Issue 233
, Friday 29 May 2015
Click here to view printer friendly PDF
In this issue
[1]
The trade union movement looks set to ramp up its
campaign on paid parental leave (PPL), with an Australian Council of Trade
Unions (ACTU) draft policy document demanding government-funded PPL be
boosted to 26 weeks and employers be required to supplement it with their
own schemes.
The May 7 draft policy paper, obtained
by Workforce
ahead of the ACTU triennial Congress next week, would commit the peak union
body to lobby for:
·
a govt-funded PPL
scheme of 26 weeks paid "at no less than the national minimum wage
plus superannuation"; and
·
a "mandated
top-up of the govt scheme to full wage replacement to ensure a
co-contribution from employers".
On May 12, Treasurer Joe Hockey
announced the govt would prevent parents accessing both the govt and
employer PPL schemes, which other senior ministers described as
'double-dipping' (WF
15/05/15).
Unions will also "campaign and bargain for an
increase to the 'dad and partner pay scheme' to provide eligible employees
with four weeks leave rather than two", the policy document said. They
will push for the accrual of entitlements including payment of public
holidays and employer super contributions during periods of paid and unpaid
parental and carers' leave.
Strengthen
bullying and adverse action claims
The ACTU document proposes extending the Fair Work
Commission's (FWC) jurisdiction to issue stop-bullying orders to "all
workers, not just those employed by constitutional corporations".
Unions should be able to apply to stop "systemic bullying rather than
the sole focus on individual complaints required to be made public",
it said. The ACTU proposed removing the "reasonable management action
taken in a reasonable manner" defence to bullying claims. It argued
the defence was "a means for employers to cover workplace
bullying".
It also wanted to reinstate the "essentially
beneficial and protective operation of the general protections provisions
of the FW Act" through either:
·
a positive
description of the relevant test of characterisation as an objective test;
or
·
excluding the
"purely subjective approach" to ascertaining the reasons for
adverse action.
The proposal responds to union fears courts are in
effect allowing decision-makers' evidence they did not take adverse action
for a prohibited reason to determine claims, after employer wins in the
High Court's BHP Coal
(WF
17/10/14) and Barclay
v Bendigo TAFE (WF7/09/2012).
Regulate labour
hire and supply chains: ACTU
The draft policy document called for FW Act
amendments "to facilitate and support parties negotiating arrangements
which have industry-wide or supply chain impact".
"In particular, Congress is concerned to
ensure collective agreements can cover labour hire workers who are
economically dependent servants and agents of an entity with which they
have no 'employment relationship'," it said.
The document backed "enterprise bargaining
across an industry or supply chain" as "more reflective of the
modern organisation of industries operating on the basis of joint
production and joint employment".
It proposed "the establishment of a
comprehensive national scheme for the registration, licensing and
regulation of labour hire agencies". In addition, unions should have
"unrestricted" rights to represent independent contractors. The
current system requires Australian Competition and Consumer Commission
approval for independent contractors to collectively bargain. The ACTU
proposed banning enterprise agreements (EAs) which "cover only one
employee" and EAs "made with a small number of employees prior to
the engagement of the rest of the workforce".
More worker
protections needed for strikes
The ACTU paper (above)
called for more protections for workers involved in strikes, ie:
·
removing the
secondary boycott provisions of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010;
·
requiring
employers to give "three clear working days' written notice" of a
lockout; and
·
ensuring employer
response action "must be a "proportional response" to
employees' protected action.
Lift good faith
bargaining requirements
The ACTU document proposed higher standards for
good faith bargaining including:
·
requiring
employers to disclose relevant and material information to bargaining parties
in a timely manner, while ensuring genuinely confidential information is
"treated appropriately";
·
requiring the
employer's "principal decision-maker" to participate in
bargaining;
·
prohibiting
employers from submitting an agreement to a vote until the bargaining
representatives are agreed a course or bargaining is at an impasse; and
·
promoting a
"normal expectation" that bargaining parties should reach an
agreement unless there are genuine reasons based on reasonable grounds not
to do so.
'Last resort'
arbitration for FWC
·
FW Act amendments
to empower FWC "to arbitrate disputes about any matters arising under
awards, agreements or the NES, as a last resort"; and
·
FW Act and state
referral legislation amendments to expressly permit the federal system,
including the FWC, "to deal with all public sector employment matters
that state govts have argued are subject to constitutional limitations,
such as job security and staffing levels".
Unions to
campaign on youth super
The draft document proposes an ACTU campaign to
"expand the superannuation guarantee to workers under the age of 18,
and remove the discriminatory requirement that workers under 18 must work
at least 30 hours per week to receive employer super contributions".
Other youth-oriented policies included:
·
opposition to
unpaid internships that are not part of an accredited course; and
·
a resolution
"to explore and support new organising strategies, particularly those
that integrate technology with campaigning".
FEG, modern
award review and IFA changes
The ACTU also proposed campaigning to ensure:
·
all employee
entitlements, including deductions, are fully recoverable from the Fair
Entitlements Guarantee (FEG);
·
abolition of
compulsory four yearly reviews of modern awards; and
·
abolition of
individual flexibility agreements (IFAs).
(Source:
Workforce 19625, 22 May, 2015)
[2]
Aurizon has terminated 12 expired enterprise
agreements (EAs) so it can start redundancies and cut allowances before the
Full Federal Court issues its decision in a union appeal to prevent the
termination.
Yesterday (May 21) Justices
Christopher Jessup, Richard Tracey and John Reeves heard the Qld
rail unions' appeal (WF
1/05/15) against a Fair Work Commission full bench decision
allowing Aurizon to terminate the EAs (WF
24/04/15). The court reserved its decision.
Immediately after the hearing Aurizon terminated
the 12 EAs, moving 3,500 employees onto the Rail Industry Award 2010.
Aurizon said in a statement it had undertaken to
maintain current base wages, super and leave accruals for six months but
"there will be immediate changes for affected employees, including the
'no forced redundancy' clause ceasing to operate and the loss of some
allowances".
The company plans to make 160 employees at its
Redbank workshop redundant, with further cuts to follow.
Aurizon had said it would delay the redundancies
until the unions' appeal was heard to "minimise the disruption to our
employees and customers" (WF
8/05/15). But the company has since clarified it meant only
to delay until the conclusion of the hearing, not the determination of the
appeal.
Rail Tram and Bus Union national secretary Bob
Nanva told Workforce
the full court "must be wondering what the hell is going on"
because Aurizon terminated the EAs on "the very day" of the
appeal.
"Aurizon has effectively given the Federal
Court a single-fingered salute. It is an act of pure, brazen arrogance by a
company that's out of control," Nanva said.
Aurizon chief executive Lance Hockridge said
termination of the EAs "means a range of legacy conditions, that are a
hangover from government ownership and restrict Aurizon from making changes
in a competitive market, will disappear".
(Source:
Workforce 19625, 22 May, 2015)
[3]
The Federal Government will "partner with
Australia's largest employers to help increase their average Indigenous
employment rate to at least 3% of their workforces by 2020", assistant
employment minister Luke Hartsuyker has announced. Its Employment Parity
Initiative will target an extra 20,000 Indigenous Australians in jobs
within five years by supporting private sector employers such as Accor
Hotel Group and Compass
Group Aust. Talking to the May 20 Indigenous Employment
Conference, Hartsuyker said
this was on top of the Commonwealth public sector target of
"increasing its Indigenous workforce to 3% by 2018, which means an
extra 7,500 people". Hartsuyker said the Govt's aim of having 3% of
C'wealth procurement contracts with Indigenous suppliers by 2020 would
boost its current value of $6.2m to some $135m a year. By supporting
Indigenous business that should also boost Indigenous employment, he said.
"As at 31 March 2015, there were
around 78,000 Indigenous job seekers on the Job Services Australia
caseload, around 9% of the total caseload. Of these, 65% were in the most
disadvantaged streams in Job Services Australia (JSA) - compared to 38%
of all job seekers," he said. He said JSA fees have been
restructured around job retention with "new outcome payments at 4, 12
and 26 weeks". "For the first time, there will be Indigenous
Outcome Targets, to ensure jobactive
(the employment services model replacing JSA July 1)
providers are achieving job outcomes for Indigenous job seekers at the same
rate as other job seekers in their region."
(Source:
Discrimination Alert 470, 25 May, 2015)
[4]
An employer springing a disciplinary meeting on an
employee was a "threatening" rather than a reasonable management
action, the Fair Work Commission (FWC) has found.
Despite the ambush, FWC refused a stop-bullying
order because the employer dealt with the probationary employee fairly
after the incident and in the face of the worker's inflammatory emails
calling for the dismissal of his alleged persecutors.
Radiologist James Willis complained that
on May 30, 2014 the general manager and human resources manager
of his employer Capital Radiology Pty Ltd held a disciplinary interview
with him without notice.
He said the GM "unreasonably berated
him" while the HR manager "demonstrated amusement at his
predicament".
Willis sought stop-bullying orders against his
employer and the two managers.
Capital Radiology had lost a bid to have the
application dismissed after Commissioner John Lewin rejected its claim
the meeting was reasonable management action (WF
20/02/15).
Employer
patient in face of worker's inflammatory emails
In the substantive decision, Cmr Lewin said the
meeting without warning was "unreasonable action carried out in an
unreasonable manner".
Willis was "subject to severe criticism based
on complaints by a person employed by a different entity", he said.
This would have been "threatening", especially seeing as Willis
had only recently started work and was on probation.
The cmr said a reasonable course of action would
have been to advise Willis of the meeting and its purpose and then explain
expectations about his performance.
Capital Radiology engaged in "repeated
unreasonable behaviour" by starting a disciplinary process which
"risked injury of Willis' psychological health and wellbeing", he
said.
Cmr Lewin noted Willis' relationship with Capital
Radiology had become "very strained" and Willis had brought
Federal Circuit Court proceedings against it for alleged "breaches of
his workplace rights".
But the cmr found that since Capital Radiology
withdrew notice of the disciplinary process it had not taken any further
unreasonable actions and had kept the two managers away from Willis.
The employer handled the matter with "restraint
and patience" and showed "careful attention to procedural
fairness" while Willis was now stood down with pay, he said.
Willis, on the other hand, "has not been
fully cooperative" and had sent "inflammatory emails" which
made "serious allegations" against the two managers, demanding
their dismissal and giving "derogatory descriptions" of their
character.
Cmr Lewin held in light of Capital Radiology's
"fair procedure" he was not satisfied there was any risk of
bullying to Willis, and dismissed the application.
(James
Willis v Marie Gibson; Capital Radiology; Peita Carroll [2015], FWC 3538,
22/05/2015)
(Source:
Workforce Daily 19631, 25 May, 2015)
[5]
Globalisation, the fracturing of the employment
relationship and the politicisation of industrial relations are rendering
labour law increasingly irrelevant, a former union organiser turned
management academic has argued.
Delivering a speech
at the NSW Industrial Relations Society conference last week, University of
Technology assistant professor Sarah Kaine argued Australia needed to look
beyond narrow economic questions and reconsider what labour law was
relevant to.
"If I wanted to be provocative I'd say that
labour law is a side show – and that the real game is political," she
said. "But it doesn't have to be that way."
Kaine listed three reasons for the declining
relevance of labour law:
Fragmentation
of employment relationship
Labour law's "problem number one" was
the "porous" boundaries between organisations as well as between
nations, Kaine argued.
Companies were moving away from in-house
production to the "fragmentation of business functions across
intricate networks and supply chains".
That altered the power dynamics between firms and
blurred organisation boundaries. It also led to an increase in insecure
work, associated with poorer wages and conditions.
"At a legal level, these changes challenge
the basis of traditional industrial law focused as it is on the primacy of
the direct employment relationship and attempts to regulate it based on
organisational and national boundaries."
It meant labour law was covering a shrinking
percentage of the workplace, with an estimated 40% of the workforce now
falling under the broad definition of "precarity".
Impact of other
areas of regulation on IR
While Australia had a long history of linking
other policy areas to IR, such as tax and the White Australia policy, Kaine
argued the contemporary context was different.
"[W]hat is different now is that along with
those other regulatory mechanisms, historically there was a robust
arbitration system and we did not have the same type of fragmentation or
organisational blurriness that we experience now."
She noted that successive govts had also been
"actively looking for ways around the constitutional constraints of
the labour power".
Further, globalisation was challenging the very
sovereignty of Australia law, Kaine argued, citing free trade agreements
such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
In the TPP, domestic laws become subordinate to
provisions in the agreement allowing foreign companies to sue countries for
non-compliancethrough Investor-State Dispute Settlement procedures.
Kaine said that "raises questions about who
is ultimately influencing not only our trade policy put our capacity to set
and enforce minimum standards through national labour legislation".
"How relevant is our labour law going to be
in that environment?"
Politicisation
of labour law
Kaine argued that while IR had always been
"hot area" of political contestation, "something has changed
over the past 20 to 30 years".
IR was now politicised "to a point in which
no sensible or mature public conversation can be had about what constitutes
an appropriate legal framework".
"We have become 'discursively disabled' … .
We seem to be stuck in party political rut in which thoughtful debate has
ceded to tabloid ideology."
Some had argued this was due to the dominance of
neoliberal thought, while others framed it with the "international
decline in social democracy or a reconfiguration of the social
contract".
Whatever the cause, Kaine argued the main idea of
labour law had shifted from a "countervailing force to counteract
inequality of power" to a "tool of economic policy".
That meant the debate about labour law was
"often limited to the benefits for business".
Labour law failure
sparks quest for alternative
Kaine argued all three factors meant civil society
and even regulators like the Fair Work Ombudsman with its "proactive
compliance deeds" were looking to other regulatory solutions –
"with mixed success".
This area of "co-regulation", in which
non-state actors become increasingly involved in developing and enforcing
labour regulation outside the strict bounds of labour law, could be seen in
codes of conduct in contract cleaning and the campaign to regulate pay rates
for truck owner-drivers.
However, Kaine said it would be
"disingenuous" to argue these innovations "somehow escape
that key weakness of labour law".
"[T]hat is, these innovations in labour
regulation are themselves subject to the political breeze of the day,"
she said.
She noted the Road and Safety Remuneration
Tribunal was under review, cleaner contractor guidelines were scrapped as
part of a red tape repeal day and proactive compliance deeds had yet to be
applied on a large scale.
But Kaine argued labour laws should not just party
politics. She called for a mature debate among the public and IR
practitioners about what constitutes a "truly fair" IR system and
what can be done to protect "whatever version of Australian equity and
fairness it is that we still hold dear".
"Perhaps we need to once again expand our
palate and ask ourselves some serious questions - not about the relevance
of labour law but a bigger question – what do we need it to be relevant
to?"
Kaine is a former organiser with the ACTU and
former junior vice president of the ALP. She is the wife of Transport
Workers Union national secretary Tony Sheldon.
An edited version speech is available here.
(Source:
Workforce Daily 19631, 25 May, 2015)
[6]
The Federal Government will provide $1.4m over
four years to implement a parliamentarians' injury compensation scheme
beginning January 1, 2016. The federal budget
papers said the scheme would "provide a senator or member with an
entitlement to compensation in respect of an injury that arises out of, or
in the course of the performance of, his or her duties as a
parliamentarian". A spokesperson for Special Minister of State Michael
Ronaldson told WCR
Comcare would administer a scheme modelled on, "but not a carbon copy
of", the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988. He
acknowledged parliamentarians aggrieved by the outcome of personal injury
claims could apply to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for relief.
(Source:
Workers Compensation Report 1018, 26 May 2015)
[7]
The SA Government is close to finalising its panel
of conciliation officers for the SA Employment Tribunal (SAET) ahead
of July 1, when the Return to Work Act takes effect (WCR
16/12/14). Full-time, part-time and sessional conciliation
officers are to be appointed, with the manager of conciliation services set
to earn up to $122,879. Meanwhile, Monday June 1 is the earliest
state Cabinet can consider the appointment of a new principal registrar for
SAET, WCR
has been told.
(Source:
Workers Compensation Report 1018, 26 May 2015)
[8]
The SA Workers Compensation Tribunal (WCT) has
found case law that was sought to bind a worker's injury to that strictly
considered by a review officer in the early stages of her claim was
distinguishable. In so doing, Auxiliary Justice (AJ) Malcolm Gray
found Southern Cross Care (SCC) (SA & NT) Inc worker Allison Reade did
not have a capacity to work because of a psychiatric injury stemming from a
2008 back injury. On March 14, 2008, SCC accepted Reade's claim
for what was described as "lower back sprain" and determined she
was totally incapacitated for work.
On September 16, 2009, SCC determined,
on the basis of a report from orthopaedic surgeon Dr George Potter, that
Reade had no entitlement to compensation for non-economic loss by way of a
lump sum under s43 of the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1986.
On December 28, 2011, SCC, relying on
s35B of the Act, determined Reade's entitlement to weekly payments were to
be discontinued. SCC was satisfied on the basis of its medical evidence
Reade had a capacity to work. Then on August 9, 2012, SCC
determined it was not required to establish a rehabilitation program that
provided for a "home assistance regime". On May 13,
2013, SCC also determined to reject Reade's claims for certain medical
expenses, cost of physiotherapy, gym membership, chemist expenses and
travel expenses incurred mostly from April to Dec 2012 and
claimed under s32 of the Act. It argued those expenses had not been
reasonably incurred. SCC found Reade had not sustained a compensable
thoracic spine injury and she was not entitled to an assessment under s43.
In his reasons on May 5, AJ Gray said GM Holden Automotive Ltd v Wey
Ping Lu (1996) case law was distinguishable. In his view, the
determination SCC made, "unlike the position appertaining to the
employer in Lu's case, squarely puts in issue the question of a disabling
diagnosable psychiatric illness and, in so far as it may be a
broader question, a chronic pain syndrome or condition".
AJ Gray said it was of course still necessary for
the evidence relied on by Reade to establish there was a psychiatric or
psychological condition and "its consequence was a sequelae of the
injury arising out of or in the course of the worker's employment".
SCC argued Reade created "a false
impression" about the injuries she claimed to have sustained as to
their extent and effect on her. Particular reference was made to her presentation
to medical practitioners of minimal ability to move her head left or right,
lack of substantial movement in her back or legs and her reliance on a
walking stick, and walking in a hobbled over fashion with unusual gait.
AJ Gray said it was "one thing to suggest
[Reade's] presentation to medical practitioners for examination is guarded
and restrained in demonstrating movement without pain". It was another
to say such a presentation was a "deliberate and conscious
construct" rather than the effect of her wish to present her best case
and to genuinely believe that it was the best she could do.
A "factor" AJ Gray regarded as more
persuasive was the extent Reade claimed to be able to accomplish the
ordinary tasks of living. "In that regard she has consistently
presented as doing as much as she can and demonstrated a significant
disconnect between her physical presentation to those examining her and
what she has described as being able to do," AJ Gray said.
Ultimately, he accepted evidence Reade was
suffering from a "psychiatric condition as a pain disorder in the area
of a somatoform disorder caused by unconscious conflicts where the emotions
are playing a significant part in the production of pain".
Reade 'did not fall into category' for work capacity
AJ Gray (above)
accepted that assessment of Reade's presentation "as one of an actual
pain experience unconsciously generated". He set aside SCC's
assessment that Reade "did not fall within the category of having no
current work capacity". AJ Gray ordered parties to convene to assess
medical expenses. (Reade
v Southern Cross Care (SA & NT) Inc [2015], SAWCT 15,
05/05/2015)
(Source:
Workers Compensation Report 1018, 26 May 2015)
[9]
Victoria Trades Hall Council (VTHC) secretary Luke
Hilakari has revealed a plan to target school children for union membership
and organise young workers in hospitality and retail industries.
Hilakari made the comments at a 'fringe' session
on organising at the Australian Council of Trade Unions Congress today (May
26).
The VTHC planned "to give every kid in high
school a union work card", Hilakari said, likening it to Commonwealth
Bank of Australia's successful 'Dollarmite' accounts targeting young school
children.
He said students could organise campaigns in their
schools like getting ethically-sourced chocolate in their canteens or
Textile Clothing and Footwear Union-approved school uniforms, which would
teach practical campaigning skills.
Hilakari also revealed a plan to target
youth-heavy industry sectors for organising and recruitment, such as
hospitality and retail sectors.
Workers in these sectors had industrial concerns
like being "paid in pizza" or below minimum wage, he said.
"That's a prime opportunity for us as organisers."
Hilakari said that VTHC had run sessions with
young workers to gauge their concerns and they had raised sexual harassment
in the workplace, being paid cash in hand and safety.
Hilakari championed the importance of data and
sharing of contact lists and petitions between unions. Having detailed
information about members' and workers' concerns allowed campaigners to
have an "authentic conversation" with voters about issues that
matter to them, he said.
Looking at petitions and sign-in sheets at union
events could help identify people who were passionate about union causes,
he said.
"If a member has filled in five or six
petitions – make them a delegate. If a non-member signs three or four
times, ask them to join the union."
Unions need
numbers not just strategy: delegate
Professionals' Australia chief executive Chris
Walton said the union movement must maintain focus on increasing numbers,
because "if you don't have adequate power, adequate numbers of
members, you can't win campaigns even if you get [everything else]
right".
"Do we just keep defensively running the next
state election campaign? Will the door to door [campaigning] model support
significant growth? I don't think the debate's been had adequately,"
Walton said.
He asked why the union movement was campaigning on
penalty rates "without [the campaign] being completely connected with
workers".
Even if organising and recruiting around this campaign
were unsuccessful, the movement would still appear "connected to
workers" and the debate would be framed "as a workers' issue, not
one about institutions and laws".
Walton said the union movement should focus on
workers it currently classes as too hard to organise, such as hospitality
workers.
"[Nobody is willing] to do a traditional
organising model in hospitality. But look at the overseas model, they've
organised workers in Walmart. Let's have a go," he said.
(Source:
Workforce Daily 19632, 26 May, 2015)
[10]
The decline of traditional employment
relationships due to digital disruption and globalisation has led to a
'trickle up' effect in wealth, according to Australian Council of Trade
Unions (ACTU) secretary Dave Oliver.
Oliver made the comments about growing income
inequality at the opening of the ACTU's triennial Congress today (May 26).
He reiterated his comments made in an interview to
Workforce
that the 'liquid workforce' created by digital platforms like Uber and
Freelancer was contributing to insecure work (WFD 25/06/15).
Working on these platforms was akin to 'zero hours
contracts' because they encouraged "a reverse auction where the lowest
bidder wins and the worker loses", he said.
Oliver warned of the emergence of "monolithic
empires" such as Google, Microsoft, and Apple which he said
"contributed to the rise in inequality".
He compared Sony, the $18bn technology business,
with Snapchat, the $19bn app-based photo sharing service. Sony, he said,
had "10,000s of employees" compared to Snapchat which could
"fit its entire operation under this one roof", of just 1,000
ACTU delegates.
Oliver said digital disruption and globalisation
were combining to cause a 'trickle up' effect - "more money at the
top, less at the bottom, and income not being distributed fairly".
Australia was now "11th most unequal of 34
OECD members", he said.
ACTU president Ged Kearney opened Congress with a
call for "a new social compact that delivers a fair distribution of
wealth for all Australians".
Kearney said workers are suffering under the
burden of "weak wage growth, longer commuter times, insecure work and
unemployment". "Wages' share of national income at close to
record lows," she said.
Kearney formally launched the ACTU's six point
charter of its 'Build a Better Future' campaign, which is centred around
improvements in the social wage including health, education, better public
services, secure retirement and a "fair go for all" in tax (WFD 25/06/15).
The charter was adopted unanimously by Congress
this morning.
(Source:
Workforce Daily 19632, 26 May, 2015)
[11]
A NSW north-coast rock quarry company's capacity
to pay fines ordered by the Land and Environment Court (LEC) is
"questionable" as it has "no assets", has multiple
creditors and "is no longer a going concern".
At the Corinda quarry's height of production
Wyanga Holdings Pty Ltd extracted 368,363 tonnes of gravel and/or rock
from February 1, 2012, to January 31, 2013. However,
that was more than seven times its environmental protection licence's (EPL)
annual limit of 50,000 tonnes. Wyanga delivered almost all the extracted
material to Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd and Fulton Hogan Pty Ltd's Pacific
Highway upgrade for the then NSW Roads and Traffic Authority. Some tonnage
was supplied to Coffs Harbour City Council. The highway upgrade between
Sapphire and Woolgoolga finished in late 2013.
On May 15, NSW LEC Justice Terry
Sheahan fined Wyanga and its two directors a total of $106,500. Wyanga and
directors Joseph and Louise Cauchi pleaded guilty to nine of 12
charges and agreed to pay $90,000 for the Environment Protection
Authority's (EPA) legal costs. Justice Sheahan sentenced Wyanga and
the Cauchis on all 12 matters after they exceeded the EPL annual extraction
limit over 2.5 successive licence years and gave misleading information to
the EPA (EM
17/06/14).
Justice Sheahan held Joseph Cauchi "more
culpable" than Louise for the EPL exceedances, fining him a total of
$76,000 for four breaches of the Protection of the Environment Operations
(PEO) Act 1997. He fined Louise Cauchi a total of $27,000 and found her
"primarily culpable" for supplying "false and
misleading" information in a 2012 annual return to the EPA. He was
satisfied the failure to disclose the exceedance was "at least
negligent, and really quite reckless". He noted the prosecutor
conceded it couldn't establish the "criminal onus" that Wyanga
and its directors "deliberately misled" the EPA and it remained a
"rational hypothesis" the breach was "inadvertent".
However, the prosecutor submitted there was "no satisfactory
explanation" for the omission because the defendants disclosed other
breaches in the return. Those were unrelated to the proceedings
before Justice Sheahan.
The judge said Joseph and Louise were
Wyanga's "directing mind and will". He ordered Wyanga to pay a
total $3,500 for its four PEO Act breaches. Justice Sheahan
apportioned the fines among the three defendants to avoid "possible
triple" punishment.
Outside the court on May 21, EPA north
branch director Gary Davey said
Wyanga's EPL was revoked after the court case. Earlier,
in August 2013, the EPA had suspended the licence after issuing
repeated warnings about the exceedances, "which the company continued
to ignore", Davey said. (Environment
Protection Authority v Wyanga Holdings Pty Ltd; Environment Protection
Authority v Cauchi [2015], NSWLEC 78,
15/05/2015)
(Source:
Environmental Manager 1002, 26 May 2015)
[12]
The Vic Environment Protection Authority's powers
to ensure environmental justice principles are adhered to and "the
environment is protected for the benefit of the community" will come
under scrutiny in a new review.
Vic environment, climate change and water minister
Lisa Neville announced the inquiry last week, saying the relevant
legislation was almost 46 years old and the regulator needed to "keep
up with the times". The review would start in June and
report in March 2016, she said.
Former state justice department secretary Penny
Armytage will chair the review. Former 2009 Bushfires Royal Commission
CEO Jane Brockington and NT EPA non-executive director Janice Van
Reyk will join the review committee. Its terms of reference
include examining the scope and adequacy of the EPA's statutory powers; the
EPA's role in public health issues; community and industry expectations;
and its "appropriate" role in protecting the environment. Whether
the EPA's governance and funding allow it to "effectively and
efficiently" discharge its powers and perform its duties would be
studied.
(Source:
Environmental Manager 1002, 26 May 2015)
[13]
The Tas Government has appointed a new Environment
Protection Authority (EPA) director and three new board members, including
a new chair and deputy chair.
Former resources director at the state Department
of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (DPIPWE) Wes Ford
has been appointed as EPA director to replace retiring director Alex
Schaap. Ford has held several senior govt positions, most recently
AgriGrowth acting deputy secretary.
Warren Jones has been elevated to EPA chair
after serving as deputy chair since 2012. Jones was DPIPWE's
environment/EPA division GM. The new board deputy chair is Anthony Ferrier,
Kingborough Council's current deputy GM. Professor Colin Buxton, a former
director of the University of Tas's Fisheries, Aquaculture and Coasts
Centre was appointed to the EPA board. He joins new member Catherine
Murdoch, Tasmanian Irrigation Pty Ltd environment manager.
(Source:
Environmental Manager 1002, 26 May 2015)
[14]
Federal environment minister Greg Hunt has asked
the Qld Government to produce an environmental impact statement (EIS) to
support its plan to dump dredge material from its Abbot Point Port's expansion
proposal on industrial land next to an existing coal terminal (EM
31/03/15, 29/04/14).
Renamed the "Abbot Point growth gateway
project", the new Qld Govt wants to dispose of project dredge material
on unused industrial land instead of on nearby protected wetlands or
undersea within the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) marine park, as the former
state govt had proposed and the Federal Govt had approved.
Hunt on May 14 decided
he would assess the proposal by an EIS under the federal Environment
Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act. That was despite a new
bilateral agreement with Qld under s45 of the EPBC Act allowing the state
govt to assess development projects on the Federal Govt's behalf.
The new Qld Govt's coal terminal expansion project
would dredge about 61ha of seabed within the port's limits, outside the GBR
park, it said. It would increase the port's capacity to handle coal exports
from 50m to 120m tonnes a year to cater for planned Galilee Basin coal
exports, including Adani Mining Pty Ltd's proposed $16.5m Carmichael Mine.
"The full cost of the EIS will be paid for by
mine proponent, Adani, not taxpayers, under an agreement with the
govt," Qld state development minister Dr Anthony Lynham said.
Meantime, the legality of Hunt's 2014 approval for the Carmichael mine is
being challenged for a third time in the Qld Land Court (EM
20/01/15).
In a statement
of reasons, Hunt said he'd reviewed Qld Govt advice and found the project
"was not eligible" to be assessed under the bilateral agreement.
Given that, plus a lack of detail on the project's final design and
mitigation measures, and uncertainty about "the nature and scale"
of its impact on matters of national environmental significance (the GBR
world heritage protected area) Hunt said he'd accepted advice he assess it
with an EIS. He agreed, "in particular" with his
"department's view assessment by EIS would provide a robust and thorough
assessment … and the opportunity for public engagement" to help him
make an informed decision on whether to allow the port's expansion to
proceed.
GBR reg change
to formalise dredge backflip
Hunt's decision (above)
was a backflip on his October 2014 decision to not require an EIS
for dredge material to be disposed on Canley Vale wetlands next to the GBR
marine park. It triggered a Federal Court challenge during which Hunt
promised the court he would provide one days' warning to the Qld Environment
Defenders Office of any decision on the former Qld Govt's project
application. (EM
20/01/15).
But on May 17, Hunt said he'd
"formally approved" an amendment to GBR regulations to prevent
any dredge material being disposed "in the entire 344,400km2
park". "This covers 100% of the area under Commonwealth
legislative control and 99% of the world heritage area." The Qld Govt
had committed to a dredge disposal ban in the remaining 3,000km2
area under its jurisdiction which included port areas, he said. The
regulatory change has yet to be registered.
Hunt's GBR protection decisions precede a UNESCO
World Heritage Committee (WHC) decision on whether to list the GBR world
heritage area as "in danger" at a meeting in June.
(Source:
Environmental Manager 1002, 26 May 2015)
[15]
Plans to expand the national workplace safety
regulator's role were a "disaster waiting to happen" in light of
its "demonstrated inability to regulate safety in the
workplaces", a lawyers' association claims. The Australian Lawyers
Alliance (ALA) used a recent prosecution against construction
giant John Holland (JH), which Comcare oversees, as evidence of the
federal safety regulator's "series of failures" (OHN
25/3/15). ALA national president Andrew Stone
said JH had breached occupational health and safety (OHS) laws several
times before the successful prosecution. He said the company was fined
$110,000 after a worker suffered a head laceration when a bridge
at the Brisbane Airport Link site collapsed. Some months earlier, a worker
died when he was crushed to death at the same worksite in an incident still
being pursued by the federal safety regular. "There are too many cases
like this which clearly show Comcare has a patchy record on workplace
safety enforcement and oversight," Stone said. "This court ruling
shows that the Comcare scheme has put workers' lives at risk by failing to
enforce OHS regulations in the limited number of workplaces for which it
has responsibility. In the case, it was noted that JH had breached the
OHS Act 1991 Act a number of times already. "It must be asked: where
was Comcare in preventing these breaches?" Stone said.
"If Comcare is struggling to adequately regulate worker
safety across only 33 companies, why on earth would you put more
workers from across the country at risk by allowing employers to leave
well-funded and well-administered state-based schemes to join Comcare's
poorly functioning regulatory arrangements?". A spokesperson for
employment minister Senator Eric Abetz told OHN the ALA had an "unfortunate
history of defending the rorts and loopholes that currently exist in the
Comcare scheme". "The very fact that a prosecution was taken and
successful shows that Comcare is an effective and active regulator,"
he said. "(The ALA) is putting the interests of those who would
benefit from the current flaws in the scheme at the expense of taxpayers
who fund the scheme." Stone said Comcare reported 13 workplace
fatalities within its mandate in its 2014 annual report.
The Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), at
its annual congress in Melbourne, attacked the Comcare reforms urging the
Federal Govt to dump its legislation. It pushed for stronger OHS laws to
fine or jail directors for safety breaches to ensure companies could not
restructure to avoid penalties for negligent conduct.
(Source:
Occupational Health News 1111, 27 May, 2015)
[16]
The Federal Court has held the meaning of
discrimination under adverse action laws is narrower than under
anti-discrimination laws, in a decision that found a traumatised train
driver's symptoms of stress were not enough to show he had been fired
because of his mental illness.
Justice Melissa Perry partly allowed RailPro's
appeal of Judge Denys Simpson's 2013 decision that found the train
operator had taken adverse action against Colin Flavel when it fired him.
Flavel had refused to take the controls of a train as part of a competency
test six weeks after he had been involved in a train collision (WF
4/10/2013).
Judge Simpson's decision – delivered more than 12
months after hearing - found Flavel had told RailPro he would be violently
ill if he drove the train and that this was because of his subsequently
diagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder arising from the collision.
The judge found RailPro's dismissal was because
Flavel had a disability under the Fair Work Act's (FW Act) s351
and had exercised his workplace right to protect his own and others' safety
under the SA Occupational Health and Safety Act as per s340(1)(a).
Discrimination law requirements don't apply
However, Justice Perry held Judge
Simpson had wrongly interpreted s351(1) in finding it had been breached
because the dismissal contravened the Disability Discrimination Act (DD
Act).
Section 351 requirements for discrimination were
different from the DD Act's "expanded" meaning of discrimination,
she said.
While s351 did not require the DD Act's comparison
between treatment of employees to prove discrimination, it was also not
enough that discrimination under s351 was "a perceived, as opposed to
actual, disability or a disability of an associate".
Further, a DD Act breach occured if the act was
done for a prescribed reason, as opposed to it being a "substantial
and operative" reason under the FW Act.
In this context, the "carve out" in
s351(2) – saying s351(1) did not apply if the conduct was "not
unlawful under any anti-discrimination
law" – simply "avoids a result whereby the FW Act
imposed more onerous obligations upon an employer than those already
imposed upon her or him under general anti-discrimination laws".
"In effect s351 proscribes a 'subset' of that
which is proscribed under the DD
Act," Justice Perry said.
The converse was not, however, true, she said.
Conduct that breached the DD
Act did not therefore also breach 351(1) "contrary to the
assumption apparently made by [Judge Simpson]".
Employer only
aware of 'attack on the nerves'
Despite the difference between
statutes, Justice Perry held "disability" under s351 still
"cannot be limited" to the "underlying diagnosed medical or
physiological or psychological condition" and could refer to the
symptoms of that condition.
"Unless the term included symptoms or
manifestations of the disability, the Act may well fail to
achieve its object."
Therefore, the fact Flavel's condition was not
diagnosed before his dismissal was "notnecessarily an impediment"
to finding he was dismissed because of his disability.
However, Justice Perry said courts still
needed to give "particularly close consideration" to an
employer's reasons for adverse action "where it may not be
apparent that the symptom or manifestation is in fact a symptom or
manifestation of a disability".
In Flavel's case, Justice Perry held the
evidence of his symptoms went "no higher than to suggest that the
decision-makers were aware that Flavel had had an 'attack of nerves'".
She agreed with RailPro that disability "does
not include ordinary human responses to particular circumstances, such as
nervousness".
"[K]nowledge by a lay person that a person
feels nauseous and has other feelings typically related to nervousness in a
stressful situation like an assessment is likely to fall short of amounting
to knowledge of a disability."
Judge Simpson's finding to the contrary that
RailPro's decision-makers were aware of Flavel's condition was
"glaringly improbable", she said.
The judge's findings Flavel was "putting on a
brave face" after the train crash and RailPro managers were not
"qualified" to give opinions about his psychological state were
inconsistent with a finding they were "aware" of his state.
A letter from Flavel's wife to RailPro showing he
was under stress and grief was also not sufficient.
For Judge Simpson to infer that
"[u]ndoubtedly" the letter warned RailPro of Flavel's fragile
mental state "assumes a capacity to differentiate between stress and a
disability", Justice Perry said.
Dismissal over
OHS right not disproven
But while Justice Perry set aside Judge
Simpson's s351 finding, she upheld his separate finding that Flavel was
dismissed because he exercised his workplace right to protect himself and
others as per the OHS Act.
Justice Perry upheld RailPro's argument
that Judge Simpson was incorrect to find Flavel's competency was not a
reason in the dismissal.
But she said that was not sufficient to overturn
the adverse action finding as RailPro had not shown that Flavel's exercise
of his right under the OHS Act was not one
of the dismissal's operative reasons.
Errors in
damages calculation
Nevertheless, Justice Perry said the
competency issue should have been taken into account when deciding on $95k
in damages.
Further, Judge Simpson erred by failing to
discount Flavel's workers' compensation payments from loss occasioned by
dismissal and in mistakenly estimating the period he would have been fit to
return to work for the compensation order.
The judge's order for RailPro to pay a penalty of
$5k was also incorrectly based on an individual penalty rather than a
corporation's penalty.
His order for a "high" award of $25k for
distress, hurt and humiliation was insufficiently justified and took into
account the erroneous finding that the decision-makers were aware of
Flavel's mental illness.
However, Justice Perry considered a $7,500
award for distress was still warranted after noting the dismissal meeting
occurred without prior notice, was held immediately on Flavel's return from
the competency test and did not "realistically" allow him to have
a support person.
She proposed remitting the question of
compensation and penalty to Judge Simpson.
(RailPro
Services Pty Ltd v Flavel [2015], FCA 504,
22/05/2015)
Academic to
invite 'reconsideration' of court approaches to discrim under FW Act
Melbourne Law school employment relations
Associate Professor Anna Chapman told Workforce
Daily that the decision "provides a very strong
statement" about the distinction between anti-discrimination law
relating to disability and the FW Act's discrimination provisions.
However, while there had been previous decisions
about the connection between symptoms and the disability, Chapman said it
was still "uncertain" what degree of manifestation of those
symptoms was required.
"That's always going to be a difficult
factual issue," she said.
Unlike the test under anti-discrimination law –
which required no intention or consciousness – the FW Act was "more
subjective" and related to the reasons of the decision-maker.
"They need to have some knowledge," Chapman said.
She said the RailPro
decision appeared to be the first on stress symptoms in relation to PTSD.
Chapman will be speaking on courts' methods for
interpreting discrimination in an industrial framework this Friday at a
Fair Work workplace relations lecture at Melbourne Law School.
She will argue there has been "a turning away
under the FW Act from earlier, broader judicial approaches on the meaning
of discrimination" and will invite a "reconsideration of current
judicial approaches".
(Source:
Workforce Daily 19633, 27 May, 2015)
[17]
Campaigners employed by the Australian Council of
Trade Unions (ACTU) for its federal election push will stay on to help
affiliates organise their own campaigns around industrial matters, ACTU
secretary Dave Oliver has revealed.
The ACTU Congress today (May 27) unanimously
approved a $13m budget for its 'Build a Better Future' campaign, which will
target 30 marginal electorates and hire 21 campaigners. $10.8m of the $13m
will be funded by a permanent $2 per member levy on affiliates.
Oliver said the ACTU campaign unit would shrink to
14 campaigners in the 18 months after the election, but the peak body would
maintain a "permanent campaigning capacity".
"We have a federal election, three state
elections and two territory elections [in the next three years] … it
doesn't make sense to keep ramping up and ramping down campaigns," he
said.
Oliver said the ACTU would mobilise the unit to
organise affiliates' campaigns around industrial matters.
"They are notionally based in marginal seats,
but we want a mobile and nimble nation-wide campaigning team," he
said.
Oliver told Workforce
Daily the campaigners would help affiliates on industrial
matters like the Transport Workers Union's 'Safe Rates' campaign, but not
industrial disputes.
After the election, the ACTU campaign team would
"aim to achieve key advancements for working people such as secure
jobs and portable entitlements", Oliver said.
The campaign will be paid for by a $2 levy on top
of the $3.71 ACTU fee paid by affiliates for each member.
From 2016, the $2 levy will be built into the
affiliation fee as a "minimum guaranteed campaign" contribution.
Affiliation fees, including the levy, will
increase to $5.88 in 2017 and $6.05 in 2018.
Local
resourcing the focus of $13m spend
Oliver said the campaign will be ready to roll out
by the end of June, in the event the Abbott government calls an early
election.
The ACTU would focus its efforts on data, such as
aggregating and updating union lists, social media engagement with voters,
and ground resources like field campaigners and door-knocking. None of the
$13m will pay for national TV advertising, despite that being the
"most significant spend" in the successful Your Rights At Work
campaign in 2007, Oliver said.
Instead the ACTU would do "low level ads
online, on local TV and radio", he said.
Oliver said he hoped "in the cut and thrust
of the federal election there will be affiliates who donate resources to
run [national] TV ads", as occurred on a state-wide level in the Vic,
Qld and NSW state polls.
ACTU could go
further: Professionals Australia
Professionals Australia chief executive Chris
Walton spoke in favour of the motion, but said the ACTU should consider
raising a $5 levy to achieve an ever greater increase in its capacity.
Walton said although unions would "always
have to bargain" for their members "if we really want to help
[members] and not just negotiate redundancies, we have to shape the
environments in which they work".
The ACTU could work at an industry and national
level to effect changes to govt funding and legislation, he said.
"We need this to win in our industry
campaigns, not just deal with the symptoms."
"I don't support this resolution [because it
is] for an election campaign but because we are building a capacity to win
for you," Walton said.
He said the ACTU benefited its affiliates through
running campaigns on equal pay, minimum wage cases, giving information on
legal and economic changes and training unionists.
The ACTU should do more, including
"bargaining for us together" on expenses like phones and cars,
Walton said.
"We'd save more than $2 a member if we acted
on this novel concept called collective bargaining," he said.
(Source:
Workforce Daily 19633, 27 May, 2015)
[18]
Australia needs to prepare for the jobs of the
future as it confronts the risk of automation of low-wage sectors,
opposition leader Bill Shorten has said.
Shorten made the comments in an address to the Australian
Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) Congress today (May 27).
He criticised the view that high wages made
Australia less competitive, and warned that "low wage jurisdictions
will be replaced by automation".
"We have to be the country which designs, builds
and operates the machines," he said.
Australia should prepare for "jobs which
haven't yet been developed" because "three out of four jobs in
the fastest growing industries will need skills in science, technology,
engineering and maths", he said.
"Labor has a plan to put these skills front
and centre – we want more Australians to study coding and computational
languages."
Shorten said the country faces "massive
change" as $100bn of mining investment has dried up and Australia
needed to plan for future job growth.
However, he committed Labor to oppose "the
race to the bottom in terms of wages and conditions, which erodes the
safety net which makes this a great country".
Labor fights
against visa exploitation: Shorten
Shorten said Labor had put a submission to the
Fair Work Commission minimum wage case for the first time because it
recognised "the min wage is not too high, it's a fundamental driver of
dignity for people in this country".
He argued the govt was attempting to repair the
budget deficit through 'bracket creep', which he described as the
"stealthy invisible hand of inflation". "[The govt] puts its
hand into your pocket taking your wage increases as increased taxes,"
he said.
Shorten also promised Labor would "never sign
up for the exploitation of people on working visas, no matter what pressure
is put on us by the conservatives".
However, last week shadow treasurer Chris Bowen
announced Labor would support the Coalition's proposed 32.5% working
holiday visa tax from the first dollar earned.
That was despite the National Union of Workers
saying the tax would be like "pouring gasoline on a fire" by
providing a disincentive to pay the visa workers appropriately and
"dooming" them to a black market economy (WF 22/05/2015).
(Source:
Workforce Daily 19633, 27 May, 2015)
[19]
By
Professor Niki Ellis
Adjunct Professor, Institute for Safety,
Compensation and Recovery Research and Department of Epidemiology and
Preventive Medicine, Monash University
www.nikiellis.com.au
Twitter @ProfNikiEllis
Recently an organisation asked me to consider what
being a mentally healthy workplace might look like for them. It was a great
brief, they were up for it. I started by having a look at their business
strategy and found they were growing, planning to further develop their
leadership and workforce and IT platform to enable them to be competitive
and make the most of the opportunities they could see.
I then reviewed their current investment and
performance in health and safety and concluded that they were a strong
performer in the traditional health and safety model. By that I mean they
aimed for zero harm in relation to the prevention of injuries. They had
started a workplace health promotion program, but it was early days, and
quite a long way off best practice.
A team from Johns Hopkins recently described
best and promising practice as:
·
Health education
·
Supportive social
and physical environments
·
Integration with
HR, infrastructure and environmental health and safety
·
Links between HP
and related programs eg EAP.
And that it works if:
·
Goals are aligned
to business
·
Program design is
evidence-based
·
Theory-based
implementation
·
Ongoing evaluation
What they did have was R U OK, and a great start
on a health portal. Way to go.
Potential for
web-based interventions
In another project I am working on for the life
insurance industry we have done a rapid review on the management of
psychological claims.
The review found that with regard to treatment
there was huge potential with web-based interventions for mental health.
A Canadian case study illustrated the future with
a confidential web-based mental health self-management resource. This
allows someone to assess their own mental health, provides information on
treatment and rehabilitation, with supporting material for doctors and then
tools for tracking progress.
The resource was based on recent evidence-based
guidelines, and was being marketed to insurers and employers.
A proposal to
become a mentally healthy workplace
Meanwhile back in Australia, having assessed the
broader strategic environment and what programs were already in place
relevant to mental wellbeing; not just in health and safety and workplace
health promotion but also in HR more broadly (EAP, diversity strategy,
respectful workplace policy etc), I developed a proposal for becoming a
mentally healthy workplace.
This drew on two sources of information: Tony La
Montagne's model of an integrated approach to mental health in the
workplace; and Gloria Sorensen's conceptual model for an integrated
approach to the prevention of 'work-related injuries and illness and the
enhancement of overall workforce health and wellbeing'.
Tony La Montagne is at the University of Melbourne
and his model has four components:
·
Prevent harm from
psychosocial hazards
·
(using work to)
Promote positive mental wellbeing
·
Early detection
·
Manage illness and
minimise consequences.
Implementation
science is key
Sorensen (above)
is the Queen of the integrated approach to workplace health and safety. She
is the head of the Centre for Work, Health and Wellbeing at Harvard
University.
A colleague of La Montagne's told me the light
bulb went on for Sorensen when she was running Quit programs at a foundry,
and realised the uselessness of talking to workers about them giving up
cigarette smoking in an environment filled with toxic fumes. She
presented a generic conceptual model, drawing on implementation science,
with the following elements: context (external and organisation);
interventions, mediating factors in the work organisation or work
environment, mediating factors related to workers, expected early outcomes,
and then expected final outcomes, at the first international conference on
Total Worker Health, American for the integrated approach,
in October last year. (Selected papers from the conference can be
found here)
Drafting the
strategic direction
Using both frameworks I generated draft strategic
directions for this organisation, which essentially draw together and build
upon many different strands of activities already in existence across the
organisation, with the aim of assisting to deliver on the broader business
plan.
These included:
·
Work design and
re-design: Proposed as they were building a new IT platform, the idea is
that health and wellbeing becomes a consideration in that work. For
existing work process, suggested the addition of psychosocial hazards to
the existing risk management system, possibly by using the routine employee
opinion survey to collect information on the psychosocial working
environment and leadership performance.
·
Proposed the
concept of work-life balance as a great link between individual behavioural
change and work environment change. Could be a focus of communications on
the strategy.
·
Extension of a
middle management development program on mental wellbeing which had already
been developed and run out to some. This is key, if you ramp up
conversations about mental health in a workplace you need to be confident
middle management can deal with mental health issues, otherwise
you may see this reflected as an increase in stress claims.
·
Inclusion of
health and productivity, especially mental health, in review of the
leadership development program.
·
Continue to
develop the health portal in relation to mental wellbeing, noting evidence
of effectiveness of web-based self management support and improving mental
health literacy.
·
Streamlining business
metrics: Opportunity to ensure that relevant indicators for mental
wellbeing and their link to productivity are included.
I provided three options for the goal. The first
two were based on integrated thinking. One was very broad, an aim of
improving organisational performance through health. The second was more
tightly focussed – improving workforce capability and wellbeing by
including mental health considerations in the development of leadership,
systems and workforce. The third option was based on extending the
traditional model to better include mental health – that is to contribute
to achieving zero harm through programs aiming to minimise psychosocial
risks and to promote mental health (separately, as is the tradition).
Bravo to this organisation for taking this topic
seriously and giving it a good shake. They are in a good position to
succeed as they have a strong foundation in a high performing traditional
workplace health and safety program, and they are not unused to the concept
of psychosocial ergonomics.
There are benefits to be had for workers in terms
of improved health outcomes and benefits to employers in terms of
performance, presenteeism and absenteeism.
But it is going to take a lot more than asking R U
OK.
(Source:
Inside OHS 90, 28 May, 2015)
[20]
By
Stephanie D'Souza
Impairment caused by the use of drugs is a
constant concern in industries like mining, building and construction,
utilities and the transport sector, where public safety, workplace safety
and employee rights are balanced against each-other.
As technology develops to provide different
options for testing in the workplace, eg urine, saliva or hair testing, the
options to detect drug use farther and farther back in time are becoming
available to employers.
Some legal developments under the Fair Work Act
would see the preclusion of more sophisticated methods of testing like
urine testing on the basis it affects privacy, as was determined by the
Fair Work Commission in January 2014 where Endeavour Energy faced
off with the Electrical Trades Union (ETU). The union justified this
perspective by focusing the application of the law on whether the worker is
impaired at work by earlier drug use.
However, the argument is already changing driven
by the emergence of different drugs, one union fearing for the safety of
its members and employers changing the basis for their drug and alcohol
(D&A) policies.
Clayton Utz partner Shae McCartney has analysed
the impact of a number of decisions in 2015 which supported employers who
have moved to a "zero-tolerance" approach. They have argued their
drug and alcohol policies needed to focus on preventing the risk of
incident or injury, rather than whether an employee was impaired.
Urine testing
'unjust & unreasonable': 2014
In early 2014, Fair Work Commission Senior Deputy
President Jonathan Hamberger ruled for the third time supporting the
ETU's position that urine testing was an unfair imposition for Endeavour
Energy's employees.
At the time, ETU assistant secretary Neville Betts
said: "While oral testing accurately identifies recent drug use, where
an individual may be impaired in their abilities, urine tests
unfairly monitor workers' private lives by potentially showing a positive
result even where a substance may have been used many days prior,
in a private capacity."
In the original case SDP Hamberger identified both
urine and oral testing were liable to cheating and that for some drugs,
like cannabis, oral testing is superior to urine testing particularly when
testing for on-the-job impairment.
"Not only is urine testing potentially less
capable of identifying someone who is under the influence of cannabis, but
it also has the disadvantage that it may show a positive result
even though it is several days since the person has smoked the
substance."
When he was still a senior partner at Clayton Utz,
now FWC Vice President Joe Catanzariti had analysed the decision,
saying by describing urine testing as "unjust and unreasonable"
SDP Hamberger had supported the requirement to balance competing
considerations when constructing policy. That is "the need to ensure a
safe workplace against the need to protect employees from undue
interference by employers in their personal lives".
Zero-tolerance
favoured by courts?
This decision had been described as a landmark and
victory for the unions, but Clayton Utz's McCartney says the courts have
since been supporting employers' moves away from impairment-based policies.
"A series of recent decisions by the Fair
Work Commission have recognised the legitimacy of drug and alcohol policies
and procedures in removing safety risks, and the right of employers to take
disciplinary action for drug use, even if there's no actual evidence of
impairment."
Referencing the statutory duties owned by
employers not just to their workers but to people who could be affected by
the employers' business, eg the general public, McCartney noted effective
drug testing was particular important in "high-risk industries".
She said the debate around efficacy of testing was
further complicated by the "emergence of synthetic cannabinoids (such
as Kronic) which can affect employees' fitness for work,
but may not show up in establishing testing procedures".
FWC full bench
does about face on urine
In late 2014 a FWC full bench overturned a
decision precluding urine testing at DP World Brisbane. The original
decision by Deputy President Anna Booth had found urine testing was
"unjust and unreasonable" even when used as a second test after
an oral swab returned a "non-negative" result.
The bench decided DP Booth fell into error by
concluding she had to consider the merit of using urine for testing; rather
she should only have looked to whether the enterprise agreement (EA)
precluded it. McCartney noted the full bench drew on evidence "urine
testing was an established part of the site-specific drug and alcohol
testing arrangements operating at each of DP World's terminals" and
workers had not raised concerns about it during EA consultations.
Ferry driver
collides with wharf
Another zero-tolerance decision McCartney (above) drew on was at
Harbour City Ferries where a ferry driver's reinstatement was overturned
after urine testing revealed cannibinoid use.
"The fact that the employer had a zero
tolerance drug policy was a key factor in the Full Bench's reasoning in
finding that non-compliance with the policy justified termination of
employment (as there was no evidence that the employee's drug use caused
any impairment nor contributed to the incident)."
The full bench judgment observed Harbour City's
emphasised its zero-tolerance policy was required due to its responsibility
to public safety.
"[Harbour City] does not want to have a
discussion following an accident as to whether or not the level of drug use
of one of its captains was a factor," the bench said. "It does
not want to listen to the uninformed in the broadcasting or other
communications industry talk about drug tests establishing
impairment."
The ferry driver had said the use of canniboids
was for "pain relief". But the full bench said his decision to
use should have informed his subsequent decision to accept a shift
"while aware of the likelihood of being in breach" of the D&A
policy.
Sara Hopkins and Mark Sullivan from law-firm
Lander & Rogers agreed with McCartney's analysis saying the decision
was "positive news for employers with zero-tolerance drug and alcohol
policies. An employer, particularly where public safety is involved, can
require strict compliance with appropriate drug and alcohol policies,
without being required to determine that a related safety incident was
caused by an employee's impairment".
Urine shows
meth in mine operator's sample
In January 2015, the FWC upheld EDI
Mining's decision to dismiss a dump truck driver who recorded a
methylamphetamine at four times the reporting cut-off figure. McCartney
said the decision "provided hope and optimism to even the most jaded
employment practitioner".
The worker had submitted she had unknowingly taken
the methylamphetamine, saying her drink had been spiked by two strangers
over the weekend past.
The Construction Forestry Mining Energy Union
(CFMEU) submitted that the worker felt "perfectly well" and the
employer had failed to prove any impairment. EDI Mining rejected the need
to prove impairment instead drawing on the existence of its "cardinal
rule" against non-approved substances.
Commissioner Ian Cambridge said the worker had
failed to prove during the hearing that her drink had been spiked and
resultantly the employer had acted appropriately to dismiss her, following
consideration of the alleged mitigating factor.
"Individuals who attend a workplace like the
Mine under the influence of drugs or alcohol endanger the lives of other
workers," Cmr Cambridge said. "This test result would of itself,
provide valid reason for the employer to terminate the employment of the
applicant. This test result was appropriately treated as a prima facie
serious risk to the safety of fellow workers."
McCartney said the cmr was "highly
critical" of the CFMEU's approach, stating it was "highly
regrettable" for an organisation "which apparently conducts
campaigns which strongly advocate safety in the workplace".
CFMEU's new
'mandatory testing' policy
As an alternative to zero-tolerance policies, the
CFMEU construction division's announced its "Impairment Policy"
in March this year. For the first time for the union, the policy
recommends mandatory blanket testing for the first time including testing
employers, focusing on scrutinising impairment.
CFMEU national construction secretary Dave Noonan
said "We acknowledge that testing already happens in specific
circumstances in the industry and accept that our membership is
increasingly concerned about the problems associated with people turning up
to work impaired and the risks this poses."
The CFMEU proposed impairment assessors would be
nominated from the safety committee and would be made up equally of
employer and employee representatives.
The Master Builders' Association (MBA) welcomed
the union's "belated commitment" but was sceptical the CFMEU's
motives included trying to persuade Senate cross-benchers there was no need
to extend the powers of the Fair Work Building and Construction Commission.
In spite of this, MBA CEO Wilhelm Harnisch said
his organisation was ready to discuss practical solutions for implementing
the testing regime. "Master Builders will take at face value the
CFMEU's commitment to a compulsory random drug and alcohol testing regime
because Master Builders is committed to ensuring that construction workers
each day return home safely to their wives, partners, children, families
and friends."
Workmates beg
workmates to quit drug use
The National Cannabis Prevention and Information
Centre (NCPIC) released survey results in May, showing of 2,000 people
surveyed 40.3% had worked with a cannabis affected colleague believed it
reduced their colleague's motivation and almost one-third believed they
were impaired.
NCPIC senior researcher Dr Peter Gates said
cannabis affects motivation, reaction time and concentration making it a
"blue collar and white collar issue".
Some 38.4% of respondents believed cannabis caused
decreased concentration in their colleague, and 31.1% believed it had
impaired that person's ability to perform complex tasks.
However, the survey also showed self identified
cannabis users did not note the same shortcomings in their work that their
colleagues observed, although 10% said the quality of their work would
improve if they quit.
Gates said "the reality is, if you are a
regular cannabis user, there is a chance your colleagues are going to
notice you are letting the team down in key performance areas such as
motivation and, in turn, productivity".
47% of users
admit to being stoned at work
Gates said the data emphasised the need for clear
communication about drug use in work-places. Whilst more than 80% of
respondents said they would be comfortable raising the issue with affected
workers, and more than 50% said they would be comfortable talking to the
cannabis user's manager, only 5% of cannabis users said the issue had been
raised with them at work. Gates noted more than 47% of the cannabis users
surveyed admitted to being stoned at work.
"Employers need to make sure they have clear
drug policies in place at work, and that these are not just included in a
pile of paperwork during employee induction." Gates emphasised the use
of strong assistance programs and making sure workers feel able to ask for
help.
The NCPIC added human resources teams should be
educated to look for warning signs where longer term effects can be subtle
amongst users. "It's easy to spot drug use at a party...but would you
think to consider a combination of a lack of focus, motivation, memory and
learning challenges or even sleep issues, as a possible drug issue?".
Perception that
workers can avoid testing
NCPIC conducted another survey late last year of
500 tradies across mining, construction, transport and defence. The survey
said 21% of respondents indicated they had consumed cannabis within four
hours of going to work. Almost two-thirds (63%) said they knew someone who
had failed a drug test.
Gates noted in these industries, despite rates of
random testing increasing, only 29% of respondents believed they would
definitely be tested. A third said it was unlikely or there was only a
small chance of being tested.
Gates emphasised smoking so close to working was a
warning sign: "If [workers] are smoking before work, it's also more
likely they are having a problem controlling their use, which is a sign of
addiction. No tradie wants to be responsible for hurting a mate while on
the job, so knowing the side effects of cannabis use, and weighing up that
risk, is really important."
AHPRA testing
doctors' hair
In non-high risk industries, like the health
sector, focus on drug-related impairment is also increasing. The Australian
Health Practitioners Registration Authority (AHPRA) has initiated a far
harsher regime of hair testing on all practitioners with substance related
impairment.
AHPRA CEO Martin Fletcher said "under the
protocol, all health practitioners who have restrictions on their
registration linked to past substance abuse will have routine hair testing
in addition to urine testing".
The Australian Drug Foundation says hair testing
detects past use up to a few months, and can "therefore test for
chronic use". AHPRA drew on its role to protect the public and manage
risks to patients.
Can employers
ask workers to see the doc?
Swaab Attorneys say employers have the option of
requiring workers to undergo a medical assessment if the employer can
establish that there was evidence to show an employee's limitations at
work.
Swaab Partner Warwick Ryan said in one case the
Fair Work Cmn had prevented an employer adding bi-yearly examinations of
forklift drivers on top of regular medical assessments already required by
the National Heavy Vehicle Accreditation scheme.
However, analysing the case Ryan said "the
clear learning from this is that where an employee discloses or displays
specific health limitations that cast doubt on their ability to carry out
their job, employers can require them to undertake a medical assessment
before returning to work".
He added the cmr and the union involved had
emphasised privacy concerns for workers if medical examinations had been
compelled, so employers should "put some thought into how medical
information is going to be stored to ensure the privacy of the
individual".
(Source:
Inside OHS 90, 28 May, 2015)
[21]
Casual cleaners at a major sports event company
were short-changed by up to two thirds of their hourly rate by the
Australian Workers Union (AWU) Victoria branch maintaining an expired
WorkChoices agreement that saved their employer millions of dollars a year
in wages.
The AWU agreed to maintain the 2006 enterprise
agreement past its 2010 expiry date in return for employer Cleanevent
paying it $25k a year in 'membership fees' and inflating the branch's
membership roll.
The Trade Union Royal Commission (TURC) heard that
Cleanevent, which did clean ups for the Formula 1 Grand Prix, the Easter
Show and the Melbourne Cup, saved an estimated $2m a year from the
arrangement .The company's low casual rates – with substantially reduced
penalty rates - were said to be "very attractive" to Spotless,
which later acquired the business in 2010.
Labor Vic MP Cesar Melham – who will be called to
the stand next week - was the AWU Vic secretary at the time involved in
negotiating to continue the agreement and setting the $25k fee.
The cmn heard that the AWU had initially entered
negotiations with Cleanevent to replace the 2006 EA in 2010 but ended up
agreeing to a three-year Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) instead.
The MOU, which was also signed by then-national
secretary Paul Howes, said the 2006 EA would continue to apply, except in
so far as the MOU adjusted pay and penalty rates.
Senior counsel Jeremy Stoljar said it
appeared the AWU had entered a MOU and not an EA because an EA would not
have passed the Fair Work Act's better off overall test as it was
"significantly worse" than the modern award.
Stoljar said as a result of the agreement level 1
casual workers were paid $18.14 an hour for public holidays compared to the
2010 award rate of $50.17 an hour. Level 3 casual workers were paid $19.86
an hour for a Sunday when the award gave them $41.44 an hour.
At the same time as the MOU a 'side letter' was
agreed to where Cleanevent would pay the AWU up to $25k a year in
'membership fees' and supply it with a list of cleaner names.
Cleaners had 'no knowledge' of membership selection
Then-Cleanevent general manager now business
development executive Steven Webber gave evidence to the cmn the company
came up with the list of staff it would pay membership fees at
"random".
Asked how he knew whether the members wanted to
join the union or not, Webber replied "I didn't."
An email to the AWU at the time Webber referred to
one of its biannual $12,500k payments as "12,500 big ones!!!"
In a 2012 email about Cleanevent's failure to pay
the AWU fee on time, Webber warned staff "this has the ability to cost
us some $2m if we pee them [the AWU] off".
On the description of the fee as 'membership
fees', Cmr Heydon said "to be blunt about it, the side-letter seems to
be a sham".
He said the "actual" agreement was
"simply to pass $25k a year and some names of people who had never
been asked whether they wanted to join the AWU".
When Stoljar put that an invoice description of
the payment as 'membership fees' was "not true or accurate because
what was being charged for was not membership fees at all", Webber
responded "I'm not sure to be honest".
Asked whether the fee was in exchange for the
continuation of the 2006 EA, Webber said it was "part of the
process".
Counsel for Melham sought to argue the fee was a
"service fee" but did not specify what the "service"
was. In any case, Webber says he did not recall Melham using that term in
negotiations.
Inflated membership boost AWU power in ALP
Stoljar said in his opening statement the
Cleanevent workers chosen for AWU membership were "members" only
in the sense that their names were entered on the AWU Vic membership roll
but "without their knowledge or authorisation".
Indeed, some were already AWU members and were
having their union dues paid "twice over", he said.
Aside from the financial benefit to the AWU Vic,
inflated membership numbers increased the branch's influence in its union's
national executive as well as the Australian Labor Party (ALP) – which in
turn led to greater influence over ALP policy formation, membership of ALP
committees and selection of ALP candidates.
"The persons who miss out are the
workers," Stoljar said. "Cleanevent's employees, or at least its
casual employees, appear to have been significantly worse off under the MOU
than they would be under the relevant 2010 award."
He questioned whether the fees were breaches of
s287 of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act in that AWU national
or Vic branch officials "seem to have been entering into an
arrangement which gained benefits for themselves and Cleanevent … but which
were detrimental to their members".
If false accounting was involved to conceal the
payment of membership numbers that could be an offence under the Crimes
Act, he said.
He said the TURC discussion paper had referred to
such payments as "corrupting payments" and asked whether
significant penalties should be imposed on employers who make such payments
to unions.
AWU member fees cover other companies
Stoljar said over the coming days TURC would
investigate other instances where the AWU had raised revenue and inflated
membership numbers through 'membership fees'. He named payments from BMD
Constructions Pty Ltd, Winslow Constructors Pty Ltd, the Australian Netball
Players' Association and the Australian Jockeys Association.
At press time, the cmn was set to call several
Cleanevent cleaners to give evidence.
The AWU has decided not to be represented at this
week's hearings but is understood to be appearing next week. An AWU Vic
spokesperson did not return requests for comment before presstime.
(Source:
Workforce Daily 19634, 28 May, 2015)
[22]
Disputes about compliance with work health and
safety laws and "operational practices" were not "bullying
conduct" which could be dealt with by a stop-bullying application, the
Fair Work Commission has found.
Andrew Gilbert was accused of bullying by
St John's Ambulance WA Ltd volunteer paramedics. St John's, his
employer, stood him down while it conducted an investigation.
Gilbert applied to FWC for a stop-bullying order
against an employee of St John's Ambulance.
Commissioner Danny Cloghan noted from Gilbert's
application he "disagrees with operational practices" of
St John's and had made allegations about its compliance with the
'Workplace Health and Safety Act'.
Cmr Cloghan noted Gilbert had mentioned the
alleged bully only in the fields to nominate the subject of the order, and
not in the "narrative" areas describing alleged bullying conduct.
The cmr said this was "notable" because
Gilbert had alleged bullying started in February 2011 and
continued until November 2014 and occurred "almost every
day".
The cmr found Gilbert was in "obvious
conflict" with St John's and volunteer paramedics which could be
resolved in "a number of ways".
"However, there is [an] incongruity … between
a dispute over operational practices and an application to the cmn alleging
bullying," he said.
Cmr Cloghan was satisfied the application was
"not the appropriate means to resolve the workplace conflict",
and dismissed it for having "no reasonable prospect of success".
(Andrew
Gilbert, PR567824,
27/05/2015)
(Source:
Workforce Daily 19634, 28 May, 2015)
[23]
Jurisdictions may establish class action
lists with dedicated judges, Qld Supreme Court Justice David Boddice
told the Australian Insurance Law Association's Qld intensive in Brisbane.
He said NSW Chief Justice Tom Bathurst was reported saying it was
important class actions be overseen by judges with specific expertise. The
Federal Court was the class action "forum of choice". But steps
were being taken to give Qld a class action regime, perhaps by adopting the
Federal Court's class action rules. Qld had only representative actions,
which required all parties to have the same interest in the dispute and
therefore it was harder for parties to qualify. Justice Boddice said
Qld's lack of class action procedural rules meant many were lodged in NSW,
eg an action against the Qld Government alleging dam mismanagement during
the 2011 floods (CN
10/07/14). Justice Boddice said the rise in class
actions had occurred since the advent of litigation funders and particularly
since the High Court's 2006 Fostif
decision, which found third-party litigation funding was "not contrary
to public policy or an abuse of process, even though individual funding
arrangements may fall foul of those imperatives". He said
many personal injuries firms now focused on class actions because tort law
changes made injury claims more difficult to prosecute.
(Source:
Cover Note 1915, 28 May 2015)
[24]
"If you can't get indemnity under the policy,
the doctrine of utmost good faith (DUGF) is not going to deliver it to
you," Qld barrister Sandy Thompson told the AILA Qld intensive (above). Thompson
appeared for CGU in the Qld Supreme Court case Matton Developments Pty Ltd v CGU Insurance Ltd(CN
30/04/15). He said the unsuccessful insured had lodged an
appeal. Matton had accused CGU of breaching DUGF by not accepting the
insured's account of events when a crane's boom collapsed on a building
site. Justice Peter Flanagan said honesty was "a core
obligation" and DUGF required full and frank disclosure. But insurers
were not prevented from seeking proof if a claim raised suspicions. They did
not have to "coddle insureds", surrender commercial advantage or
put an insured's interests above their own. Thompson said Justice
Flanagan had found insurers were entitled to deny indemnity if
circumstances fell outside the insurable interest or exclusion clauses
applied. In Matton,
the crane driver gave evidence the crane was on a level surface when its
boom collapsed but a CGU expert's evidence said it was not. Justice
Flanagan found the driver's evidence was inconsistent. (Matton Developments Pty Ltd v CGU
Insurance Ltd (No 2) [2015], QSC 72,
15/04/2015)
(Source:
Cover Note 1915, 28 May 2015)
[25]
The ACT Appeal Court has found a civil servant
liable under the Civil Liability Act for $658,850 in negligence damages to
a staff member after failing to prove he had her consent to have sexual
intercourse with her during an interstate work conference. Expressed as
assault and battery, 38-year-old Sharon Whitehead claimed she had sustained
a personal injury in August 2007 because of Michael Moon's sexual
assault, which had caused her to lose her virginity. She claimed as a
result she had received treatment from a rape crisis centre and
psychologists and had been totally incapacitated for work from Aug 17,
2007, to June 10, 2008. Master David Harper, who has since
retired, had entered a judgment against Moon for $668,856, including
$10,000 for aggravated damages and costs. Moon appealed against that
decision, claiming among other things Master Harper had erred in finding he
did not have Whitehead's consent to sexual intercourse.
The court heard Whitehead had met Moon in 2005,
when they worked together at the Department of Immigration and
Multicultural Affairs. The following year, the pair engaged in sexual
activity short of intercourse. Whitehead left the same year to work at the
Department of Veterans Affairs. The pair met again in 2007, after Moon had
started working for the Child Support Agency and a few months later
Whitehead agreed to work at the agency under Moon's supervision but said
she did not want a sexual relationship with him. On Aug 13, the pair
travelled to Sydney to attend a two-day conference. They had agreed
beforehand to share a two-bedroom, two-bathroom apartment. It was
established on the first night the pair visited several sex shops in Oxford
St before returning to their apartment. Whitehall claimed Moon had entered
her bedroom without her permission and forced himself on her despite her
repeatedly telling him to "get out". Master Harper accepted
Whitehall's evidence.
In the Appeal Court, Chief Justice (CJ) Helen
Murrell and Justice John Burns said Moon was liable in battery
unless he proved on the balance of probabilities he had Whitehall's consent
to that contact. Justice Hilary Penfold agreed. They found Master
Harper had gone "beyond finding" Moon had failed to discharge
that onus. CJ Murrell and Justice Burns found Moon's appeal must therefore
fail and Justice Penfold agreed. They upheld Master Harper's decision
but set aside the $10,000 award of aggravated damages. (Moon v Whitehead [2015], ACTCA 17,
22/05/2015; Sharon Whitehead v Michael Moon [2013], ACTSC 243,
05/12/2015)
(Source:
Cover Note 1915, 28 May 2015)
[26]
The Super Complaints Tribunal (SCT) received 2,724
phone inquiries in the March qtr, down 6.7% on the previous qtr.
Written complaints dropped 11.5% to 637. In its latest quarterly bulletin,
SCT said 62.8% of complaints were within its jurisdiction. Of those,
administration complaints were the biggest category at 43.5%; death benefit
complaints 29.7%; and disability 20.8%.
(Source:
Cover Note 1915, 28 May 2015)
[27]
A deal to cut the legislated 2020 renewable energy
target (RET) by 8,000GWh may yet fall apart over the Federal
Government insisting on listing native forest wood waste as a renewable
energy source in a Bill tabled this week.
The Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Bill
(REE Bill) tabled on May 27 by environment minister Greg
Huntreflected bipartisan agreement on reducing the legislated target from
41,000GWh to 33,000GWh. The Bill would axe the destabilising two-yearly
reviews of the RET scheme by the Climate Change Authority (CCA) and exempt
emissions-intensive, trade-exposed (EITE) industries from compliance with
the scheme, as Hunt agreed with Opposition climate change spokesperson Mark
Butler last week.
It would overturn Labor's 2011 change
to RET regulation 8, which removed native forest biomass as an eligible
energy source. But the Bill would also shift the regulation's definition of
eligible woody biomassinto the legislation, and significantly changed the
definition.
The explanation
of Hunt's Bill referred to the definition of eligible woody biomass as
"protections". It would introduce the term "ecologically
sustainable forest management principles" into the RET legislation. To
be eligible to earn renewable energy certificates under the RET the Bill
said the biomass must have been harvested primarily for a purpose other
than for biomass for energy. The biomass must be either a by- or waste
product of a govt-approved harvesting operation that meets a new
"high-value test", or a by-product of an operation based on
ecologically sustainable forest management principles. The harvesting
operation must be covered by a regional forest agreement or meet equivalent
ecologically sustainable forest management principles "to the
satisfaction of the minister", the explanatory memorandum said.
The REE Bill's new "high-value test"
would ensure the forestry operation's primary purpose was sawlog, veneer,
poles, pile, girder, carpentry or craft wood, or oil product production and
that it derived most of its financial value from those products.
Senators will
decide Bill's fate
The govt shifting the RET's legal definition of
woody biomass came as a surprise to many, including the clean energy
industry, after the drawn-out negotiations between the major parties meant
to seal a bipartisan deal on the scheme's future was finally forged last
week. Most had expected the govt would table a separate regulatory
amendment to reintroduce native-forest wood biomass into the RET.
The govt's move generated a clash between Labor
and Greens MPs. New Greens leader Senator Richard Di Natale demanded Labor
"abandon its deal to cut the RET, which was introduced to parliament
today and allows for the burning of native forests". Labor Opposition
climate change spokesperson Mark Butler rejected as "completely false
Di Natale's suggestion Labor's deal with the govt was designed to allow
native forest biomass back into the scheme in return for dropping the CCA's
biannual reviews. Labor "does not support burning native forests as a
renewable energy source" and would move to amend the Bill, Butler
said. "We opposed it in govt and we oppose it now," he said.
That means the Bill's fate rests on the govt
securing the needed Senate six cross-bench votes for it to pass as is.
Alternatively, the govt may be hoping Labor will cave into
industry and forestry union pressure and pass it without amendment, Carbon Extra sources
said. Hunt has not yet delivered the Bill's second reading and his office
has not responded to Carbon
Extra's question.
RET regs will
prevent EITE windfall, govt says
The Bill's (above)
100 exemption for EITEs from having to comply with the RET scheme would
introduce new electricity intensity baselines for EITE activities, the
explanatory memorandum said.
More flexible'
RET regulations
That created a risk some EITE
firms may receive "assistance that exceeds the cost impact
of the RET on these EITE activities". The govt would consult on the
detail of amended regulations "to address this risk", it said.
Therefore, the REE Bill (above)
would allow "more flexible" regulations "in terms of how
they may characterise or describe the amount of an exemption certificate".
(Source:
Carbon Extra 319, 29 May 2015)
[28]
Clean Energy Regulator (CER) CEO Chloe Munro this
week confirmed most of the carbon abatement contracted after the first
emissions reduction fund (ERF) auction last month would come from projects
already operating under the former Federal Government's carbon farming
initiative (CFI).
The CER spent about $660m of the ERF's total
$2.55bn funds on the first auction, paying on average $13.95 per tonne/CO2-e
for a total of 47m tonnes of abatement.
Under questioning inSenator Estimates this week,
Munro said 107 of 144 projects underERF contracts had transitioned from the
CFI. The 34.4m tonnes of carbonabatement they would deliver represented 72%
of the total abatement contracted from the first auction, she said. The
remaining 37 projects were new. Opposition climate change spokespersonMark
Butler saidthatmeant the govt had effectivelypaid $66t/CO2-e for
"only 10m additional tonnes of carbon abatement".
(Source:
Carbon Extra 319, 29 May 2015)
[29]
Newly updated federal regulatory guidance takes
into account the "broader scope" of emissions reduction fund
(ERF) project types, new participants and "anticipated"
aggregated structures that "may emerge".
The Australian Securities & Investments
Commission's (ASIC) latest Regulatory Guide
236 (RG 236) also affirms who "may need" Aust financial services
licences (AFSLs) under the Federal Government's revised carbon markets
regime. In March, after negative reaction, the govt split its plans to
exempt some ERF participants from having to hold AFSLs (Carbon
Extra 20/03/15).
ASIC's updated RG 236, released
on May 20, confirmed Australian carbon credit units (ACCUs) and
eligible international emissions units (EIEUs) were financial products.
Providing information on ACCUs or EIEUs to another
person could constitute financial product advice in some circumstances, the
guide said. Eg, where the information was intended to influence their
decisions on regulated emissions units or "could reasonably be
regarded as being intended to have such an influence". Providing
financial product advice could relate to an ERF project or to people
seeking to produce EIEUs through developing or operating international
offset projects. It could include advice given to voluntary emissions
offsetters "on approaches to, or strategies for, acquiring or
disposing of regulated emissions units". Providing advice to entities
covered by the govt's proposed safeguard mechanism to help them make
decisions about acquiring or disposing of regulated emissions units could
also constitute financial product advice.
The guide noted other emissions-related financial
products included derivatives over emissions units and interests in managed
investment schemes involving carbon abatement activities or emissions
units. Carbon abatement contracts themselves were not financial products,
RG 236 said. That meant people did not require AFSLs to provide advice
about those contracts or deal in them.
ASIC in an online statement said
it had worked closely with the federal environment department and the Clean
Energy Regulator (CER) to "anticipate a variety of different
structures of ERF aggregated projects that may emerge".
However, ASIC said it would "monitor the need to more closely align
its guidance to emerging and evolving ERF practices".
Carbon
Extra sources say it's likely the next ERF auction, expected
later this year, will see bids based on the scheme's method for aggregated
energy efficiency projects. The legal technicalities, including ASIC's
final position on who needed AFSLs, had stalled market players forging the
multiple contracts involved in preparing aggregated projects for bid.
(Source:
Carbon Extra 319, 29 May 2015)
[30]
The Electrical Trades Union (ETU) has sought
"urgent meetings" with the NSW Government about protections for
employees after the lower house passed legislation allowing the sale of
majority stakes in Ausgrid and Endeavour Energy, and the full sale of
statewide transmission business TransGrid. Treasurer Gladys Berejiklian told
parliament the bill guaranteed existing enterprise bargaining agreements
terms and conditions. "Once transferred,
employees may continue to be a contributor to their existing
superannuation fund, retain rights to annual leave, sick leave, extended or
long service leave accrued or accruing immediately before the
transfer," Berejiklian said on May 26. However, ETU NSW sec
Steve Butler told WFNSW
the bill didn't provide worker protections retailers and generators had
previously been offered such as salary maintenance and job security for
five years following the sale, nor addressed issues like guaranteed
apprentice numbers. The ETU is pinning its hopes on the Legislative Council
Leasing of Electricity Infrastructure Inquiry headed by Fred Nile (WFNSW8/05/15) which will produce
recommendations on June 2. Butler said: "It is extremely
concerning that the NSW Govt has decided to jump the gun, tabling
legislation ahead of the parliamentary inquiry even handing down its
findings ..." Butler told WFNSW
it's a bid to get the laws through "before they are truly
understood". The Electricity Network Assets (Authorised Transactions) bill
passed the lower house last night with the upper house debate scheduled for
next Wednesday.
·
Fred Nile MLC is
to address Unions NSW on Thursday June 4.
Unions say govt
broke promises to consult
The ETU and United Services Union (USU) are
"considering their legal and industrial options following the Baird
govt's failure to consult with the workforces of Ausgrid, Endeavour Energy,
and TransGrid ahead of their privatisation". The unions said the govt
has told them a scheduled 30 minute meeting with Premier Mike Baird and
Berejiklian on Monday (June 1) will be the only consultation over
protections for workers and apprentices. Butler said "power industry
unions have made themselves available for urgent negotiations, including
after hours or over the weekend, but neither the Premier nor Treasurer is
willing to meet". Berejiklian responded saying the govt had been
working "round the clock" to kick-start their infrastructure
program and reiterated conditions would be maintained per negotiated EBAs.
"The Fair Work Act and Enabling Legislation will in effect ensure
continuity of employees' accrued entitlements including superannuation."
(Source:
Workforce NSW 19635, 29 May 2015)
[31]
The NSW Government plans to reform and end overlap
for the seven agencies responsible for police corruption and misconduct,
having commissioned former state shadow attorney general Andrew Tink to
undertake a review by August 31. A govt statement said: "The
current system for doing this is out–dated, complex, and confusing with
overlapping responsibilities amongst the agencies." Agencies under the
microscope include Ombudsman, the Police Integrity Commission, the
Inspector of the Police Integrity Cmn, Crime Cmn and WorkCover. Deputy
Premier and Minister for Justice Troy Grant said an effective system
will uphold "the highest standards of behaviour and integrity, while
allowing police to get on with the job". Tink will take submissions
until June 24. The final report is to include options for a
single civilian oversight model for police.
(Source:
Workforce NSW 19635, 29 May 2015)
[32]
On Monday June 1, peak state union body
Unions NSW will protest outside federal Treasurer Joe Hockey's office
against govt cuts to paid parental leave. Unions NSW encouraged supporters
to bring "dummies" and their baby or toddler as part of the protest.
(Source:
Workforce NSW 19635, 29 May 2015)
[33]
July
22, Sydney: AILA twilight seminar: An update on ASIC's
regulatory priorities. Go to www.aila.com.au/events
August
5, Sydney: AILA twilight seminar: Good faith and claims
handling. Go to www.aila.com.au/events
August
5-6, Sydney: AICLA/ANZIIF 2015 claims convention. Go to theinstitute.com.au
(Source:
Cover Note 1915, 28 May 2015)
[34]
Managing
Editors: Helen Jones, Peter Schwab. Emailhelen.jones@thomsonreuters.com
or peter.schwab@thomsonreuters.com.
|