Action month: Bans on for old blokes who don’t know its past 1993, super dispute winding down, possible consensus on drugs and alcohol policies and good luck Jody

 

Parramatta Councillors discover there is a new Local Government Act

In the 50s and 60s, people found Japanese soldiers hiding in remote jungle believing that the war was still being fought. Who would have thought that there were Councillors at Parramatta (clearly hiding in the jungles of Parramatta Park) who missed the 1993 Local Government Act and the significant changes of responsibilities for Councillors and general managers.

The 1993 Act modernised relationships between the council and the general manager with a clear and dramatic separation of power. Under the old Act which had operated for most of this century, the Town/Shire Clerk was only the chief administrative officer and the mayor was the chief executive officer. What is still described as the "new" Act limited the role of the council to policy and made the general manager chief executive officer, responsible for day-to-day management.

Prior to the 1993 Act, councillors could and did do anything. Wandering through offices, directing staff, going through files and all that but the 1993 Act put Councillors on a leash - apart from an obligation in section 8, the Council’s Charter, to "be a responsible employer", councillors lost their ability to throw their weight around with staff.

Some councils were slower to move than others. Many councillors were reluctant to give up the opportunities to bully and abuse staff. For many councillors this was why they had stood for election to local government in the first place. In 2000 Parramatta Council filed a dispute with depa when our members placed a ban on a councillor who had made public criticisms of council staff. The general manager at the time was quite open that councillors believed they were unaffected by the 1993 legislation. The courageous ban by members and the subsequent proceedings in the Commission secured an apology and an acknowledgement that the days of threats and bullying of staff were over.

But some councillors just don't learn. Late in 2008 we met with the General Manager over concerns that people other than professional building and planning staff were trying to affect the assessment of development applications. Dabbling dilettante councillors with an unhealthy obsession with brothels in the area provided someone who wasn't a planning/development professional with an ability to intervene in and complain about development assessment.

This unholy and unhealthy alliance led to three peer reviews of the decisions of our members (all vindicated) ending in June with an offensive and inappropriate resolution of the Council attacking our members in the Development Services Unit over an application where the council had in their possession a report from Phillips Fox Solicitors again saying the council staff had acted professionally and properly. You can only imagine what the old blokes on the council would have done if the peer reviews or the lawyers had found a flaw.

Our members met and placed a ban on processing development applications for brothels, massage parlours and, in what seemed an extraordinarily broad list of activities and applications, nearly everything else. But the list of nearly everything else reflected only a direction by the Group Manager about the sort of applications that should go for advice to the council’s Corruption Prevention officer a person who was not a planning or development professional. And he was the person responsible for causing the peer reviews in the fiasco leading to the June decision.

People who don't understand planning or the procedures of the Land and Environment Court should have nothing to do with these processes.

It's amazing how a ban on activity focuses people's attention - particularly when the weeks following the ban being implemented there were four development applications for brothels filed.

The dispute ran in the Commission on two occasions and on the second day even the Department of Local Government turned up with a watching brief. And no wonder, a decade and a half post 1993 and these old blokes thought they were still fighting the war.

Now settled, agreement was reached with the general manager that these processes would change in November with the reallocation of legal responsibilities at the Council but in the meantime any application process by the professionals which drew criticism from the nonprofessional would be peer reviewed before submission to Council. A temporary solution anticipating the departure of the nonprofessional in November.

Parramatta Council has a group of old blokes who must have missed the change in the legislation in 1993 but also some new councillors who have fairly easily fallen into the timewarp of thinking that they too are operating prior to 1993. They must have slid off into a parallel dimension.

The General Manager has organised training for Councillors which will take place shortly after the mayoral election in September and we look forward to the councilors’ education about modern life in local government.

And congratulations to the members courageous enough to place a ban on actions and flush out this successful resolution.

Only the really unpleasant councils left in super/TRP dispute

Wow, imagine settling with The Hills. Hills General Manager Dave Walker was intent on challenging the super dispute and taking everyone if necessary to the Supreme Court. He canvassed other councils for support but even Liverpool, still in the dispute, said no to that sort of enthusiasm.

But in a calmer moment he realised that the problem that existed at The Hills existed only because a previous general manager had thought it a good idea to put 60 or so people in managerial positions on term contracts. So, problem solved, it was someone else's fault so Dave could fix it. A settlement was reached with the six employees at The Hills and on 11 September General Manager started discussions with the unions about how to dismantle the TRP arrangements.

While there is a settlement at The Hills; Blue Mountains, Liverpool and Wyong share the same problem that The Hills has now recognised needs to be fixed. Their contracts just don't add up. When managers are packaged the package should start with the salary system rate of pay (because these are all Award employees) but this is often not the case. Assertions about an amount being in the rate in compensation for overtime or flexibility, when tested, are found to be wrong. Things just don't add up.

Many of the problems arise because councils like Blue Mountains, Liverpool and Wyong have packaged the wrong way, starting with a total figure and working backwards. Often this means that with different superannuation payments into the two different superannuation schemes in local government, people who should be on the same skill level and rate in the salary system are being paid at different skill sets. This breaches the obligation under the Award to place people on a "rate of pay that recognises the skills the employee is required to apply to the job."

While The Hills has settled (and the employees affected may eventually get over the aggravation they lived through in a bitter and difficult process) Blue Mountains and Wyong will be dealt with by the Commission on 21 and 22 September.

Liverpool at this stage thinks it can keep away from the Commission and hope that the dispute settles itself or they can reach local agreements with the employees affected that will make them pay some part of the increased employer contribution. Who would want to work for people like that?

Accreditation of council staff: is no news, good news?

While the AIBS hoped that the BPB Chair Sue Holliday would announce what was happening about accrediting councistaff at their annual conference in late August, she didn't.

Our submission to the BPB (contained in the last depaNews) asked for reconsideration of parts of the accreditation proposal version 2.The latest news from the BPB is that a further proposal has now gone to the Minister for her approval. There is likely to be some news within the next month.

 

 

 

depa, the LGEA and the USU have met to try to develop a common approach to drug and alcohol policies

depa has filed disputes with Hornsby, Sutherland and Wollongong over policies that were developed at the time with the support of the USU and which provided for either random drug testing (which we oppose) or which fail to acknowledge the two different PCA levels incorporated in the Motor Traffic Act (which we also oppose).

It would be so much better, and more efficient, if the unions and the LGSA could reach agreement on a drug and alcohol policy which could then be recommended to the industry. That could keep the lunatics and the zealots at bay who think that developing an occupational health and safety policy is a great opportunity to invade the private lives of employees with random testing employees quietly going about their work and showing no signs of impairment.

It would also take the wind out of the sails of people like the HR manager who told depa that their council didn't want to employ "people who take illegal drugs".

Drug and alcohol policies can only operate properly in an environment where council provides a sympathetic and supportive approach to employees with drug and alcohol problems. There needs to be a cultural change away from the punitive so that employees can feel comfortable that if they make a complaint about potentially dangerous activities by a fellow employee, that the council's first approach would not be to punish them.

It will only be in a cooperative and non-punitive culture in the industry that employees can feel comfortable about getting assistance with drug and alcohol problems and their workmates can feel comfortable about helping them to get this assistance.

Au revoir Jody, welcome Sally

This will be Jody's last day for eight months or so. She is off to have a baby and we wish her all the best. In the meantime, Sally Anderson will be continuing our welcoming and professional services to members.

Sally has been told that all of our members are charming, hospitable and pleasant. She can't wait to talk to you.

 

Yours etc