It’s time for you to decide.

After months of consultations, negotiations and hard work by your negotiating team Mission Australia is about to put a new Collective Agreement to a vote. We, your negotiating team want you to make up your own mind on how you will vote and we provide you with this information to help you decide.

Reflecting on the process –A short version of a long and ongoing story.

The “Consultation”

In January Mission Australia issued a discussion
paper setting out their plan to strip your Collective Agreement of many of your conditions. Mission Australia then outlined to you how they planned to “consult” with you about your pay and conditions. The discussion
paper linked all the proposed changes to “objectives” like; reducing costs and reducing administration – things were not looking good in terms of improving Mission Australia workers already poor conditions.

Mission Australia was less than welcoming of your Union’s involvement in what they initially called “their” process.

Mission Australia claimed to have a transparent and democratic way to consult you – they held meetings all over the country but many were cancelled at the last minute, or set at times that meant people could not attend. They claimed that every workplace had their right to have a say through ECC reps – and while there was the odd example of where the ECC people did exist, across the country it certainly was not the norm. Mission Australia’s consultations lasted for 4 hours and they permitted Union presentations at the end. The contents of Mission Australia’s presentations were misleading and very anti-union. Mission Australia claimed they got “feedback” from their “consultation” to help them to shore up their position.

Union members and organisers hit the phones and the road across the country – bringing the real story to workplaces far and wide. People started to get a real idea of what was going on, they started asking questions and hundreds of workers joined their Union.

Mission Australia asked you all to decide if you wanted a Union or Non-Union agreement and you voted overwhelmingly in support of a Union agreement (401 – 67) because you knew that workers on union agreements have better pay and conditions and that you needed your Union’s support at the negotiating table – and how right you were.

Your Union surveyed workers about what they wanted and hundreds of workers responded sharing their ideas and concerns with Mission Australia’s proposal. Union members and organisers analysed the surveys and compared them with your current conditions and different state Awards. Over 100 issues of concern were identified.

Together we worked on all the information available and began to prioritise the problems they wanted to deal with. The really big problems from the beginning included; pay increases in line with other workers in the sector,
performance and productivity pay, job security issues, fixing hour bank, penalties and shift provisions, and the right to be consulted about changes. In addition, many other smaller problems were identified.

Mission Australia Employees were not asking for much:

We wanted to fix the things that were wrong with current employment conditions
We wanted to protect industry standards
We wanted to make sure conditions were at least slightly above Award conditions.

The “Negotiations”
Even after you voted to have a Union Agreement Mission Australia tried to control the process for negotiations. The negotiators came from far and wide – some Union members, some not. Prior to beginning negotiations Mission Australia offered to “train” the negotiators. The negotiators took up the offer Mission Australia paid an employer organisation (people who usually represent management) to do the training. The next morning the team met with the Union to consider their analysis of the situation. It was a heavy day – with the analysis proving surprising and telling. In the end of it your team was united. Your team knew that they had to act as one – with the union’s support and expertise – on everyone’s behalf.

On the first morning of the first negotiations Mission Australia made a feeble attempt to split the Team – but the team held strong and presented a united front.

Faced with this United team management refused to move on the big issues. The fight was just trying to keep what Mission Workers already had.

At the end of the second day your team agreed to provide Mission Australia with a document outlining all their concerns and all their positions. We also agreed to set up working parties to deal with a couple of areas ofspecific concern and we set a date to continue negotiations in July.

Mission Australia did not provide the details they had agreed to provide. Mission Australia did not participate in the working parties they had agreed to. Mission Australia then began to tell your Union who could represent staff in negotiations.

Your team worked endlessly to resolve the problems amicably. Despite this Mission Australia just would not budge. As a team your representatives decide there was no option but to withdraw from negotiations and call crisis meetings with Mission Australia management.

Those crisis meetings solidified your team. They knew they had a crisis on their hands – but, they knew they had to hold strong.

Negotiations continued and Mission Australia continued to renege on agreement after agreement.

And so it comes to this – It’s time for you to decide.

What did we save?

• 
  A Union agreement
• Pay Increases – Not linked to productivity
• Secure employment for casuals – improved
• Some restrictions around the employment of temporary workers saved
• Payment and conditions related to the Supervision of camps saved
• Links to classifications and awards saved
• Commitment to Letter of Appointment that tells you when you start what your employment conditions are
• Split Shifts – restricted to those who work them now or those who agree to work them in the future

What did we win?

Pay rates – that are Above Award and will remain so for the life of the agreement

• First aid allowance – returned
• Hour Bank – Improved
• Rostered Day Off – improved
• Overtime – improved
• Casual loading – improved
• Shift conditions – improved
• Increased Paid Maternity leave
• Unpaid Parental Leave improved
• Compassionate leave improved
• Redundancy provisions improved
• Sleepover allowance improved
• Performance Pay resisted
• A say in changes in the work improved
• Those on AWAs or ITEAS conditions to be negotiated next time
• Resisted Salary on Reduction
• Restricted Averaging of Hours
• Taking into account personal circumstances in Rostering
• Pay Formula simpler
• ECC Review removed from CA
• Objectives removed from CA
• Probation – promised in letter of offer
• Cadetship – removed from CA
• Consultation when changes are proposed is improved
• Redundancy is improved
• Personal Leave Doctor Certificate requirements restricted

What is not so good?

• Mission Australia initiated delays from the first round of negotiations, and continued throughout, all the while claiming that they didn’t want delays - They started with deadlines linked to pay increases and they continued to be less than clear and transparent about backpay and pay increase dates right to the end.
• Mission Australia reneged on its agreed position in relation to the use of the Flexibility clause – this clause if misused will be an AWA by any other name.
• Mission Australia reneged on conditions for temporary workers.
• Mission Australia has failed Service Managers (and anyone who might act-up or start as a Service manager in the life of this agreement) by not providing your team with details about their pay and conditions as promised.
• Areas with workers who are on AWAs have really missed out.
• Some newly “captured” workers (who Mission Australia included at the last minute) did not get to have a fair say.
• Many of the saved and improved things are not perfect – but they are at least saved

So, where to from here?

As management have told you all you’ll get an “info” pack in the week of October 27. Your team has not seen the contents of the pack so can’t tell you what will be in it. If you have any questions or concerns please don’t hesitate to contact your staff rep and/or Union office.

It’ll include instructions on how you can vote. And so, it’s time for each and every Mission Worker to decide:

Why Yes? Your team has fought really hard and feels they have, in the circumstances, managed to get back and save many things – the CA is far from perfect – but it may be the best we can do. Voting Yes will see your pay come into line with others in the sector, many of you have been behind for too long.

Why No? Your team is really disappointed with some aspects of the agreement and has some serious concerns about the processes. A No vote is a vote to keep your current conditions and to continue a new campaign and a new round of negotiations. A new campaign would require everyone getting involved and sticking together.

It’s up to you, and it’s important you have your say.

Regardless of how you vote your representatives should be congratulated. After a long and drawn out process some good gains have been achieved. The ASU would like to congratulate these workers on their hard work in staying together and acting on behalf of all. Every ASU member should feel proud for their contribution to this campaign. And don’t forget - regardless of if you vote yes or no, before long we will all have to do this again... Get involved and stay involved.

For more info

Please contact your Union Office or Staff Rep.