Monash College restructure - report of meeting 13 June
Meeting between NTEU & MC re. interim arrangements for T2 2012
- NTEU requested that MC provide justification for why they have not implemented the structure that was presented at FWA
- MC – these are interim arrangements in order to cover key functions but agreed that there were some deficiencies
- Plan to be fully operational by T3
- There were some workload concerns surrounding full implementation
- Full implementation would not have been possible with the time frame available
- Advertisements were online and in newspapers for the roles not yet filled for the new structure
- SR asked if MC could confirm that the structure being implemented would not serve the purpose of the full structure. MC confirmed that this was the case.
- NTEU asked why the interim structure had not been a subject of consultation prior to implementation. MC stated that it had not occurred to them to do so and offered formal apology.
- To avoid this occurring in the future, MC suggested that regular consultative meetings be scheduled while the new structure was being implemented. NTEU members agreed.
- NTEU raised concerns that because the interim model is not the model that was presented at FWA it is difficult to assess the effectiveness of the model before December when FWA has said the issue will be revisited.
- For this reason SR stated that union members are being advised to not work outside of their duty statements and to work solely within them as only this would allow evaluation of the new positions and their classifications.
- MC stated that they want staff to work to the PDs (‘bubble diagrams’ being their bible) so that the new structure can be tested
- MC stated that any duties not covered by the interim structure would be undertaken by the reporting manager and not delegated down, eg AD duties in Arts, such as approval of session timesheets, would be undertaken by the Director until an appointment was made
- SG queried why the Subject Coordinator in engineering was continuing for trimester 2 but the coordinator for engineering Maths was not, with the workload in the latter position being undertaken by the Academic Manager(Engineering)
- MC stated that other issues came up that led to maths coordinator not continuing but subject coordinator would
- NTEU raised concerns about a position where one individual in Engineering has been allocated the Unit Leadership responsibilities for 9 units.
- MC stated that the individual had signed an agreement to take on this workload
- MC indicated that this was a result of some unfilled unit leadership positions and some extenuating circumstances that could not be revealed to the meeting
- MC stated that it was not foreseen that there would be any delegation to others as a result of this allocation to one individual
- MC also stated that some of the 9 units had a significantly reduced workload compared to others which is why the total workload was judged to be acceptable
- This appears to be an open statement by MC that some units have a significantly reduced workload compared to others raises questions re. the ‘one pay scale for Unit Leadership’ model
- It also appears to be a breach of the design of the Unit Leader positions that was presented to us all and the FWA at the hearing.
- NTEU members sought clarification about the VRPs that were being offered when the restructure was initially announced.
- MC stated that a new round of VRPs would be being offered to be taken at the end of T2
- SR stated that the NTEU would need to be informed of staffing complement when considering these
- MC stated that they would adhere to the 50/30/20 ratio as per enterprise agreement
- MC stated that there was no plan for any compulsory redundancies
Monash College represented by - Faye Lambert, Julie Coleman, Kate Milne and Sarah Roser
NTEU represented by - Sandra Green, Ann Tahirovski, Ranjith Weerasinghe Joannah Cane and Stan Rosenthal