Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales CITATION: Notification under s.130 by NSW Dept of Health in respect of the New South Wales Health Service, Hunter New England Division of a dispute with NSW Nurses' Assoc. re proposal to implement new system of rostering [2010] NSWIRComm 89 New South Wales Department of Health PARTIES: New South Wales Health Service, Hunter New England Division NSW Nurses' Association FILE NUMBER(S): IRC 616 of 2008 CORAM: Harrison DP CATCHWORDS: Notification of industrial dispute re change to roster system - balanced roster to replace request and responsive rosters - agreement on roster process to achieve high quality patient outcomes and sustainable levels of employee satisfaction - extensive mediation - evidence based study and trial processes leading to agreement on roster guidelines - further assisance of the Commission requested in implementation stage. LEGISLATION CITED: Industrial Relations Act 1996 HEARING DATES: 29 May 2008, 10 June 2008, 20 June 2008, 11 July 2008, 16 October 2008, 4 December 2008, 8 December 2009, 7 July 2010. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 12 July 2010 Mr M Sainsbury (Applicant) New South Wales Department of Health New South Wales Health Service, Hunter New England Division LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: Ms J Moffitt (Respondent) NSW Nurses' Association JUDGMENT: - 3 - INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES CORAM: HARRISON DP Monday, 12 July 2010 Matter No IRC 616 of 2008 Notification under section 130 by New South Wales Department of Health in respect of the New South Wales Health Service, Hunter New England Division of a dispute with New South Wales Nurses' Association re proposal to implement new system of rostering for nursing and midwifery staff STATEMENT [2010] NSWIRComm 89 1 This matter concerns the difficulties of developing a new system of rostering for nursing and midwifery staff within the Hunter New England Area Health Service (HNEAHS). 2 The issue first arose during 2007 at which time the parties were unable to engage or find a means of dealing with the tensions between request and response rostering systems. 3 The request roster process in place for many years fills shifts primarily to meet the needs and preferences of staff. The responsive rostering method proposed by HNEAHS approached the issue entirely from the clinical needs aspect. 4 The difficulty arises in constructing a rostering system which meets the clinical needs of the ward whilst providing sufficient worklife balance to recruit and retain staff. 5 Advocates of both systems suggested that their preferred method had the best patient outcomes. 6 The parties sought the assistance of the Commission by notification on 9 May 2008. The matter proceeded by way of mediation and the parties were able to agree upon an evidence based study of the respective systems and their ultimate value in delivering quality health care. 7 Experts were engaged by the parties and a paper produced in August 2009 titled "Balancing the Needs A Comparative Study into the Request and Responsive Rostering Methods in the Hunter New England Area Health Service". 8 The parties then engaged in detailed analysis and discussion, ultimately arriving at a document tendered in proceedings on 8 December 2009 titled "Balanced Rostering Guidelines Version:1.1". 9 The balanced roster system derived from the process described above is focused on delivering high quality patient outcomes, the purpose is described at p3 of the Guidelines in the following terms: "Purpose In NSW, the aim of the Health Service is to provide a good experience for people using public health services by making sure that these services are of high quality, appropriate, safe, available when and where needed, and coordinated to meet each individual's needs. Processes that focus on delivering high quality patient outcomes are paramount. In the health context, the primary objective of rostering is to plan and deploy the available skills and resources to best meet patient needs. This must be accomplished with the aim to deliver high levels of staff satisfaction and worklife balance. The rostering method must achieve this in way that meets the health services' objectives of patient outcomes and operational constraints, while also providing a safe working environment that delivers sustainable levels of employee satisfaction." 10 The Comparative Study makes the following acknowledgements: The project team wishes to recognise and acknowledge the significant contribution in time and effort of the Nurse Unit Managers and Nurses in the wards studied in this report. Their willing commitment and engagement throughout the process was central to the detail, completeness and success of the study. The project team would also like to recognise and acknowledge the support provided by the New South Wales Nurses Association and the Hunter New England Area Health Service. This study demonstrates the great potential that can be achieved through collaborative efforts when addressing complex issues such as rostering. 11 The Balanced Roster Agreement provides implementation and training guidelines, roster rules and guidance for the construction of rosters and consultation with staff in order to meet its purpose. 12 The parties are in agreement and are now ready to move to the implementation stage, which will commence with a process of broad consultation over the next few weeks. 13 There have been many people involved in the process, all of whom deserve credit and acknowledgement for their constructive and professional approach to the matter. As the proceedings have taken some time, appropriate to the gravity and complexity of the issue, some of those involved at the outset have experienced career change, however, their contribution through the course of the process cannot be underestimated. 14 Ms Joanne Moffitt, an Official of the NSW Nurses' Association, has led that side of the discussion throughout, appearing at proceedings on 7 July 2010 with Ms N Scilanto, Ms R Kiernan, Ms E Montgomery, Ms W Goodman, Ms L Reeves, Mr G Ribbons and Mr T Bellamy. 15 Mr Martin Sainsbury of HNEAHS has led that side of the discussion from the outset and appeared on 7 July 2010 with Ms T McCosker and Mr K Drinkwater. 16 The parties sought that these proceedings remain on foot should the assistance of the Commission as presently constituted be required in further mediation or conciliation during the implementation phase. 17 I congratulate the parties on the progress of this matter. Proceedings are stood over generally with leave to relist at the request of either party. _______ DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.