Bargaining Report 23 March 2010
After nearly nine months of not supporting tenure in its current form, the management group agreed to reinstate these provisions in full.
Agreed in principle: An improvement overall in relation to assessment time and the basis for reclassification as codified in the agreement, access to appeal, and full inclusion of the classification standards in the Agreement.
Discussions are continuing on the professional staff clause.
For academic staff, 40/40/20 as a guide and recognition of a 1725 hours per annum cap have been agreed in principle. Key sticking points are the NTEU claim that academic workload models should be developed at the academic unit (discipline or research centre) level, with ratification by the HoS, and the management proposal to remove the workload review process (currently the staff complaints process). We have also been confronted with a new management claim proposing "teaching-mostly" appointments (60:20:20).
Minimal progress was made in addition to the already agreed (and now announced) 25% loading and 9% superannuation. The sticking points are the inclusion of a % cap on casual academic numbers, and the inclusion of comprehensive rates for marking and assessment.
Discussion is continuing in relation to a monitoring committee, commitment to a genuine increase in the employment of Aboriginal staff, and the establishment of a community network group.
Dispute resolution/Review Committees
This has become a major area of disagreement. Specifically of concern are
the issues of nexus between the review committees process and dispute
settling procedure, review committee membership and union visibility in both clauses.
The move towards a more secure form of employment for many research staff has been impeded by a late management objection based on changes to the way in which research infrastructure is funded. The NTEU will continue to pursue this matter and remains strongly committed to achieving more stable forms of employment for this cohort of staff.
Senior management continues to insist that failure to participate in PDR be defined as "unsatisfactory performance". The NTEU rejects this notion. Management has indicated a preparedness to drop the claim if the NTEU will agree to a clause enabling termination of fixed term contract staff for unsatisfactory performance. We fail to see the connection and will approach each matter on its own merits and not as part of a horse trading exercise.
Post a comment
15 Paxtons Walk 281 North Terrace Palais Apartment complex
University of Adelaide
Phone: 08 8227 2384