C3426/300, Transcript of Proceedings [2001] AIRCTrans 1226 (21 June 2001)

AUSCRIPT PTY LTD
ABN 76 082 664 220

Level 4, 179 Queen St MELBOURNE Vic 3000
(GPO Box 1114J MELBOURNE Vic 3001)
DX 305 Melbourne Tel:[phone] Fax:[phone]

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS


O/N 7723

A 5.6.01

AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

COMMISSIONER BLAIR

C No 34263 of 2000

VICTORIAN HOSPITALS INDUSTRIAL
ASSOCIATION

and

HEALTH SERVICES UNION OF AUSTRALIA

Notification pursuant to section 99 of the
Act of a dispute re claim for increased wages
and restoration of parity

MELBOURNE

2.38 PM, WEDNESDAY, 30 MAY 2001

Continued from 6.3.01

PN488

MS J. BREMNER: I appear for the Health Services Union of Australia, together with MS R. KELLY.

PN489

MR A. DJONEFF: I appear on behalf of VHIA.

PN490

MR P. O'DONOGHUE: I appear on behalf of the Department of Human Services.

PN491

THE COMMISSIONER: This matter has been relisted at the request of the VHIA. Mr Djoneff.

PN492

MR DJONEFF: Thank you, Commissioner, for the early relisting. The cause of my request to relist the matter is twofold. You recall this matter was before you a short while ago where the parties were discussing essentially the issue associated with an EFT claim, and at that time the union indicated that via a survey of members it had concluded that a requirement of about 296 EFT was required to satisfy all sorts of work load pressure points.

PN493

In the context of that discussion considerable reference was made to the State budget that had been handed down some only days earlier and questions arose as to what were the implications of those budget provisions which, I think in the view of everyone were not easy to decipher from the budget documents themselves, what were the implications of those budget provisions for EFT claims for the future. And it was agreed at that time, in the face of a request by the union for a compulsory conference, to at the first instance allow the department to ascertain certain information and provide a response.

PN494

Prior to that response being provided, and such a written response in fact has been forwarded to the union yesterday, and I will come to that in a moment, the union obviously had the view that progress on this matter was unsatisfactory and as a consequence to our certain knowledge there was a meeting of members at the Alfred Hospital where resolutions were passed to the effect that this coming Thursday there would be a walkout, or a threatened walkout of staff if a response of a satisfactory kind had not been received. Or expressed another way that walkout potentially occurs tomorrow.

PN495

Now, the point I want to raise, Commissioner, is that one, there is an answer from the department now, so there is a basis for resuming the conference that we left off a short while ago. And that conference of course was being conducted in accordance with the procedures that we had followed throughout the addressing of this claim under section 111AA, and on certainly two specific occasions the union had committed itself to the 111AA process. In that regard there is, as part of that, an acceptance that no industrial action can occur in respect of such matters whilst they are in that process.

PN496

So what we are seeking is an expression from the union today, indeed before we actually deal with the merit of the matter, that industrial action will not occur in the context that this is an ongoing part of the 111AA process. So that will be, if you like, a threshold point if you will. Now, Commissioner, could I now table the correspondence from the department to the union of which a copy has, of course, been provided to VHIA, addressed to the union yesterday, which deals with a particular letter sent by Ms Kelly seeking specific information on the State budget. And a response has been provided, the essence of which is that for over the next three years budget periods, an additional 60 EFT will be funded and provided over the life of the agreement, assuming we are going to get a three year agreement.

PN497

This letter in fact was the subject of discussions yesterday at the most recent working party meeting of the three parties; DHS, the union and ourselves, and obviously the union will speak for itself, but clearly their view is that this was far from satisfactory. And the view that we expressed was 60 EFT over three years to deal with the variety of labour pressure points, which have been described in various ways, seems to us to fall short of a satisfactory answer. Now, whilst we do not put forward a particular figure, we are certainly convinced that it is more than 60, and 60 over three years across this industry is unlikely to produce a resolution to this matter and accordingly we believe that further conciliation proceedings should occur in respect of that matter.

PN498

So, Commissioner, we seek two things; one is an undertaking that in the context of 111AA processes, of which this matter is an obvious part, indeed a significant part, that the union gives the undertaking that I have sought; and that secondly, the issue of the merit of the claim and the response of the department be the subject of further conference. If the Commission please.

PN499

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Mr O'Donoghue, do you wish to make any comment at this point?

PN500

MR O'DONOGHUE: There are two things, Mr Commissioner. Firstly, just to say that we would concur with VHIA in regards to the actual case around the EFT and we would be happy to proceed in conference. With regards to the first point again we would concur and would like to have an undertaking that in the context of this process that has been in train for some time, that there will be no industrial action arising from the matters still not determined. Having said that - - -

PN501

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Ms Bremner.

PN502

MS BREMNER: Commissioner, we are indeed fascinated to hear the DHS advocate agree with the VHIA that the offer of 60 additional staff over three years is inadequate, because if the DHS says its own offer is inadequate there would clearly be no need for the union to advocate that position.

PN503

THE COMMISSIONER: I am not quite sure that that is what I - - -

PN504

MS BREMNER: That is what I heard, Commissioner.

PN505

THE COMMISSIONER: I notice that Mr O'Donoghue did say that he concurred with the position of the VHIA, but I must say I understood that to be in relation to no action, and the second one was to proceed into conference. I did not interpret Mr O'Donoghue to say that he concurred that the offer of 60 EFT was inadequate.

PN506

MS BREMNER: We must have heard him differently, Commissioner.

PN507

MR DJONEFF: We could have otherwise adjourned, Commissioner.

PN508

THE COMMISSIONER: It may be a bit of wishful thinking I think.

PN509

MS BREMNER: I thought Mr O'Donoghue had just put our case for us, how obliging of him. Commissioner, the letter that has been handed to you by Mr Djoneff was given to us yesterday, in the circumstances described to you by Mr Djoneff. Now, our response to that is that this is largely irrelevant to the claim of 296 additional EFT. And the reason for that as I explained to both of the employer parties yesterday is because this only addresses staffing available under the budget that was recently handed down for new acute hospital services, the targets for which were set in the recently handed down budget.

PN510

Now, this is, of course, a very, very important issue, but it is quite distinctively different from the issue which we have been agitating through the enterprise bargaining process, and that is repairing what we could call a base line. And that is addressing staffing needs to ensure that services are delivered in a safe manner for patients and staff in the current context, staffing levels at their present level. I really don't know if 60 is the right figure for the new services because I haven't had any information from DHS about what services provided by our members are going to - if I could withdraw that and start again, Commissioner.

PN511

I haven't had any information to inform us of how services provided by our members will change, what additional services will be provided in the light of the budget appropriation. There was a meeting called with the Minister for Health last week, a budget briefing, but that information, that level of specificity wasn't provided. So the question of the future, increased patient throughput and the 60 is really something that is quite distinctively different from our case for an additional 296. And the government just has not addressed that at all.

PN512

And we are extremely disappointed that the letter of offer which we had been encouraged to believe was going to resolve the problem has in fact ignored the problem. Now, that is the position that we are at. We have waited a very, very long time for the department to address the issue and I think that - the word that I could use to describe their response so far would be stonewalling. We have got no satisfaction out of the enterprise bargaining process, we are suffering rising levels of frustration and through these endless talks the members, out in hospitals, are the ones paying the price for the under staffing, the increased stress levels and the generally unhealthy environment in which they are being asked to work. And they are saying, Commissioner, that they have just had enough of it.

PN513

THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Djoneff, made mention of a walk out tomorrow. Can you tell me something about that please.

PN514

MS BREMNER: Yes, Commissioner. There was a vote last week by members at the Alfred Hospital to convene tomorrow morning to determine whether or not they would take industrial action in the light of whatever response the government may or may not have made between the time of the meeting last week and tomorrow morning. So this letter that has been handed up to you will be presented to a meeting of medical scientists tomorrow and it will then be decided by them whether this is an acceptable offer and what they want to do about it. So that decision has not been made.

PN515

THE COMMISSIONER: Right. Thank you. Thank you. Mr O'Donoghue, two issues that arise out of Ms Bremner's submission and one goes to the letter of 29 May, simply addresses the budgetary position for new acute services and what the HSUA seek in terms of outcomes for additional EFT go to repairing what is termed, the base line, that is what is already in place and what needs to be fixed in order to get it back on track. The other issue goes though to what - there is no information about what additional services will be provided in regards to the budgetary position, or what changes are required of the existing staffing levels. Is that right?

PN516

MS BREMNER: That is right.

PN517

THE COMMISSIONER: Now, they are fundamentally important issues to understand in what context this offer of 60 EFT means. Have those issues been addressed?

PN518

MR O'DONOGHUE: Mr Commissioner, I am not in a position to actually provide any detailed response on that. But our view is that through the budgeting process which involves a dialogue between the Ministry, the department and the hospitals, those issues do get considered and eventually an outcome is generated and that is reflected in the budget. But the position of government overall is that once that has been decided it becomes the responsibility of the hospital management to make those decisions, addressing the needs of that particular service and perhaps the system overall in the context of the budget constraint.

PN519

So once the money has been allocated, in the context of the budget, it is then left to hospitals as to how they will make those decisions and that goes to staffing levels as well. So that is the first thing that I would say. Secondly, in the context of the view expressed by the union that this response from the department is unsatisfactory, it is our view that this offer comprehends, or claims, that is that we haven't endeavoured to anticipate or to dissect what the union is seeking. We acknowledge that they are making a claim for extra EFT, but we have responded on the basis of what the budget allows.

PN520

And we think that in the circumstances that is a reasonable approach, bearing in mind what I said in the first instance, that it becomes the responsibility of the hospital management to allocate that money to the EFT.

PN521

THE COMMISSIONER: Well, there are a couple of things. One is for there to be constructive discussions by way of conference, there needs to be understanding very clearly on what basis the additional 60 EFT was offered. There appears to be some vagueness about that in terms of the HSUA understanding in what context the 60 EFT have been offered, given the questions that Ms Bremner has raised this afternoon. So the Commission will direct that the parties, that is the HSUA, the VHIA, and the DHS, confer in between now and Thursday the 7th, over the issues raised by the HSUA, in firstly understanding whether or not the additional 60 EFT offered in the correspondence of 29 May, are 60 that were part of the budgetary process to deal with the new acute services.

PN522

Secondly, in what context does the DHS see the additional 60 EFT in terms of fixing the base line as identified by the HSUA. Thirdly, identifying what additional services, if any, will need to be provided. And fourthly, what changes are required of the existing staff within the medical scientists area covered by HSUA4. Whilst those discussions are occurring, and hopefully clarify in what context the 60 additional EFT are offered, there will be no industrial action. If there is any industrial action tomorrow arising from what may be deemed to be a report-back at the Alfred, the Commission will reconvene urgently tomorrow afternoon to contemplate a section 127 application by, I would assume, the VHIA.

PN523

Whilst the parties are being dealt with in context of 111AA, and whilst the Commission has acknowledged that there needs to be further clarification of the additional EFT, the Commission does expect that the parties will clarify that and have further consultation in an environment free from any industrial action. At the report-back on Thursday the 7th, the Commission will have it by way of conference and hopefully by that time the issues identified earlier will assist the parties in hopefully coming to some understanding.

PN524

The Commission at this point prima facie would have to say that it agrees with the submission of the VHIA that 60 additional EFT, regardless of which context it is seen in, the Commission would have to say is insufficient, there needs to be some further assessment done of that by the DHS. Are the parties clear on what the Commission has put. Mr Djoneff?

PN525

MR DJONEFF: Thank you, Commissioner.

PN526

THE COMMISSIONER: Mr O'Donoghue?

PN527

MR O'DONOGHUE: I did miss the first point you made, Mr Commissioner, but we will have the transcript very shortly and that will clarify it. Thank you.

PN528

THE COMMISSIONER: Ms Bremner?

PN529

MS BREMNER: Are you setting a time now for the - - -

PN530

THE COMMISSIONER: Sorry, 2 pm, on the 7th. Are the HSUA clear on what the Commission has put?

PN531

MS BREMNER: Yes.

PN532

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. The Commission will stand adjourned to 2 pm, by way of conference on Thursday, 7 June.

ADJOURNED ACCORDINGLY [2.59pm]