Page 2327 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 22 June 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The AEU has provided a reasonable account on behalf of their members. They report that their members respect accountability but are demanding efficiency in human resource practices. To that end, a motion in this place has been brought by Mr Doszpot. We have heard that it is taking valuable resources in staff time, and we do need to make sure that we are on top of this issue with respect to how much time it is taking in schools.
Initially, one might say that this is quite a minor matter to bring forward as a motion and, when you look at it, it does seem to be a minor administrative matter. But we do understand that there are a significant number of teachers who have signed a petition to say that it is impacting on them and therefore we do believe that this issue needs to be addressed.
I agree with the minister and the Australian Education Union that it is very important that leave forms be submitted by teachers who are absent and that they are done in a timely manner. After all, as the Education Union states, it is a requirement for teachers under the current enterprise agreement to furnish leave forms. One of the subclauses clearly states that “absences not covered by approved leave will be treated as an unauthorised absence and may result in salary and/or disciplinary action”. This is a basic industrial relations issue that the vast majority of us would understand.
It does, however, seem to be a little absurd to burden all teachers across the system with filling out a form when they have not taken leave. The Greens are concerned that front-line teachers have an increased impost placed upon them due to what could be seen as an inefficient system or definitely a system that needs streamlining and that this could be seen as a waste of their time and really taking away some of that time from their primary role of being the teachers of young people and children.
I acknowledge that there is a serious side to this. An audit was conducted to match leave taken and the forms required with a staff member’s recorded leave entries. This audit investigated a two-year period and it found that 1,600 Department of Education and Training officers apparently had discrepancies between leave taken and leave processed. I acknowledge that this accounts for one-third of the workforce and that it translated into a cost of approximately $2.4 million for the Department of Education and Training. I understand that the Education Union does not agree with these figures, but waste of a magnitude anywhere near this should be of some concern.
I am sure the Assembly would be united in its support of the minister and the department for recognising that it is important to ensure that we do not waste taxpayer funds, particularly in the areas around staff entitlements. So in this case, when leave taken is not recorded, we need to ensure that we have accurate and proper records. Surely, there is a much better way to deal with the issue than making all teachers submit forms every fortnight even when they do not take leave. To me, it would seem that the view of at least half of the union’s membership, the 1,500 who have signed the petition, is that there is a better way and that the directorate should be looking at a better way.
Whilst I understand that the union were involved in discussions regarding leave form compliance, and even the trialling of a new scheme, I understand that with regard to the one currently in place they have raised concerns with the directorate on many
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video