redundancy and restructures. Having personally survived a recent ‘managing change’ and restructure process, I have felt the firsthand effects of team and position disestablishment. Transition periods, following a restructure, can present workload challenges especially when employees are confronted with a messy environment with lots of unknowns. Protecting your rights at work is as much an individual necessity as it is a team or workplace responsibility. Working cooperatively with colleagues can be a positive and empowering 20
frontline
vol.16, October 2008
means of effecting change. There is strength in unity and while the NTEU is able to provide helpful information and advice about adhering to industrial instruments, a collective voice can add fire to shared concerns, helping to shift the balance of power in many work contexts. Being a member of the NTEU is therefore not just about protecting your work rights and defending existing working conditions. It is also about maintaining the integrity and social inclusivity of university workplace environments. Keeping our universities quality workplaces is integral to broader reform in the tertiary education sector. What is the purpose of our universities if not to contribute to the public good by providing specialised, high quality services to meet students and employees expectations? I have found the ongoing support and guidance provided by UniSA’s Branch of the NTEU to be invaluable. So, if you are not already a member of the NTEU, consider joining, get involved and make a difference to your working life and workplace. The NTEU’s expertise and understanding of Australia’s tertiary education sector reassures me about the future for our universities.
Annabel Beckenham University of Canberra
U
nions are a social institution that look beyond the demands of capital to issues of equity, sustainability, and social justice. They don’t always get everything right, but their efforts are crucial to a functional democracy, where people are citizens before they are consumers or resources. As a long term union activist , I’ve had many conversations with colleagues about why they should join, and motivations often vary. On the most venal level, membership provides numerous shopping discounts and some financial equity benefits. It is, of course tax deductible. On a much more fundamental level, it provides advocacy. This extends from individual workplace difficulties to sector wide collective bargaining for fair pay and safe working conditions. As a personal example, I was employed as a lecturer on a series of short term semester long contracts for close to ten years, and had to run a second job to cover the periods each year when I was laid off. This was no one in particular’s fault; it was a systematic and financial imperative of the organisation to keep people in tenuous and short term positions. But it was the NTEU who took the issue to the Industrial Relations Tribunal and won the HECE decision which stopped universities from exploiting people in this way. Immediately after the HECE decision, I was given continuing full time employment by my university. Suddenly, because of the union, they could manage it! Unions are one of the bastions of a civilised society. Without an organised and committed union movement, the unfortunate employees of James Hardie would have been free to quietly die of mesolothemia while the company moved its profits offshore to avoid their compensation claims. Without a union movement, the architects of WorkChoices would have been free to continue their demolition of decent working conditions in all sectors. Without the union movement workers would be done over on all levels, and individuals could expect a working life nasty, brutish and potentially quite short. There is really no good reason not to be in a union! Photo by Jane Maze vol.16, October 2008
frontline
21
FEDERAL POLITICS
The Battle of Bennelong
When McKew took on Howard Cathy Rytmeister Macquarie University
I
’ve campaigned in elections in Bennelong and the corresponding State seats of Ryde and Epping since moving back to the area in 1989. In the 2007 Federal election, in addition to my usual work with The Greens, I was also involved in the Bennelong Your Rights At Work (YR@W) campaign. paign tactics of stalls, distributing leaflets at railway stations, bus The Bennelong YR@W group started early in 2007, with around stops and shopping centres, and letterboxing. Other key events 25 people who live or work in Bennelong as well as a few from were a Community Forum on Rights at Work, a formal campaign outside the electorate. Education unions were prominent, with launch, and participation in the Granny Smith Festival parade local NSW Teachers Federation reps organising and chairing in Eastwood, the heart of the electorate. Each of these gave us the first meeting, and the NTEU and IEU well represented by some memorable moments. members and officials. A Unions NSW organiser also attended The Community Forum in June attracted about 200 people. to provide support and information about other groups already Ordinary union members spoke of the impact of WorkChoices established in marginal seats to the west and north of Sydney. on their lives. Some stories were horrifying, a couple were heartOver the next few months, the group grew to around 50 ‘regubreaking, but all inspired outrage and disgust at the callousness lars’ plus others who helped out from time to time, coordinated and unfairness of the Coalition’s laws. John Robertson, the Secby a core planning group of around 15 people. The great thing retary of Unions NSW, spoke about both the smaller planning strongly about the need to group and the larger activist group remove the Government and was their diversity – members and This desperate act of our opponents actually their laws. The Forum made staff from at least 15 different gave us some heart – the PM losing his seat had the news when the Sydney unions were involved, as well as looked like such a long shot but now seemed to Morning Herald reported on retired and self-employed people, be a real possibility. a ‘leaked’ secret recording of students, and members of Labor, this speech and the (shock, Greens and other left-wing parties horror) promise that unions and organisations. would seek to influence the ALP, should they be elected! This There were some underlying tensions – those of us NOT in the desperate act of our opponents actually gave us some heart – ALP were determined that the YR@W group would not become the PM losing his seat had looked like such a long shot but now simply another Maxine McKew cheer squad. But the fact that seemed to be a real possibility. we were united in our outrage at the unfairness of the CoaliAs the election approached, the NTEU Macquarie Branch tion’s workplace relations legislation and anti-union propaganda ran a forum at the University, at which Carolyn Allport spoke meant that any tensions were managed, and never interfered to around 300 staff members and guests. After the Macquarie with our campaigning. Forum we all raced off to see Bob Hawke officially launch the We planned a range of activities, including the usual cam22
frontline
vol.16, October 2008
Photo by Sam Holmes. Reproduced with permission
Bennelong YR@W campaign. I’ve never been a huge Hawke fan, but he was great that night, reminiscing about his ACTU days and the way Fraser Government advocates lined up with industry advocates against the unions in the industrial court. He also reminded us that many of the union leaders of those days had keen intellects and broad interests, but had been confined to manual occupations by lack of opportunity – rather than lack of aptitude – for education. His repudiation of the Howard Government’s ‘union thugs’ rhetoric was powerful and timely. I’m glad my daughter Louisa (then 16) was there to hear him speak. The annual Granny Smith Festival in Eastwood, right in the middle of the electorate, certainly provided a campaign highlight. The YR@W group took part in the festival parade, accompanied by our own little jazz band. Along with the familiar orange posters we carried special green apple posters and stickers proclaiming ‘Your Rights at Work – the core issue’. We happened to come to a stop just as we passed the main stage, from where the Prime Minister and his wife had been waving to the crowd and the parade participants. This is where Maxine McKew danced to our band – a moment that was captured on television and was reproduced in many of the nation’s newspapers the next day. The Howards didn’t know where to look, mostly choosing to gaze fixedly at a point somewhere above our heads. Priceless! I was still sceptical about the possibility of toppling the PM – a feeling reinforced by spending most of polling day at one of the most conservative booths in the electorate. But after the polls closed, Louisa and I scrutineered at West Ryde – historically an ALP booth but one that had drifted to Howard over the last couple of elections. Louisa, with her scrutineering L-plates on,
turned out to be a real gun, and called the booth pretty accurately early in the count: ‘Maxine by about 400’ – and so it was. McKew gained 1750 primaries to Howard’s 1307, winning the booth outright with 52.6% of the primary vote. I felt a bit more positive about our chances, especially as the text messages started to come in from outside. My favourite text message of the evening came from a friend of Louisa: ‘Dad says Howard in huge trouble. Mum’s opened a second bottle.’ It was time to go. I admit that as we left to join the delirium of the post-election party, I took a moment to savour the grey faces of the Liberal scrutineers, who had been so outwardly confident, even smug, at the start of the count. I met up with a friend in the carpark of the local shops, and after embracing, dancing and squealing a bit, we took our CFMEU-supplied ‘Howard’s End’ wine to the Ryde-Epping Greens celebration party. There on the big screen (well, a sheet hung on the wall) we watched Kerry O’Brien and Antony Green make the call. Being part of the YR@W campaign was an experience I will treasure – not just because we achieved the result we wanted. During those months, great relationships and enduring friendships were forged through working at a local level with such a diverse group of people. And it’s not over yet – there is plenty to do to ‘win the peace’. Although we have given ourselves a rest following a very long and challenging campaign, our commitment remains strong. We may well be called on again soon, to remind our newly elected Government of the promises they made and the faith placed in them by hundreds of thousands of working people. I have no doubt that in such an event, the Bennelong YR@W team will once again be a force to be reckoned with. vol.16, October 2008
frontline
23
YOUR UNION
Women take 50% of key elected positions for the first time
W
omen’s representation in NTEU has now reached 54%, with women holding 49% of all elected representative positions. Women also now comprise 62% of Division Secretaries, and 50% of the fulltime elected officers, both key representative and decision-making groups within the Union. This is an important result, as it is the first time that women have made up over 50% of both categories. The number of women elected to Branch President and Secretary has also grown since the 2006 elections. In total, it can be seen from the 2008 NTEU election outcomes that women’s representation and our voice in the Union is holding strong and growing. 33% 33% 50% 50%
25% 37% 37% 62%
37% 41% 35% 39%
48% 32% 45% 53%
02
02
02
02
04
06
08
Full Time Officers
04
06
08
04
06
08
Branch Presidents
Division Secretaries
04
06
08
Branch Secretaries 50% 51% 54% 54%
100% 0% 50% 50% 29% 25% 37% 62%
02
04
06
02
08
National Councillors: NT 02
04
06
04
06
08 02
National Councillors: WA
04
06
06
08
National Councillors: Qld
25% 22% 11% 37% 02
04
08
National Councillors: SA
52% 65% 55% 78%
66% 33% 66% 33% 02
04
06
08
National Councillors: NSW 02
04
06
08
National Councillors: Indigenous
47% 50% 46% 39%
02
04
06
Percentage of Women in NTEU positions, 2002–2008
50% 66% 60% 55%
02
08
National Councillors: Vic
04
frontline
vol.16, October 2008
06
08
National Councillors: ACT
0% 100% 0%
0%
02 04 06 08 National Councillors: Tas
24
08
Membership: National
53% 40% 47% 45%
INCLUDE AREA CODE
WORK PHONE
USE PAYMENT OPTION 1, 2 OR 3
NTEU National Office PO Box 1323, South Melbourne VIC 3205
T (03) 9254 1910 E nteunat@nteu.org.au
HRS PER WEEK:
HRS PER WEEK:
USE CASUAL PAYMENT OPTION ONLY DATE
SPECIAL RATES FOR CASUAL & SESSIONAL STAFF
SESSIONAL ACADEMIC GENERAL STAFF CASUAL
F (03) 9254 1915 W www.nteu.org.au
Return this form to the NTEU National Office...
SIGNATURE
Office use only: Membership no.
WORK FAX
MOBILE PHONE
MONTH NEXT INCREMENT DUE
ANNUAL SALARY EQUIVALENT FULL TIME
STEP/INCREMENT
MAIL/BLDG CODE
CLASSIFICATION LEVEL EG LECTB, HEW4
POSITION
DEPT/SCHOOL
ARE YOU EMPLOYED AS...? CONTINUING/PERMANENT FULL TIME PART TIME HRS PER WEEK: FIXED TERM CONTRACT DATE OF EXPIRY:
POSTCODE
PLEASE USE MY HOME ADDRESS FOR ALL MAILING
WHAT IS YOUR EMPLOYMENT CATEGORY? ACADEMIC STAFF GENERAL STAFF OTHER:
OTHER EMAIL
WORK EMAIL
INCLUDE AREA CODE
HOME PHONE
HOME ADDRESS
ARE YOU AN AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINAL OR TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER? YES PREVIOUSLY AN NTEU MEMBER? YES. WHICH INSTITUTION:
FACULTY
/
DATE OF BIRTH
/
CAMPUS
GIVEN NAMES
SURNAME
EMPLOYER
INSTITUTION
MALE FEMALE
TITLE
and wish to update my details
I am currently a member
I hereby apply for membership of NTEU, any Branch and any associated body‡ established at my workplace.
I want to join NTEU
This information is needed for a number of areas of NTEU’s work and will be treated as confidential.
Office use only:
You may resign by written notice to the Division or Branch Secretary. Where you cease to be eligible to become a member, resignation shall take effect on the date the notice is received or on the day specified in your notice, whichever is later. In any other case, you must give at least two weeks notice. Members are required to pay dues and levies as set by the Union from time to time in accordance with NTEU rules. Further information on financial obligations, including a copy of the rules, is available from your Branch. ‡Associated bodies: NTEU (NSW); James Cook Univ. Staff Assn (Union of Employees) at JCU; Univ. of Queensland Academic Staff Assn (Union of Employees) at UQ; Murdoch Univ. Academic Staff Assn at Murdoch Univ.; Union of Australian College Academics (WA Branch) Industrial Union of Workers at Edith Cowan Univ. & Curtin Univ.; Curtin Univ. Staff Assn (Inc.) at Curtin Univ.; Staff Assn of ECU (Inc.) at ECU.
Please complete your personal details...
Use this form to join NTEU
— — ANNUALLY
QUARTERLY
CARD TYPE: MASTERCARD VISA
DATE
INSERT YOUR NAME
ANNUALLY = 5% DISCOUNT DATE
QUARTERLY
ACCOUNT NUMBER
IF KNOWN
DATE
ANNUAL FEE $55 $77 $110
6 MONTH FEE $27.50 $38.50 $55.00
SIGNATURE
DATE
Description of goods/services: NTEU Membership Dues. To: The National Tertiary Education Union, PO Box 1323, South Melbourne VIC 3205.
$ — — — — CARD TYPE: MASTERCARD VISA
———— ———— ———— ———— EXPIRY AMOUNT
CARD NUMBER
NAME ON CARD
PLEASE ACCEPT MY CHEQUE/MONEY ORDER FOR THE AMOUNT ABOVE. CREDIT CARD PAYMENT
Pay by cheque/money order or credit card
$10,001 – $20,000 OVER $20,000
ESTIMATED SALARY RANGE $10,000 AND UNDER
NTEU CASUAL MEMBERSHIP RATES ARE BASED ON ESTIMATED ANNUAL EARNINGS. PLEASE DETERMINE YOUR ESTIMATED SALARY RANGE AND FEE AMOUNT (INCL GST), AND TICK THE APPROPRIATE BOX:
Casual/Sessional staff only
SIGNATURE
or its duly authorised servants and agents to deduct from my salary by regular instalments, dues and levies (as determined from time to time by the Union), to NTEU or its authorised agents. All payments on my behalf and in accordance with this authority shall be deemed to be payments by me personally. This authority shall remain in force until revoked by me in writing. I also consent to my Office use only: % of salary deducted employer supplying NTEU with updated information relating to my employment status.
HEREBY AUTHORISE INSTITUTION
STAFF PAYROLL NUMBER
YOUR ADDRESS
INSERT YOUR NAME
OF
I
Option 3: Payroll Deduction Authority
Fees for this Branch = 1% of gross annual salary
Direct Debit Request (DDR) Service Agreement: 1. This is an agreement between you and NTEU. 2. Under this Agreement, you arrange to have deducted from your account, on the 15th day in each calendar month (working day), the appropriate amount of dues and levies, payable under NTEU’s Rules, to NTEU (the debit user). If you are uncertain as to when the debit will be processed please contact NTEU on (03) 9254 1910. These arrangements will not change, although the amount may vary in accordance with decisions of your elected NTEU Councils and Committees. You will be notified, in writing, of any changes at least fourteen (14) days prior to their implementation. 3. For all matters relating to the Direct Debit arrangements, including deferments and alterations, you will need to send written correspondence to PO Box 1323, Sth Melbourne VIC 3205 and allow 10 days for the amendments to take effect. 4. You may stop any Debit item or cancel a DDR with NTEU at any time in writing. All correspondence is to be addressed to NTEU General Secretary, PO Box 1323, Sth Melbourne VIC 3205. 5. Should any dispute ever arise between you and the NTEU about your payments you should advise NTEU General Secretary in writing or by email in the first instance and, if necessary, NTEU will take advice from your financial institution. 6. It is your responsibility to have sufficient clear funds to meet the costs of payment under this Agreement. NTEU however, does not have a policy of recovering any penalty fees from members if debit items are returned unpaid by the ledger financial institution. 7. You should be aware that: direct debiting through BECS is not available on all types of accounts; and account details should be checked against a recent statement from your financial institution. If uncertain, check with your ledger financial institution before completing the DDR. 8. NTEU does not use your financial records and account details for any purpose except the collection of union dues and the information is only available to a small number of NTEU employees. The details may be provided to your financial institution if a claim was made against that institution of an alleged incorrect or wrongful debit.
SIGNATURE
HALF-YEARLY
REGULAR DEBIT: MONTHLY
BSB NUMBER
ACCOUNT NAME
BRANCH NAME & ADDRESS
FINANCIAL INSTITUTION
authorise the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) APCA User ID No.062604 to arrange for funds to be debited from my/our account at the financial institution identified below and in accordance with the terms described in the Direct Debit Request (DDR) Service Agreement.
I
PROCESSED ON THE 15TH OF THE MONTH OR FOLLOWING WORKING DAY
Option 2: Direct Debit
SIGNATURE
I hereby authorise the Merchant to debit my Card account with the amount and at intervals specified above and in the event of any change in the charges for these goods/services to alter the amount from the appropriate date in accordance with such change. This authority shall stand, in respect of the above specified Card and in respect of any Card issued to me in renewal or replacement thereof, until I notify the Merchant in writing of its cancellation. Standing Authority for Recurrent Periodic Payment by Credit Card. Description of goods/services: NTEU Membership Dues. To: The National Tertiary Education Union, PO Box 1323, Sth Melbourne, 3205.
HALF-YEARLY
REGULAR DEBIT: MONTHLY
— —
———— ———— ———— ———— EXPIRY
CARD NUMBER
NAME ON CARD
PROCESSED ON THE 16TH OF THE MONTH OR FOLLOWING WORKING DAY
Option 1: Credit Card
...and choose ONE of the following payment options
Union Aid Abroad APHEDA
The overseas humanitarian aid agency of the ACTU
-AKE ,IFE &AIR %VERYWHERE Union Aid Abroad-APHEDA needs your regular support. More than ever we need committed union members to become regular donors – Global Justice Partners - to sustain the work we do. Our funding situation has become less certain over the years and we need to guarantee the future for our overseas projects, as people’s lives depend on the work we do – Making Life Fair Everywhere.
We need YOUR HELP, otherwise our projects cannot continue Union Aid Abroad saw a 90% decrease in its government funding under the Howard government. Whilst this may change under the new government, we can not rely on government funding to support our many important projects. Currently only 4% of the Overseas Aid Budget goes to not-for profit Australian aid agencies. Over 50% goes to private companies who, naturally, turn a profit. As Union Aid Abroad-APHEDA is the overseas aid agency of the ACTU, it needs to have the support of union people. Union Aid Abroad is YOUR overseas aid agency, and you know you can rely on your agency to deliver a decent work agenda along with our many projects. We are the only Australian aid agency that works to strengthen trade unions to help ensure a decent wage for working families in the countries where we work.
Women in Indonesia take heavy loads of gravel from a riverbed, the gravel is then transported to construction sites. Only ten years ago, support from individuals was a small part of the revenue used to fund our overseas projects, as the majority was still in the form of funding granted as AusAID contracts. The situation we find ourselves in now “The rights and lives of workers in developing countries want toaid doprogram more, Ihas want to largely become a is incredibly different as Australia’s Ioverseas been can be improved through international solidarity. By Over the past 6 privatised and aid agencies like us GLOBAL have been overlooked. JUSTICE PARTNER donating to Union Aid Abroad–APHEDA you will be years, we saw our government funding reduced from around $3 million to supporting workers and their families in developing I PLEDGE THE FOLLOWING EACH MONTH: approximately $350,000 a year. countries where it is so important to take action to $10
ensure justice,The human rights need and peace.� urgent to replace Sharan Burrow,we ACTU Presidentthe Make Life launched
$25
$50
$100
My own amount $_______ ( min. $10 )
this funding YES, to continue projects was the reason I would like freeour membership of Union Aid Abroad (for the life of my donation) and agree to bound by the rules2006 of the Association. Fair Everywhere campaign inbeSeptember – Complete thePartners coupon, seal and(regular post. donors) so that our the campaign aims to recruit Global Justice I wouldNow like somemore informationthan about wills & bequests 45 projects in 16 countries can continue. ever, regular donaI would like to subscribe to Union Aid Abroad’s monthly e-bulletin tions from union members are vital for us to continue our work!
#%.43 ). %6%29 $/,,!2 9/5 $/.!4% '/%3 4/ /52 /6%23%!3 02/*%#43 ). #/5.42)%3
The remaining 15c is directed to essential tasks for project planning, monitoring and administration.
Title Ms Mr Mrs Miss Dr (please circle) Other
You can become a regular donor - a Global Justice Partner - and assure future First name Union Aid Abroadfunding for our work. If the battle for Your Rights at Work was the battle for Last name s the only Australian labour rights at home, consider the battle for fair and decent work in overseas overseas aid agency Address countries where labour rights are minimal, and where poverty means living on hat places workers’ Postcode less than $1 a day. ights at the centre
85%
15%
85% goes directly to projects overseas
15% supports the work we do here
For as little as (h/m)33c a day
of its work.
Phone: (w)
Australian workers understand that we can’t protect workers’ ights in our country while in neighbouring countries workers ace exploitation and dangerous or sweatshop conditions.
Your Union
(around 22c after tax) D.O.B you can make a real contribution to the lives of people in the countries where we work through:
METHOD OF PAYMENT: a) Credit Card
r skills training MasterCard Visa Expiry Date | | |–| | | r countering human trafficking Card no | | | | |–| | | | |–| | | | |–| | | r health care and medical equipment Card holder name support Signature Date r trade union development and OR b) Direct Debit strengthening Fin. r Inst.HIV training Branch Name on account r OH&S training BSBrno |skills | | |–| | the | | training for disabled Acc r No |sustainable | | | agriculture | | | | | | Signature r early childhood education Date By signing this Direct Debit request you acknowledge having read and endorsed r food security
Union Aid Abroad educates workers about abour rights, organising, collective bargaining, free media and democratic rade unions.
7/2+%23´ Ibu Salbiah, Leader of the organic to name a few . . . 2)'(43 agriculture group in Aceh 2)'(43 !2% (5-!. To become a regular donor – a Global Justice Partner –
the terms and conditions governing the debit arrangements between you and APHEDA Inc. as set out in our Direct Debit Request Service Agreement overleaf.
Donations to Union Aid Abroad APHEDA are tax deductible.
|
|
$10
can provide a manual for union trainers to run courses in labour rights in Indonesia
$20
can buy 1,000 fish fingerlings to help a Cambodian family set up a fish farm
$30
can buy materials for 30 women in East Timor to practise their sewing skills
$50
can provide stationery for 5 refugee children in Lebanon
$100
can provide revolving loans to two women in rural Vietnam so they can set up a small business
DONATIONS FREECALL 1800 888 674 or 02 9264 9343 Level 3, 377- 383 Sussex St, Sydney NSW 2000
office use only DM PL AP XL call 1800 888674 or visit www.unionaidabroad.org.au PHOTO ),/
20/3/08 4:45:56 PM