QTU members vote to continue the defence of their profession

Members have overwhelmingly re-affirmed support for taking 24-hour industrial action should it be necessary to defend their profession.

Members voting in the recent ballot overwhelmingly backed action should the Department of Education, Training and Employment attempt any of the following without consultation, negotiation and agreement with the QTU:

a) an annual performance review process that has not been negotiated and agreed with the QTU
b) “performance-based fixed-term contracts” for principals and deputy principals
c) performance bonuses for teachers or school leaders
d) any other infringements of conditions and entitlements flowing from the Great Teachers = Great Results action plan
e) negation or increase of class size targets, as proposed by the Commission of Audit.

The outcome of this ballot is significant. The QTU continues to rely on these ballot results when negotiating with the department on a range of issues. The significance of the initial ballot can be seen in the successful negotiations for the new Annual Teacher Performance Review process. As the ballot results were almost 12 months old it was important that members affirmed their commitment to take industrial action should any of the infringements listed above occur – the overwhelming support of members for this action further strengthens the QTU’s negotiating position.

The government is currently trying to remove a number of working conditions through the award stripping process. It is important to note that the matters identified as non-allowable matters will also apply to certified agreements and EB claims.

It is clear from the legislation that the government intends to remove those matters that it refers to as “non-allowable” in the next round of EB negotiations.

These matters are:

• “contracting provisions” that restrict or set conditions on contracting out of services
• employment security provisions
• union encouragement provisions
• policy incorporation
• training arrangements
• workload management
• delivery of services
• workforce planning.

The impact of this on the development of our next EB claim is two-fold:

• members would be unable to take protected industrial action should our claim contain “non-allowable” matters
• matters in a claim that are deemed “non-allowable” cannot be considered in arbitration.

In recent correspondence to the Union, the Minister has already identified that he believes matters such as class sizes, transfers, relocations, the Remote Area Incentives Scheme and workload management tools are matters of policy and therefore non-allowable. While the Union believes it is not for the Minister but for the QIRC to determine what matters may be non-allowable, it is still important for us to develop a response that protects members’ conditions.

Consequently, the QTU has developed a strategy that would see some of the matters that may be deemed non-allowable by the QIRC captured in other agreements with the department – a compact around professional issues and a compact that covers teaching and learning conditions.

Bargaining priorities

As part of the ballot process, schools were also asked to identify bargaining priorities which would be considered for inclusion in EB negotiations or compacts. The following are the main bargaining priorities as outlined by members:

• Class sizes
• Job security 
• Non-contact time
• Transfer and relocation system
• Pay
• RAIS
• Beginning teacher issues
• Workload issues
• Professional pay
• Resourcing of schools 
• The implementation of the Australian Curriculum and the use of C2C resources.

The QTU will continue to work through the information provided by schools to develop the claim for the relevant document, i.e. the EB8 claim, the QTU budget submission or a compact for each of the above priorities. Meetings will be held with members in term four to further outline the process of negotiations and campaigning to protect (and in some cases enhance) these conditions.

Kate Ruttiman
Deputy General Secretary

Queensland Teachers' Journal, Vol 119 No 7, 3 October 2014, p9