Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales CITATION: Notification under s 130 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 by Comm of Police of an industrial dispute with the Public Service Association and Professional Officers' Assoc Amalgamated Union of NSW re proposed bans [2008] NSWIRComm 34 APPLICANT: Commissioner of Police PARTIES: RESPONDENT: Public Service Association and Professional Officers' Association Amalgamated Union of New South Wales FILE NUMBER(S): IRC 128 of 2008 CORAM: Boland J CATCHWORDS: Industrial dispute - NSW Police Force - Proposal to restructure administrative classifications - Changes to employee roles and rostering - Re-training and relocation of employees - Voluntary redundancy - Conciliation conferences - Recommendation issued. LEGISLATION CITED: Industrial Relations Act 1996, ss 130, 134(2) HEARING DATES: 6, 8, 15 and 19 February 2008 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 19 February 2008 APPLICANT: Mr A J Woods Henry Davis York Lawyers LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: RESPONDENT: Mr S Little Public Service Association and Professional Officers' Association Amalgamated Union of New South Wales JUDGMENT: INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES CORAM: BOLAND J 19 February 2008 Matter No IRC 128 of 2008 Notification under s 130 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 by Commissioner of Police of an industrial dispute with the Public Service Association and Professional Officers' Association Amalgamated Union of New South Wales re proposed bans STATEMENT AND RECOMMENDATION [2008] NSWIRComm 34 1 On 5 February 2008, the Commissioner of Police notified the existence of an industrial dispute with the Public Service Association and Professional Officers' Association Amalgamated Union of New South Wales ('PSA'). The Commissioner sought the Commission's intervention to resolve a dispute over the proposed implementation of a new classification of General Administrative Support Officer ('GASO') within Local Area Commands ('LACs'). 2 The new role was designed to encompass duties presently carried out by General Support Officers ('GSOs'), Court Process Officers ('CPOs') and Clerical Officers ('COs'). That is to say, administrative staff will be reclassified as GASOs, subject to receiving appropriate training, with the idea being they will be capable of performing any or all of the work previously performed by the three classifications of GSO, CPO and CO. The Commissioner believed that the new GASO role would increase the effectiveness of the delivery of administrative support services within Local Area Commands, enhance the duties of administrative support staff and result in pay increases to a number of staff. 3 There are 80 LACs and within those LACS there are 546 GSO/CPO/CO positions. The proposed restructure will reduce that number to 498. Of the 48 positions that will become redundant 25 are presently vacant, thereby leaving 23 positions that will be directly affected by the restructuring. The Commissioner has called for expressions of interest in voluntary redundancy and there has been a considerable response. 4 The proposed changes may also mean that current rostering arrangements will change and staff will be required to work different hours. It may also result in staff being transferred to other LACs, depending on how the changes are to be implemented within individual LACs. There will be no forced redundancies. The changes would be managed mainly at a local level. 5 The proposed changes were first mooted in 2006. A consultative group was formed that consisted of LAC commanders, HR personnel and representatives of the PSA and Police Association. A timeline has been established for the implementation of the changes, the final phase being scheduled to occur from 7 April 2008. That involves, inter alia, the commencement of the GASO position (subject to training) and the implementation of new rosters. 6 The PSA regarded the proposed changes as merely an elaborate response to Treasury directions to reduce staff numbers. The PSA considered the proposal to be unworkable in its present form and that the implementation process should be placed on hold until the parties had the opportunity to undertake further consultation. The PSA indicated that in support of its position staff were intending to impose bans on administrative work from midnight on 7 February 2008. 7 The Police Association expressed its concern that the changes would have an impact on its members in the form of an increased workload. The Commissioner's representatives assured the Association that this would not be so. 8 Arising out of a conciliation conference chaired by the Commission on 6 February, the PSA agreed to suspend its decision to impose bans. On 7 February, the parties held discussions with staff at Hurstville Police Station to obtain a better understanding of the basis of the opposition to the proposed changes and reported back to the Commission on 8 February. 9 The opposition to the changes seems to stem from a number of concerns. There is concern about change itself, concern about changes to rostering arrangements and the impact that may have on family responsibilities such as childcare arrangements, concern about the prospect of transfer to another LAC and particular concern about the merger of classifications whose work is quite different. For example, clerical officers may deal with inquiries at the counter. This is regarded as requiring a particular skill in dealing with the public, particularly irate ones who have the need to visit a police station. Other clerical staff performing administrative work within the LAC find the counter work stressful. 10 On 15 February, following a request from the Commission, the PSA tabled its position regarding the proposed restructuring changes. Essentially, the PSA proposed that: · the current implementation process be suspended; · expression of interest for voluntary redundancy be issued to current permanent employees; · voluntary redundancies to be identified in consultation with the PSA. The deletion of positions to be approached on a State-wide basis using a common methodology; · rather than a single new position being created, that there be two new positions: GASO (operational) and GASO (administration). The first classification would be substantially the same as the current GSO role and the second would combine the functions of CO and CPO; and · there would be a series of 'business rules' to guide the implementation process. For example, it was proposed that a GASO (administration) would not be rostered to perform front counter duties other than in strictly limited circumstances; no employee would be forced to relocate; no impact on current job sharing arrangements. 11 It became apparent in the course of the conciliation conferences that it was unlikely there would be any agreement between the parties on measures to resolve their differences. Accordingly, the Commission indicated it would make a recommendation to the parties pursuant to s 134(2) of the Act. 12 In considering the terms of a recommendation I have been influenced by a number of factors. Firstly, discussions between the parties regarding the restructuring of classifications have been going on since 2006. The PSA has been a party to those discussions. As far as I am able to ascertain, it has not been until the most recent of times that the PSA has indicated in unequivocal terms its objection to the GASO classification. 13 After being aware of the nature of the Commissioner's restructuring proposal for many months and declining to stake out its opposition to GASO, and having allowed a vast amount of work to be completed in connection with the new classification it is, in my view, too late for the PSA to now opt for an entirely different proposal involving two classifications. This is not to be critical of the PSA. I recognise the difficulties of obtaining feedback from members on what is a reasonably complex restructuring proposal. And I also recognise that the PSA's dual classification approach is designed to meet the genuine concern of PSA members regarding front counter work. But it seems to me that if individuals are incapable of performing that work for one reason or another, notwithstanding they might have received the necessary training, that steps will be taken, within reason, to accommodate this incapacity. If such steps are not taken there are avenues available to the PSA to have the matter reviewed. 14 Secondly, employees will not be required to undertake any new work unless they have been properly trained. Thirdly, employees who undertake the wider range of duties inherent in the GASO classification will be remunerated accordingly. Fourthly, whilst new rostering arrangements will be negotiated and implemented at the local level they will need to accord with standard arrangements and be subject to oversight by the Rostering Implementation Committee. Any concern, including that an employee is being treated unfavourably in relation to rostering, is a matter that may be addressed either through the dispute resolution procedure in the relevant Award or through a special procedure established to deal with such matters. 15 Fifthly, if the proposed change will improve efficiency and productivity it is not for the Commission to impede that change unless the impact on employees is unreasonable and unfair. In that respect, I note that unlike the common experience in the private sector, no employee will be made compulsorily redundant, that is, no employee will lose his or her job as a consequence of the proposed changes unless the employee opts for voluntary redundancy. That employees may need to accommodate roster changes or even experience the inconvenience of relocation is not an unusual outcome where structural change is involved but as a general proposition, such consequences could not be considered unfair or unreasonable except where it is shown to be in individual cases. In relation to individual cases: · there will need to be reasonable and proper notice to and consultation with any individual employee in circumstances where the employee is to be relocated or where there is a legitimate objection by an employee to undertaking new aspects of work; · any employee with legitimate concerns, such as serious disruption to existing childcare or carer's responsibilities because of relocation or a rostering change will need to be given special consideration by the employer and a genuine endeavour made to accommodate the employee's difficulties; · job sharing arrangements should be able to be continued; · permanent part time employees should be able to continue to be employed on that basis notwithstanding the change in job title; and · if a dispute or difficulty involving an individual employee remains unresolved at the local level the parties should consider establishing a process for the matter to be referred to the regional level involving the PSA if the employee so requires it. 16 Sixthly, the Commission will make itself available to assist in the monitoring of the implementation of the changes by convening regular report back conferences and dealing with individual disputes if and when they arise. 17 Seventhly, the PSA should be kept advised of the process involving applications for voluntary redundancy and the effect that is having on the implementation of the restructuring plan overall. Recommendation 18 The Commission recommends that subject to the following matters, the proposal by the Commissioner of Police to introduce a new GASO classification, together with the accompanying restructuring changes, shall continue according to the current timeline: (1) Employees will not be required to undertake any new work unless they have been properly trained. (2) Whilst new rostering arrangements will be negotiated and implemented at the local level they will need to accord with standard arrangements and be subject to oversight by the Rostering Implementation Committee. Any concern, including that an employee is being treated at the local level unfavourably in relation to rostering, is a matter that should be addressed through the appropriate disputes procedure. (3) In relation to particular matters affecting individual employees the following procedures shall be adopted: (a) there will be proper notice to and consultation with any individual employee in circumstances where the employee is to be relocated or where there is a legitimate objection by an employee to undertaking new aspects of work; (b) any employee with legitimate concerns, such as serious disruption to existing childcare or carer's responsibilities because of relocation or a rostering change will need to be given special consideration by the employer and a genuine endeavour made to accommodate the employee's difficulties; (c) job sharing arrangements should be able to be continued; and (d) permanent part time employees should be able to continue to be employed on that basis notwithstanding the change in job title. (4) If a dispute or difficulty involving an individual employee remains unresolved at the local level the disputes resolution procedure in the award shall be followed. Alternatively, the parties may wish to give consideration to a special procedure that allows for consideration of any local issue to be considered at a regional level and if it is not resolved there, that the matter is then referred to the Commission. (5) The Commission will make itself available to assist in the monitoring of the implementation of the changes by convening regular report back conferences and dealing with individual disputes if and when they arise. (6) The PSA should be kept advised of the process involving applications for voluntary redundancy and the effect that is having on the implementation of the restructuring plan overall. (7) The parties will report back to the Commission at 9.00 am on Friday 29 February 2008. At the report back the Commission will consider an issue raised by Mr Little for the PSA regarding a draft roster drawn up at Hurstville LAC, which he contended was not workable. Mr Little indicated that similar problems were likely to emerge at other LACs. ___________________________________________ 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.