Country Fire Authority v United Firefighters' Union of Australia
[2012] FWA 9644
•13 NOVEMBER 2012
[2012] FWA 9644 |
|
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.739—Dispute resolution
Country Fire Authority
v
United Firefighters’ Union of Australia
(C2012/2416)
United Firefighters’ Union of Australia
v
Country Fire Authority
(C2012/4971)
COMMISSIONER ROE | MELBOURNE, 13 NOVEMBER 2012 |
Alleged dispute regarding lateral entry for Operations Officers and Operations Managers pursuant to Clause 122 of the Country Fire Authority (CFA), United Firefighters’ Union of Australia Operational Staff Agreement 2010 - Clause 15, Dispute Resolution of the Agreement.
[1] On 30 January 2012 the Country Fire Authority (CFA) made application under s.739 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) to deal with a dispute in accordance with a dispute settlement procedure (Clause 15) of the Country Fire Authority, United Firefighters’ Union of Australia Operational Staff Agreement 2010 (the Agreement).
[2] The Operations Officer (Reliever) position in District 18, Swan Hill has been vacant since October 2008 except for limited periods when it has been filled on a temporary basis using secondment or higher duties. It has been vacant since 29 February 2011.
[3] Operations Managers provide leadership, management and direction to regional personnel, brigades, groups and service delivery points to ensure effective emergency service delivery and preparedness within the region. CFA carries out its functions through approximately 58,000 volunteers, 580 career firefighting positions and approximately 1100 support staff. Operations Officers assist Operations Managers in the provision of leadership, management and direction to regional personnel, brigades, groups and service delivery points to ensure effective emergency service delivery and preparedness within the region. The performance of both roles is very important in ensuring effective delivery of a range of CFA activities including volunteer brigade support, infrastructure planning/maintenance, risk management, training and service delivery preparedness and response programs. There are a total of 138 Operations Officers and Operations Managers positions. Most Operations Officers are located within regions and districts across the state. There are also a number located at CFA Headquarters.
[4] Lateral Entry means an external appointment to or entry to a position within CFA other than by progression through the rank structure within the CFA.
[5] Prior to 1991 there were two pathways for entry to operational roles as a career firefighter in the CFA. One pathway was to enter as a recruit firefighter and progress through the classifications or ranks upon the completion of required training and experience and subject to merit selection for promotion. The other pathway was to the rank of assistant regional officer by lateral entry following merit selection. After 1991 a single classification or rank structure was introduced and there was some retraining of personnel to ensure that they met the requirements of the new structure.
[6] The matter of lateral entry for Operations Managers and Operations Officers has been the subject of prescription in the previous registered collective agreement covering Operations Managers and Operations Officers, namely, the Country Fire Authority, United Firefighters’ Union of Australia Operations Managers/Operations Officers Enterprise Agreement 2007. The provisions in the 2007 Agreement were similar to those in the current Agreement. The registered collective agreement which operated immediately before the 2007 Agreement, namely, the Country Fire Authority, United Firefighters’ Union of Australia Operations Managers/Operations Officers Enterprise Agreement 2002, did not contain terms specifically addressing lateral entry, although it did contain terms dealing with the competencies required of Operations Managers and Operations Officers. Prior to 2002 there was no regulation by collective agreement or award of lateral entry to the position of Operations Officer or Operations Manager.
[7] A significant number of personnel entered the CFA and have subsequently become Operations Officers/Operations Managers by lateral entry. A number of them are still employed in these roles. These personnel have backgrounds including from other public firefighting services, as CFA volunteers and with police and other emergency services in Victoria or elsewhere. Between 2002 and 2007 those who were appointed through lateral entry were required to meet the competencies specified for Operations Officers/Operations Managers in the collective agreement. The requirement to meet the competencies for the Operations Officer/Operations Manager position is narrower than the requirements in the 2007 Agreement and the current Agreement. 1 There is no evidence before me to suggest that these personnel are unable to effectively carry out the roles of Operations Officer and Operations Manager.
[8] Lateral entry for ranks below Operations Officers has been more restricted. The collective agreement for those ranks prior to the current Agreement restricted lateral entry to those who are currently employed at a comparable rank in a government fire service in Australia or New Zealand. The Agreement refers to these as recognised fire services. Clause 28 of the current Agreement maintains this restriction.
[9] In practice there has been no lateral entry since 2007 into the ranks of Operations Officers and Operations Managers as agreement has not been reached on the lateral entry process consistent with the requirements of Clause 122 of the Agreement.
History of the dispute
[10] Mr Skiba of the CFA gave evidence that since October 2011 the CFA had been consulting with the Untied Firefighters’ Union of Australia (UFU) on a form of Business Rule that sets out a competency based lateral entry process to be applied to the filing of a vacant Operations Officer (Reliever) position at District 18 which is around Swan Hill and for other similar positions. Consultation occurred at the Operations Managers/Operations Officers Consultative Committee (OO/OM Committee). A number of amendments to the proposed Business Rule were discussed at the OO/OM Committee meetings on 31 October 2011 and 12 December 2011. The CFA agreed to provide an amended Business Rule for the UFU to consider.
[11] The UFU claims that agreement was in fact reached on the content of the Business Rule at the consultative committee meeting on 12 December 2011. 2 Mr McGuinness for the UFU says that agreement was reached that the Business Rule was agreed to operate as a trial for the three long term vacant positions if those positions were not filled through the Station Officer Priority Appointment Program.
[12] On 21 December 2012 the CFA advised that they did not agree with two of the amendments discussed at the meeting on 12 December 2012. Those two matters were a requirement that applications for lateral entry be limited to operational staff from a recognised fire service and a requirement that a UFU representative be on the selection panel for lateral entry positions.
[13] The CFA notified a dispute to Fair Work Australia (C2012/2416) on 30 January 2012 concerning the failure to resolve the Business Rule to give effect to lateral entry under Clause 122 of the Agreement.
[14] A further consultation meeting was held on 8 February 2012. Conferences were held on 9 and 22 February 2012 at Fair Work Australia. The outcome of these proceedings was that there was further correspondence and consultation committee meetings in March and April 2012. The CFA made some modifications including to the interview panel and to the skills assessment panel in attempt to reduce the concerns of the UFU. Changes arising from the early consultations were reflected in revised versions of the Business Rule which were provided to the UFU. Subsequent issues were discussed and some documents were provided to the UFU which later became part of the revised version of the Business Rule which the CFA now seeks but the CFA did not establish that later versions of the Business Rule were provided to the UFU prior to the advertising of the position. Mr Purdy for the CFA thought that later versions would have been provided but Mr McGuinness for the UFU said that they had not been.
[15] At a further Fair Work Australia conference on 23 April 2012 I issued a Statement which amongst other things recorded that the CFA was satisfied that the matters raised in the Application to Fair Work Australia of 30 January 2012 had been resolved and that the CFA would now proceed to advertise the vacancies. The Statement recorded that the UFU was not happy with this position and reserved its rights to seek further proceedings in C2012/2416 or another application.
[16] On 23 April 2012 the UFU lodged a grievance with the CFA in respect to lateral entry. The CFA provided information to the UFU but advised the UFU that the alleged grievance was in substance the same matter as dealt with in C2012/2416 and that consultation about lateral entry was exhausted.
[17] On 3 July 2012 my Associate wrote to the UFU and CFA as follows: “the Commissioner would appreciate advice as to whether or not C2012/2416, lateral entry is concluded or not.” The CFA responded that as far as they were concerned that matter was concluded as set out in the Statement of 23 April 2012. No reply was received from the UFU. The UFU subsequently advised on 31 August 2012 that there had been a telephone conversation with my Associate on 24 July 2012 advising that “the UFU did not consider the matter is concluded and will respond today or tomorrow”. It is not suggested that any such response was sent or received.
[18] The CFA advertised the positions internally on 25 May 2012 and 12 June 2012 but says that it did not receive any internal applications. On 13 July 2012 the CFA advertised the position of trainee to become Operations Officer (Reliever) for District 18. It is reasonably apparent that applicants were sought to fill a trainee position for a fixed term with permanent appointment to an Operations Officer (Reliever) position on successful completion of the traineeship. The UFU objected to the actions of the CFA by correspondence on 13 August 2012. On 15 August 2012 the CFA advised that the dispute had been resolved and the matter was closed.
[19] On 20 August 2012 the UFU lodged an Application under s.739 of the Act (C2012/4971) concerning the failure to properly consult in accordance with the Agreement. A conciliation conference was held on 24 August at Fair Work Australia but this did not resolve the matter. The CFA advised that they had shortlisted 9 candidates from 69 applications. The CFA also advised of the timetable for filling the positions.
[20] The parties were requested by Fair Work Australia to advise by 31 August 2012 if they wished to proceed to arbitration. The UFU provided such advice on 31 August 2012 together with advice that they would be seeking an interim order that the status quo be adhered to which would mean the CFA taking no further steps to fill the vacancies until the matter was determined. The matters were listed for directions hearing and to consider the matter of an interim order on 27 September 2012. An interim order was not issued but directions were issued for the matter to be heard on 2 November 2012 and the CFA have undertaken not to make offers to fill the position prior to 9 November 2012.
The nature of the dispute
[21] There is a difference of emphasis between the parties as to the nature of the Operations Officer role. It is accepted that a major part of the work of the Operations Officer is management and coordination. It is also accepted that the role includes management of emergency incidents and risks 3 and that this requires:
“An understanding of, and proven performance in fire and emergency management strategies and practices, and the ability to command and control major incidents.” 4
[22] The parties agree that Operations Officers to perform their work must meet the Position Description which is set out in Schedule 11 of the Agreement, must have the specific operational and management and leadership competencies set out in Schedule 12 of the Agreement, and must have the specific competencies or equivalent for the Station Officer rank which are set out in Schedule 5 of the Agreement. 5 The parties disagree about the extent to which Operations Officers must have the competencies acquired through experience and training in progressing through the ranks from recruit firefighter to senior station officer. In part this reflects the difference in emphasis about the extent to which the role is managerial and the extent to which it is operational. The UFU argue that all of these competencies are required and the CFA argue that only some are necessary and in some cases only the underpinning knowledge, or theory, is required not the actual capacity and experience to do the work. Mr McGuinness gave evidence in support of the merits of the UFU view and Mr Purdy and Mr Johnstone gave evidence in support of the merits of the CFA view. All three are Operations Officers or Operations Managers. The parties also argue that the proper construction of the Agreement and Clause 122 in particular supports their view.
[23] Clause 122 of the Agreement is as follows:
122. LATERAL ENTRY
Where it can be demonstrated that no suitably qualified internal applicant (as per clauses 120.1 and 120.2) exists and after advertising internally on two occasions, CFA will seek to fill the vacant position through:
122.1. internal appointment of a person who does not meet all the requirements of Schedule 12; or
122.2. lateral entry of an external applicant
in accordance with the outcomes of consultation or, if not resolved, by determination of FWA of a competency based lateral entry process. A determination of FWA pursuant to this clause will be effective only for the classifications covered by this agreement and only for the life of this agreement.
[24] Clause 15 Disputes Settlement and a number of other relevant provisions of the Agreement to which I will refer are set out at Attachment 1 to this decision.
[25] It is generally not in dispute and I am satisfied that the dispute is a matter within the scope of the Disputes Settlement clause of the Agreement and the relevant steps of the procedure have been followed. The UFU does argue that there are some aspects of the lateral entry policy or Business Rule proposed by the CFA which are different from those which were subject to consultation with the UFU. The UFU therefore argue that it is not open to Fair Work Australia to determine those aspects of the policy or Business Rule apply because they have not been through the required consultation process or the required earlier steps in the disputes settlement procedure.
[26] Both parties have put forward proposals as part of these proceedings for the policy which should apply to the appointment of Operations Officers by lateral entry. The Business Rule of policy proposed relates only to Operations Officers and does not include Operations Managers.
[27] The CFA dispute notification of 30 January 2012 (C2012/2416) described the dispute as “the parties have been negotiating the introduction of a Business Rule to give effect to the Clause (Clause 122) and the parties have failed to reach agreement on the terms of the Business Rule.” The CFA sought the determination of the Business Rule in the terms sought by the CFA as the resolution to the dispute. The UFU dispute notification of 20 August 2012 stated that the UFU does not consider that C2012/2416 had been resolved. The UFU set out a number of complaints about the actions taken by the CFA in respect to lateral entry. The relief sought by the UFU was “the UFU seeks the assistance of Fair Work Australia to utilise its powers to resolve this issue.”
[28] Although the UFU failed to formally respond to the 3 July 2012 request from my Associate that: “the Commissioner would appreciate advice as to whether or not C2012/2416, lateral entry is concluded or not,” I am satisfied that the dispute was not settled. The dispute is not a particular file or matter number in Fair Work Australia. The dispute is an actual conflict between the parties concerning the rules to apply to the implementation of lateral entry in accordance with Clause 122. The UFU advised on 31 August 2012 that they wanted the matter arbitrated. The UFU accepted that the matters for arbitration included: the CFA application of 30 January 2012, the UFU grievances of 23 April and 13 August 2012 and the UFU application of 20 August 2012.
[29] Based upon the above history of the dispute I am satisfied that the dispute is about the implementation of lateral entry for Operations Officers pursuant to s.122 of the Agreement. The resolution of the dispute must, pursuant to s.739(5) of the Act, not be inconsistent with the Agreement. Pursuant to s.739(3) of the Act the resolution of the dispute cannot occur unless the requirements of the disputes settlement clause of the Agreement have been met.
[30] Both parties seek that the lateral entry policy be determined having regard to the proper construction of the Agreement and Clause 122 and Schedule 12 in particular.
[31] The UFU argue that Clause 15.2.6 means that a matter cannot be determined by Fair Work Australia unless it has been progressed through the disputes procedure. On this basis the UFU argue that some aspects of the CFA’s proposed Business Rule have not been the subject of consultation and therefore the Tribunal does not have the jurisdiction to determine the matter favourably to the CFA.
[32] I am satisfied that to be consistent with the Agreement the resolution of a dispute about the implementation of lateral entry for Operations Officers pursuant to s.122 of the Agreement must be the determination by Fair Work Australia of a competency based lateral entry process. Clause 122 makes this quite clear as it provides for: “lateral entry of an external applicant in accordance with the outcomes of consultation or, if not resolved, by determination of FWA of a competency based lateral entry process” I am also satisfied that there must be consultation about the policy to apply to lateral entry prior to any Fair Work Australia arbitration.
[33] I am satisfied that the versions of the policy or Business Rule proposed by the UFU and the CFA are competency based lateral entry processes. It is reasonably clear from the provisions of Clause 13 and Clause 123 that consultation about matters arising under the Agreement and consultation about proposals for change arising from the Agreement must be dealt with through the Operations Managers/Operations Officers Consultative Committee (OO/OM Committee). 6 The general consultative committee under the Agreement is recommendatory in nature and operates on the basis of consensus in developing recommendations.7 However, Clause 123 provides that the OO/OM Committee is recommendatory but makes no specific reference to consensus. It is the OO/OM Committee which applies to OO/OM specific matters. In any case the specific provisions of Clause 122 make it clear that lateral entry policy can be implemented by determination of Fair Work Australia even if agreement or consensus is not reached through consultation at OO/OM Committee.
[34] I am satisfied by the evidence that the matter of the appropriate policy for lateral entry was discussed extensively at a number of OO/OM Committee meetings from 12 December 2012 through to 16 April 2012. It was also the subject of extensive correspondence and conciliation at Fair Work Australia.
[35] A dispute over the application or implementation of a clause in an agreement is not necessarily fixed or definite in respect to its subject matter. The subject matter may be altered and enlarged during the course of the dispute itself including during the processes before Fair Work Australia. 8
[36] I am satisfied that having regard to the provisions of the Agreement and the history of the dispute it is not necessary for every detail of the lateral entry policy proposed by either of the parties to have been the subject of consultation prior to the matter being determined by Fair Work Australia.
[37] The UFU argues that the evidence does not establish that there was specific consultation with the UFU about the concept now proposed by the CFA that a person might be appointed on a fixed term basis as a trainee until they have completed a program to fill an identified skill gap prior to ongoing appointment as an Operations Officer and prior to actually fulfilling all the duties of an Operations Officer. The UFU argues that the evidence also does not establish that there was specific consultation with the UFU about the concept that a person’s fixed term appointment may be extended even though they do not meet the requirements for ongoing appointment as an Operations Officer.
[38] The UFU also argues that the evidence establishes that there was no specific consultation about the change in the specification of the required competencies from being the equivalent to the competencies required by Schedule 12 of the Agreement to a provision whereby the competencies are set out in an attachment to the policy or Business Rule.
[39] Both the earlier versions of the CFA proposed Business Rule and the final version do not require external applicants to have the relevant competencies and qualifications as identified within Schedule 12 of the Agreement to make an application for the position.
[40] An examination of the draft Business Rules proposed by the CFA which were the subject of consultation at OO/OM Committee, the minutes of the OO/OM Committee meetings and the correspondence between the parties reveals that the qualifications and experience required for an external person to apply and/or be selected for the position of Operations Officer by lateral entry was the subject of disagreement between the parties during the consultation process. The UFU was seeking to limit applications to those from a recognised fire service whilst the CFA was seeking to draw from a much wider pool of prior qualifications and experience. It is also apparent that the issue of a process to deal with the filling of skills gaps which might be found was the subject of consultation at OO/OM Committee. The CFA proposed Business Rule of 21 December 2012 9 specifically provides:
“in situations where the skills recognition process finds the external applicant does not meet all required training competencies and a skills gap exists, the following shall be applied:
(a) Upon commencement of employment with CFA, the applicant be required to complete all outstanding training as a matter of priority acquiring the necessary competencies as provided for by CFA.
(b) The offer of employment will require that for employment to be confirmed following probation the applicant must have made every reasonable attempt and endeavour to complete all identified competencies/training within the designated time frames.
(c) The external applicant shall be paid the salary prescribed for Operations Officer Level 1 until eligible to progress in accordance with the terms of the Agreement.” 10
[41] Mr Purdy gave evidence that at the OO/OM Committee meeting on 16 April 2012 the “internship proposal” to “ensure all identified skills gaps are overcome” was discussed. Mr Purdy says that the discussion was quite extensive. 11At that meeting Mr McGuinness prepared a flow or diagram chart for discussion about the process whereby the applicant’s skills gaps were identified and potentially filled. This flow chart or diagram was attached to Mr Purdy’s statement and Mr McGuinness accepted that he was the author and that the issue of skills gaps and internships or cadetships were discussed. The diagram does refer to an up to 12 month “induction and endorsement” period in one place and to an up to 12 month cadetship period in another place. The diagram has at its heading or starting point “everyone - external ad.” Mr McGuinness gave evidence that the focus of the discussion when it came to cadetship was on internal applicants who did not meet the requirements for appointment and a process for filling their skill gap.12 Mr Purdy gave evidence that the discussion related to both internal and external applicants.13 However, Mr McGuinness accepted that his diagram contemplated that both external and internal applicants would be assessed.14
[42] On 27 April 2012 in response to both the questions asked by the UFU at the OO/OM Committee meeting of 16 April 2012 and the FWA conference of 23 April 2012 the CFA provided a document which set out the required leadership/management skills which would be utilised to assess candidates and identify skills gaps, the proposed content of the induction program to deal with CFA working environment and procedures and the proposal as to how to deal with gaps in firefighting experience from external applicants. (Attachment SP4 to Exhibit CFA 7) That document indicated that the Operations Officer position description would be used for assessment.
“Where gaps are identified, an assessment will be made to what skills and experience need to be provided to enable the individual to effectively perform at the required level and if this process is achievable within a 12 month time frame. Consistent with the requirements established by the Agreement, applicants will be required to have the minimum skill set required for an Operations Officer. The individual learning plan and internship concept allows the proposed process to overcome any deficiencies in this area. If experience or skills gaps are identified the resulting individual learning program will be developed with the aim of addressing these issues. The shadowing and mentoring program with experienced OO’s & OM’s which will concurrently operate with any skills acquisition program aims to support the acquisition and application of skills and develop relevant experiences.” 15
[43] I am satisfied that the 21 December 2012 version of the CFA Lateral Entry Business Rule contained the concept that an external or an internal applicant may not have all the required competencies for an Operations Officer but may still apply for the job. Such an applicant may then be assessed, have skills gaps identified, have a training/experience program developed to fill the gaps, be required to complete that program prior to being confirmed in an ongoing position and not be required/permitted to undertake the full range of Operations Officer duties until successful completion of the program. I am also satisfied that this concept was further developed and discussed in detail at the OO/OM Committee and at the 16 April 2012 meeting in particular. The UFU made significant input into this discussion including the possible use of a cadetship or internship concept for the period of training/experience to fill the skills gap and it was discussed that this period may be for a period of up to 12 months. This concept was then further documented in the correspondence of the 27 April 2012 and there were further opportunities to discuss this matter further if desired in at the subsequent conferences at Fair Work Australia. The UFU did not respond further to the details provided by the CFA on 16 April and 27 April 2012. 16
[44] I am satisfied that it was clear to the UFU that the CFA was proposing that a successful applicant may not have the equivalent of the minimum skills set required for an Operations Officer as set out in the Agreement but that through an internship or cadetship of up to 12 months a program would be established to rectify the gap as assessed.
[45] Mr Purdy gave uncontested evidence that Attachments 1 and 2 which now form part of the CFA’s proposed Business Rule were provided to the UFU at the meeting on the 16 April 2012 and in the subsequent correspondence of 27 April 2012. 17 Attachment 1 “illustrates the required operations underpinning knowledge and skills which must be met for an external applicant to be successfully appointed” and it is also to be utilised to indentify “where each required competency to support underpinning knowledge can be obtained”. Attachment 2 is the leadership, management, communication and interpersonal skills required by Operations Officers pursuant to Schedule 12. Attachments 1 and 2 were not a part of the earlier versions of the CFA Business Rule which had been the subject of consultation. The Attachments replace the formulation in the earlier versions of the CFA Business Rule “Schedule 12 of the Agreement (or equivalent) for Operations Officers, in addition to those competencies required for the rank of Station Officer.” It is reasonably apparent that the CFA believe that Attachments 1 and 2 represent, for the purpose of lateral entry, the equivalent to the requirements of Schedule 12 of the Agreement for Operations Officers including the competencies required for the rank of Station Officer. Attachment 1 in particular includes what is required in the view of the CFA to meet the requirement in the note at the end of Schedule 12 of the Agreement that: “this process will define the necessary underpinning knowledge equivalent to FF through to and including SSO qualifications.”
[46] I am satisfied that there was consultation about the CFA’s view of the competency and underlying knowledge requirements to be met for lateral entry. The CFA Business Rule now proposes that the skills recognition process will involve an assessment against the position description and the requirements of Attachment 1 and Attachment 2. The earlier version proposed that it be against the position description and “Schedule 12 of the Agreement (or equivalent) for Operations Officers, in addition to those competencies required for the rank of Station Officer.” I am satisfied that Attachment 1 and Attachment 2 are the CFA’s elaboration of the earlier requirement and that these were the subject of consultation but not agreement.
[47] I am therefore satisfied that although there are some specific aspects of the Business Rule now proposed by the CFA which were not available to the UFU in the form of a revised Business Rule, all of the main issues in dispute about the nature of the policy or Business Rule to apply to lateral entry were the subject of consultation. The dispute including all the major issues between the parties about the nature of the lateral entry policy to apply to the CFA has been through the necessary stages of the disputes settlement procedure, Clause 15, to enable it to be determined by Fair Work Australia. This includes the pool of applicants, the process for exhausting internal selection, the role of the UFU in the selection and assessment process, the process for identifying and filling skills gaps, the concept of conditional appointment until skills gaps are filled, and the key features of the induction program.
[48] Even if I am wrong about that matter, I am satisfied that the parties had considerable opportunity to consult about the policy for lateral entry in some detail and over a significant period of time. I am satisfied that the matter of the competency based lateral entry process to apply was not resolved. In these circumstances Clause 122 provides for Fair Work Australia to determine the competency based lateral entry process. The proposal of both parties as to the appropriate process is before me. The Agreement at Clause 122 specifically empowers me to determine the lateral entry process on merit having regard to the competing positions put before me by the parties.
[49] I am satisfied that I can determine the dispute over the policy to apply for lateral entry pursuant to Clause 122 by finalising the policy to apply. Provided that the policy I determine is consistent with the Agreement I can determine the policy based upon consideration of the merits of the competing policies put forward by the UFU and the CFA. Based upon consideration of the merits I may determine a policy which differs from that proposed by either party.
[50] The UFU argue that there are some aspects of the CFA proposed policy/Business Rule which I cannot accept because they are in conflict with aspects of the Agreement. I will deal with these separately.
[51] I note that the CFA made a formal submission that Clause 122 is invalid and unenforceable for reasons I had rejected in a recent matter involving the same parties and the same Agreement. 18
The vacancy in District 18 and the urgency of determining a lateral entry process.
[52] The evidence establishes that the vacancy is very long term. The evidence of Mr Johnstone 19 establishes that a failure to the fill the vacancy puts pressure on the remaining Operations Officers in the Region and makes it difficult for them to take leave and achieve adequate rest. Mr Johnstone also gave evidence that there were additional costs for the CFA. This evidence was not fundamentally challenged by Mr McGuinness and the UFU.
[53] Mr McGuinness suggested further steps which might be taken to fill the position by secondment or internal priority appointment. Mr McGuinness suggested that further consultation with the UFU about the lessons learnt from the priority appointment program might lead to new solutions. Mr McGuinness pointed to the fact that there had been a number of other long term vacancies which have been successfully filled through secondment or priority appointment or other means. Mr McGuinness and the UFU suggested that alternations to the work might also assist given that the amount of travel required may be a disincentive to internal applicants. Mr Johnstone and Mr Purdy responded to a number of these matters.
[54] After considering all of the evidence I am satisfied that significant and extensive efforts have been made to fill the vacancy in District 18 and that for operational and occupational health and safety reasons it is imperative that the position be filled. I am satisfied that the relevant alternative options to fill the position have been explored and that the CFA is entitled under the Agreement to access lateral entry in accordance with Clause 122 in these circumstances.
[55] Clause 122 does not suggest that the resolution of the appropriate lateral entry process should await the need to fill a particular long term vacancy, although the use of such a process is dependent upon demonstration that there is no suitable internal applicant and after internally advertising on two occasions. In fact it would seem logical to conduct the consultation and if necessary the determination of the process in advance of the necessity to use it, given that some time is inevitably required in the resolution of such matters.
[56] Clause 122 refers to “a determination of FWA pursuant to this clause” and I am satisfied that I am required by the terms of Clause 122 to determine the competency based lateral entry process in a situation where it has not been resolved through consultation. I have already determined that this is a matter which has been subject to consultation and has not been resolved.
[57] I am satisfied that it would not be in the public interest or consistent with the terms of the Agreement to further delay a resolution of the competency based lateral entry process.
What needs to be determined as part of a competency based lateral entry process?
[58] I am satisfied having heard the evidence and having regard to the provisions of the Agreement that there are essentially three elements which must be included in a competency based lateral entry process:
● The processes whereby a lateral entry process is administered including how the position is first tested internally, the selection process, the consultation process, the assessment process, and the appointment process. There are some commonalities and some differences between the parties on these matters.
● To be appointed to be an Operations Officer requires that an applicant meet the position description in Schedule 11 and the equivalent to the competency framework for Operations Managers/Operations Officers in Schedule 12. It is necessary to determine what is the equivalent to the competency framework requirements in Schedule 12 or at least how that is to be determined or assessed.
● To identify what is the pathway whereby those who are otherwise suitable to be appointed but who have a manageable and identified skill gap can come to be employed and effectively work as an Operations Officer. This will include an appropriate induction process.
[1] Both parties accept that to perform the duties of an Operations Officer it is necessary for them to meet the requirements of the position description in Schedule 11. An analysis of the differences between the parties about the requirement for the equivalent to the competency framework for Operations Managers/Operations Officers in Schedule 12 are a matter of detail not fundamental structure or principle. The CFA proposed policy/Business Rule provides that lateral entry cannot be used to fill vacancy of an officer in charge of an integrated brigade and that to be a Regional Duty Officer requires Operations Officer Level 2 competencies and appropriate underpinning knowledge associated with Firefighter through to and including Senior Station Officer. The CFA propose to define and list the competencies required rather than to use the term equivalent to the competency framework for Operations Managers/Operations Officers in Schedule 12. They do this for reasons including because they say there is dispute between UFU and CFA about what Schedule 12 requires in this circumstance. 20 In earlier versions of the CFA Business Rule the requirement was described as “the training competencies required are as established in Schedule 12 of the Agreement (or equivalent) for Operations Officers, in addition to those competencies required for the rank of Station Officer.” The earlier versions stated that regard would be had for “previous experience, underpinning knowledge and skills commensurate with the Operations Officer role”.21 The UFU use the term equivalent to Schedule 12 but they also define and list the required competencies.
[2] Both parties also agree that applicants for a competency based lateral entry process may have manageable skills gaps but be otherwise suitable to be appointed. Schedule 12 specifically provides that “the process foreshadowed in Clause 122 will result in a competency based entry pathway to employment as an Operations Officer for persons who are not currently employed by the CFA as Station Officers with underpinning competencies. This process will define the necessary underpinning knowledge equivalent to FF through to and including SSO qualifications.” 22 I consider that the concept of a pathway can and should encompass how manageable skills gaps will be addressed. I consider that the concept of process can and should encompass how equivalence to the requirements of Schedule 12 is defined and as a part of this how the necessary underpinning knowledge equivalent to FF through to and including SSO qualifications is defined or determined.
[3] The UFU proposed policy for lateral entry 23 provides that an appointee can only perform duties commensurate with their competencies and if there is a gap between the competencies held and the competencies required by Schedule 12 then the appointee is required to complete all necessary training and assessment (including station officer assessment) prior to performing an Operations Officer role. In this sense the UFU also accepts that there will be a pathway to employment as an Operations Officer which includes a process for filling a skills gap.
[4] The UFU proposal would require UFU agreement to extend appointment beyond an applicant from a recognised fire service.
The extent to which other provisions of the Agreement limit the policy for lateral entry pursuant to Clause 122.
Creation of new classification
[5] I accept that the policy or Business Rule cannot create a new classification for a number of reasons. Firstly Clause 6 limits the application of the Agreement to the classifications or occupations referred to in the Agreement. Secondly, Part C of the Agreement deals with Operations Officers and Operations Managers and sets out in detail the classifications, position descriptions, progression requirements and competency requirements for Operations Officers and Operations Managers. Thirdly, there is a requirement that personal development of existing Operations Officers and Operations Managers must not be undermined. 24
[6] I accept the argument of the CFA that it is not the intention to create a new classification. Rather the CFA is seeking to create a pathway via a competency based lateral entry process to an Operations Officer position as contemplated by Clause 122. It is apparent from reading the CFA Business Rule that the successful applicant will be paid as an Operations Officer level 1, will not be required to perform duties until competent, will be provided with training and assistance to fill any skills gap over a period of up to twelve months, and will not be appointed in an ongoing position unless the skills gap is successfully filled. I accept the argument of CFA that the provision that the fixed term appointment during training may be extended is a reasonable precaution against claims for unfair termination but there is another provision in the Business Rule which makes it clear that permanent appointment and the capacity to perform the full range of duties are dependent upon successful completion of the necessary training and experience.
[7] I agree with the CFA that Clause 122 in allowing for a process and a pathway for lateral entry allows for persons to be appointed for a period of time and paid as an Operations Officer prior to meeting all of the requirements for the job and prior to performing all the requirements for the job and whilst they are resolving an identified skills gap and undertaking induction. This process and pathway does not necessarily create a new classification.
[8] However, I also accept the argument of the UFU that there is a problem in the fact that there are two quite separate employment contracts contemplated. The first is a fixed term contract for a trainee Operations Officer and the second is the ongoing employment contract which will only be entered into if the training during the first fixed term contract is successfully completed. The first employment contract could be extended and there is no limit in the proposed CFA Business Rule to the length of that extension.
[9] I also consider that there are some inherent problems in the fixed term concept. The program is not a registered traineeship or apprenticeship, although this might be possible to organise at a future date. Traineeships and apprenticeships are recognised in the Act as permitting fixed term arrangements with exemption from unfair dismissal. However the arrangement in this case is not a training arrangement as defined in Section 12 of the Act. That definition is as follows:
“training arrangement means a combination of work and training that is subject to a training agreement, or a training contract, that takes effect under a law of a State or Territory relating to the training of employees.”
[10] If the program is not a training arrangement then there may be some difficulties in identifying what is the specified time or task.
[11] However, it is not necessary to decide this question because the main problem is the concept of two separate employment contracts. The first contract is for a different position than that covered by the requirements of the Agreement for an Operations Officer. The successful applicant for that position will not perform the duties identified in the position description in the Agreement and does not meet the requirements for appointment to the position in either Schedule 11 or Schedule 12 of the Agreement. I am satisfied that a separate employment contract means that the appointment to the fixed term position of Trainee Operations Officer is an appointment to a separate and different classification. It is an appointment to a classification not covered by the Agreement and that is inconsistent with the Agreement.
[12] For reasons that I elaborate on later I have found that Clause 122 contemplates and permits that a lateral employee will not meet all the requirements of a person who has come up through the CFA ranks and the competency based process will allow for recognition of equivalent skills, competencies and underlying knowledge and will define those that satisfy the requirements of equivalency within the framework of Clause 122 and the note in Schedule 12. I have also found earlier that Clause 122 contemplates and permits that a lateral employee may have an initial skills gap and may have to complete a structured training and induction program as a pathway to being able to perform the full range of duties as an Operations Officer. However, this cannot be achieved through two separate employment contracts.
[13] I am satisfied that the successful applicant must be appointed as an Operations Officer not a Trainee Operations Officer. The successful applicant can be required as a condition of employment to complete the relevant training plan to close a skills gap and the relevant induction program. The successful applicant would not be able to undertake duties for which they are not competent until the successful completion of this program. The successful applicant could be subject to a probation period during which this program must be completed and the employment could be ended if the program was not completed or if there was not sufficient progress towards completion.
[14] The UFU also argues that lateral entry as proposed by the CFA undermines Schedule 5 of the Agreement which sets out the CFA Emergency Response Training Framework and the Public Safety Training Package competency standards and career progression structure. However, Schedule 5 relates to the ranks below Operations Officer and does not include Operations Officer. Clause 122 allows for modification to the normal progression through the ranks to Operations Officer. I do not consider that the proposal is inconsistent with the Agreement in this respect.
Application of Clause 28
[15] The CFA argue that Clause 28 does not apply and that Clause 122 is a specific provision for lateral entry for Operations Officers/Operations Managers which applies instead of the general provision for other ranks in Clause 28. Clause 28 limits the use of lateral entry in a number of ways, including by restricting applicants to those who are “an operational employee of a recognised fire service” who “must hold the same or equivalent rank as that of the position advertised.”As discussed earlier a recognised fire service is defined in the Agreement as a fire service of a government of Australia or New Zealand and it does not include a private firefighting service.
[16] The CFA refer to the context in which Clause 122 and Clause 28 must be understood and particularly to the history of the Clauses.
[17] I am satisfied that Clause 28 does not apply to Operations Officers and Operations Managers in respect to lateral entry. Clause 122 is the provision which applies to lateral entry for Operations Officers and Operations Managers. Clause 122 does not limit applicants to those from a recognised fire service.
Competencies required
[18] The CFA argue that the competency based lateral entry process referred to in Clause 122 applies to both external and internal applicants who do not meet all the requirements of Schedule 12, Competency Framework for Operations Managers/Operations Officers. The CFA argues that it is obvious that external applicants do not meet all the requirements of Schedule 12 because the requirements of Schedule 12 include all operational and management competences of a Station Officer and those competencies are developed through CFA specific modules and experience. Mr McGuinness accepted that the requirements of a Station Officer included CFA specific modules and experience. 25
[19] Reading Schedule 12 in context, excluding any modifications which might arise from a lateral entry pathway, there are four requirements to be an Operations Officer: the Operations Officer competencies set out in the Schedule, the Station Officer competencies, the qualifications and experience obtained through progression from Firefighter to Senior Station Officer, and the requirements of the Position Description.
[20] The UFU argue that because the words “who does not meet all the requirements of Schedule 12” only appear in Clause 122 in respect to internal applicants, they cannot be implied in respect to external applicants.
[21] It is clear that the parties dealt with both internal and external applicants when considering the policy for lateral entry. This is logical given that Clause 122 and lateral entry only applies “where it can be demonstrated that no suitably qualified internal applicant exists” and the clause covers both those internal applicants who do not meet all the requirements of Schedule 12 and external applicants. I am satisfied that the phrase “in accordance with the outcomes of consultation or, if not resolved, by determination of FWA of a competency based lateral entry process” applies to both the internal and external applicants. All of the discussions of the parties have been about the rules to apply to both internal and external applicants.
[22] I do not accept that the absence of the words “where it can be demonstrated that no suitably qualified internal applicant exists” in reference to external applicants can be read as implying or requiring that external applicants must be suitably qualified, that is must meet all of the requirements of the Position Description in Schedule 11 and all of the competency requirements in Schedule 12. It is not necessary to read Clause 122.2 as if the words “where it can be demonstrated that no suitably qualified internal applicant exists” were present to reach this conclusion. I accept that by definition an external applicant could not meet all the requirements of Schedule 12 because those requirements require the completion of CFA specific modules and experience.
[23] The UFU accept that by definition external applicants for lateral entry will be unlikely to hold the precise CFA qualifications and length of service and hence they accept that Clause 122 only requires applicants for lateral entry to meet equivalence to the requirements of Schedule 12.
[24] However, the CFA do not accept the UFU’s interpretation of what is required for equivalence to Schedule 12.
[25] I accept that to work as an Operations Officers a person must meet the requirements of the Agreement to work as an Operations Officer. The existence of a competency based lateral entry process does not change those requirements. Clause 113 provides that the Operations Officer must meet the requirements as set out in the Position Description in Schedule 11 and that this is read in conjunction with the competencies in Schedule 12.
[26] The Position Description includes the requirement:
“an understanding of, and proven performance in fire and emergency management strategies and practices, and the ability to command and control major incidents.”
[27] The parties agreed that eventually it is necessary for all Operations Officers to be able to perform the role of State or Regional Duty Officer. Clause 120.3.3 and Schedule 12 make it clear that “no new appointee shall perform the Regional Duty Officer role unless they have Operations Officer Level 2 competencies and appropriate underpinning knowledge associated with Firefighter through to and including Senior Station Officer.” Hence any appointee through lateral entry must be capable of eventually meeting this requirement. However, the appropriate underpinning knowledge of the lower ranks is not necessarily the same thing as all of the competencies of the lower ranks.
[28] I am satisfied both as a matter of merit and a matter of construction of the Agreement that the competency based lateral entry process must lead to the person meeting the competencies equivalent to the requirements of Schedule 12, Competency Framework for Operations Managers/ Operations Officers. Whether the person enters through the pathway of lateral entry or through the normal progression process the person must ultimately meet the competency requirements for an Operations Officer under the Agreement. These are set out in Schedules 11 and 12.
[29] However, competency is about the capacity to do things not about the particular pathway to acquiring that capacity. Competency is about the combination of theory and practice or the combination of skill and underpinning knowledge required to perform work to the appropriate standard. A competency based lateral entry process is not confined to the normal process of acquisition of the necessary skills and knowledge through progress through the CFA ranks and successful completion of the required training programs. It includes equivalent and alternative pathways to meeting the equivalent of the Schedule 12 requirements. Clause 122 would have no work to do if the only pathway was a requirement to meet Schedule 12.
[30] I am satisfied that even if the policy or Business Rule specifies the required competencies as in the latest version of the CFA Business Rule, it is appropriate in order to ensure consistency with the Agreement, to make explicit in the policy or Business Rule the requirement, as in the earlier CFA versions that, “the training competencies required are as established in Schedule 12 of the Agreement (or equivalent) for Operations Officers, in addition to those competencies required for the rank of Station Officer.” However, it is necessary to resolve the conflict between the UFU and the CFA as to whether or not this means that all of the competencies from lower ranks are required.
[31] Clause 120.1 provides that “All internal appointees to the ranks of Operations Officer or Operations Manager must hold all Station Officer competencies and the competencies of the underpinning ranks.” The progression requirements then follow in Clause 120.2 which is headed “New Internal Appointments.”In my view this strongly suggests that all these requirements do not apply to the appointment process for those under lateral entry. That it is intended that the requirements for those in a lateral entry pathway are to be different is reinforced by the specific requirement of Schedule 12 which provides that the Operations Officer Level 1 pay level will apply to Lateral Entry personnel and details the relationship between Schedule 12 requirements and lateral entry in a note:
“the process foreshadowed in Clause 122 will result in a competency based entry pathway to employment as an Operations Officer for persons who are not currently employed by the CFA as Station Officers with underpinning competencies. This process will define the necessary underpinning knowledge equivalent to FF through to and including SSO qualifications.” 26 (emphasis added)
[32] I am therefore satisfied that it is anticipated that lateral entry is possible for those who do not have all the “underpinning competencies” for Station Officer. Instead of requiring the underpinning competencies the process of competency based entry will define “the necessary underpinning knowledge equivalent to FF through to and including SSO qualifications.” In addition to this there is a requirement for the specific Operations Officer competencies specified in Schedule 12 and the Station Officer competencies to be achieved. The words “necessary” and “equivalent” are significant. The use of the words “underpinning knowledge” rather than competency is also significant. Underpinning knowledge is an aspect of competency but it is not the whole of a competency. It is the knowledge necessary to understand and perform work and its context rather than the actual capacity to perform work. I am therefore satisfied that this means that not necessarily every competency of the ranks below Station Officer is required for lateral entrants to work as Operations Officers.
[33] However, the requirements for appointment to the position are not just set out in Schedule 12. There are also the requirements set out in the Position Description in Schedule 11. The Operations Officer competencies and the Operations Officer Position Description must be considered together. The lateral entry process must ensure that the applicant has all of the competencies and underpinning knowledge necessary to meet the Position Description. As the Position Description requires amongst other things “an understanding of, and proven performance in fire and emergency management strategies and practices, and the ability to command and control major incidents” it is obvious that more than underpinning knowledge of firefighting practice is required. 27 The necessary competencies acquired through fire and emergency management experience are also required. Hence although the note in Schedule 12 uses the term “underpinning knowledge” rather than “competency”, in reality actual competency is also required in some areas. Attachment 1 of the CFA Business Rule recognises this. A number of the competencies for the ranks below Station Officer are listed in Attachment 1 as required whereas others are listed as “theory only” and it appears that some are not listed at all.
[34] It is a matter of merit to determine what are necessary competencies and what is the necessary equivalent underpinning knowledge.
Merits. What should be contained in the policy.
[35] The parties in their submissions explained why the key features of their proposed policy should be favoured over the proposal of the other party. Expert evidence was given by Mr Purdy, Mr Johnstone and Mr McGuinness, all of whom hold the rank of Operations Officer or Operations Manager. They gave evidence as to why key aspects of the proposal of the other party were unnecessary or inappropriate and as to the merits of their proposal. I have carefully considered this material. It is not necessary to repeat all these points, suffice to say I have weighed up these arguments in reaching conclusions as to the appropriate content of the policy.
[36] It is necessary to use one of the proposals as the base for the policy. The process since late 2011 has been one where the CFA draft(s) have been the basis for consultation. The issues that the UFU has with the CFA draft(s) have been well articulated. I consider it appropriate to use the CFA draft as the base for the policy.
[37] Mr McGuinness gave evidence that “it is fraught with danger to either laterally enter an applicant into an operational position that would be required to undertake command and control operations if they have not obtained the necessary prerequisites and learning outcomes” associated with the training undertaken by a firefighter progressing through the various ranks. Mr McGuinness says that it puts the public and other firefighters at risk to have unqualified and inexperienced personnel in these positions. 28 The UFU argues that external applicants must have the required years of service as a career firefighter.
[38] As discussed earlier Mr McGuinness and the UFU emphasised the importance of operational skill, knowledge and experience. The CFA and its witnesses emphasised that the job was principally a managerial role. Mr Purdy particularly pointed to the absence of any requirement for Operations Officers and Operations Managers to maintain technical or operational firefighting skills. This is a requirement for other ranks.
[39] I appreciate the concerns of the UFU that if through lateral entry persons were employed as Operations Officers who did not have the necessary skills and knowledge it could threaten the integrity of the professional firefighting career path within the CFA and undermine the job security of career firefighters. I also appreciate the concerns the UFU have for community safety and the safety of other firefighters.
[40] I have taken these matters into account in adopting a cautious approach to the finalisation of the lateral entry policy. I accept that it was the mutual intention of the parties to tighten the requirements for lateral entry in changing the provisions of the 2002 Agreement to introduce the present provision. However, I have found that the provisions of Clause 122 and the note to Schedule 12 read together with the requirements of the job as set out in Schedule 11 of the current Agreement do not require that all the competencies of the lower ranks must be achieved. I accept the evidence of the UFU that it is desirable that all the competencies of the lower ranks are held but I do not consider that it is mandatory. The desirability of holding all of the competencies is reflected in the CFA Business Rule by the requirements that lateral entry is the last resort and the requirement that when lateral entry occurs preference will be given to those with previous professional background in emergency/fire management. However, I consider it is appropriate that the Business Rule be strengthened by amending the requirement as follows: “an understanding of, and proven performance in fire and emergency management strategies and practices together with the achievement of the Station Officer competencies will require a significant period of demonstrated fire and emergency and fire and emergency management experience.”
[41] The UFU also points to the Final Report of the Royal Commission into the Victorian Bushfires, Volume II Recommendation 18:
“the Country Fire Authority and the Department of Sustainability and Environment amend their procedures to require that a suitably experienced, qualified and competent person be appointed as Incident Controller, regardless of the control agency for the fire.” 29
[42] The UFU did not provide information about the context in which this recommendation was made or its direct relevance to the entry requirements for Operations Officers. The CFA did not have the opportunity to provide evidence in response. However, the UFU submit and I accept that this generally underlines the importance of suitable experience, qualification and competency for Operations Officers.
Specific merit issues
[43] I found earlier that it is appropriate in order to ensure consistency with the Agreement, to make explicit in the policy or Business Rule the requirement, as in the earlier CFA versions that, “the training competencies required are as established in Schedule 12 of the Agreement (or equivalent) for Operations Officers, in addition to those competencies required for the rank of Station Officer.”
[44] Mr McGuinness argues that the Vacancy Management Strategy should include a definition of qualified people in point 1 with reference to the requirements under the Agreement for new internal appointments as Operations Officer. 30 This proposal is consistent with the Agreement and is appropriate for clarity. I also consider it appropriate to include consideration of secondment as proposed by the UFU but it should not be mandatory.
[45] Mr McGuinness argues that the Vacancy Management Strategy should not provide that the second step “fixed term higher duties opportunity” is discretionary. He argues that the current practice is to utilise this step and is subject to an agreed Business Rule “Fixed Internal Transfer/Opportunities”. 31 The UFU does not appear to have raised this in consultation in response to the earlier drafts. There was insufficient evidence to support a proposal that this step would always be appropriate. I consider it appropriate to leave this step as discretionary.
[46] Mr McGuinness argues that the Vacancy Management Strategy should provide at its fourth step that any alternative to the Priority Appointment Program is subject to agreement with the UFU. I consider that it should be made clear that any new program must be finalised consistent with the requirements of the Agreement.
[47] The UFU argue that it should be explicit that an appointee can only perform duties commensurate with their competencies until they have successfully completed their Individual Learning Plan. The CFA agrees with this point. 32 I consider it appropriate that this should be explicit in the Business Rule in order to ensure consistency with the Agreement.
[48] Mr McGuinness and the UFU have consistently argued that the RPL/RCC Panel should be utilised for the purpose of validating the competency and experience of individuals. This process has been used for instructors under the Agreement. Mr McGuinness gave evidence that it had been utilised successfully. The MFB propose a different Skills Recognition Panel. The major differences between the two bodies are the representation of the UFU on the RPL/RCC Panel and the requirement for the RPL/RCC Panel to operate by consensus.
[49] I accept the submission of the CFA that given the opposition of the UFU to lateral entry other than from a recognised fire service the UFU proposal may lead to lateral entry being delayed and frustrated. However, I consider that the involvement of a UFU representative who is an Operations Officer or Operations Manager in the process could assist in building confidence in the process. Furthermore the evidence before me was limited as to the process for finalising Attachment 1 which lists the underlying knowledge and competency required. This includes the process whereby the CFA achieved satisfaction that Attachment 1 does meet all of the requirements of the Position Description and the note to Schedule 12. I consider that the UFU could make a considered and constructive contribution to these judgements. The expertise of those directly involved and experienced would assist in improving Attachment 1 for the future. I am satisfied that the CFA is committed to ensuring that Attachment 1 does fully reflect the requirements of the Operations Officer role.
[50] Mr Skiba gave evidence 33 that the skills recognition process has been completed for the selection process for lateral entry for the District 18 vacancy. I consider that to require this process to start again would lead to inappropriate delay. I consider that delay to be unnecessary. However, a UFU representative should be involved in the skills recognition process for any future lateral entry process.
[51] I do not consider that the evidence was sufficient to justify other aspects of the UFU proposals including but not limited to:
● The requirement to consider job redesign before moving to lateral entry
● The inclusion of a further representative on the selection panel
● Requirements for UFU agreement for various steps in the process.
Variations required to the CFA draft Business Rule.
[1] I have decided that the following amendments shall be made to the CFA draft.
- The successful applicant can be required as a condition of employment to complete the relevant training plan to close a skills gap and the relevant induction program;
- The successful applicant would not be able to undertake duties for which they are not competent until the successful completion of this program;
- The successful applicant could be subject to a probation period during which this program must be completed; and
- The employment could be ended if the program was not completed or if there was not sufficient progress towards completion or if the applicant was not able to carry out the required duties within a specified period of time.
- Step 1. Add “Applicants will be career firefighters who have obtained the competencies and qualifications for Operations Officers specified in the Agreement.”
- Step 4. Add after “or any similar program which provides for a streamlined approach to career development” the words “and which is developed consistent with the consultation and other requirements of the Agreement.”
- Add after Step 4 an additional step which provides for consideration of the option of secondment but does not make this step mandatory.
- Add at the beginning:
- Amend the first paragraph as follows:
- Alter the heading of Attachment 1 to “Operational Underpinning Knowledge, skills and competencies.”
- Within three months the OO/OM Consultative Committee and the Skills Recognition Panel shall review Attachment 1.
- FWA will then incorporate any agreed amendments and or determine a revised version of the Business Rule based upon the current dispute notifications.
- Within two months of the completion of the induction program and Individual Learning Plan in respect to the District 18 appointee the OO/OM Consultative Committee and the Skills Recognition Panel shall review the induction program and Attachments 1 and 2.
- FWA will then incorporate any agreed amendments and or determine a final version of the Business Rule based upon the current dispute notifications.”
1. Trainee issue
Changes shall be made in various places to reflect my finding that the successful applicant must be appointed as an Operations Officer not a Trainee Operations Officer. The changes should also reflect the following features:
2. Vacancy Management Strategy
3. Skills Recognition Process
Replace the words “and the identified underpinning training skills for all ranks up to and including Operations Officer” with “and the equivalent of the requirements of Schedule 12 of the Agreement as it applies to Operations Officers. This will include the Operations Officer Level 1 specific competencies in Schedule 12 together with the Station Officer competencies acquired through the Station Officer development course (or equivalent) and the necessary underpinning knowledge equivalent to Firefighter through to and including Senior Station Officer qualifications to ensure that all the requirements of the Position Description on Schedule 11 of the Agreement are able to be met.”
4. Skills Required
“To be appointed on an ongoing basis at the conclusion of the lateral entry process the person must meet the requirements of the Position Description in Schedule 11 of the Agreement and the equivalent of the requirements of Schedule 12 of the Agreement as it applies to Operations Officers. This will include the Operations Officer Level 1 specific competencies in Schedule 12 together with the Station Officer competencies acquired through the Station Officer development course (or equivalent) and the necessary underpinning knowledge equivalent to Firefighter through to and including Senior Station Officer qualifications to ensure that all the requirements of the Position Description on Schedule 11 of the Agreement are able to be met.”
“Attachment 1 illustrates the required operational underpinning knowledge, skills and competencies which must be met for an external applicant to be successfully appointed to an Operations Officers position at the conclusion of the lateral entry process.
Note: it is not a requirement that the applicant possess all of these skills prior to making an application. However, an understanding of, and proven performance in fire and emergency management strategies and practices together with the achievement of the Station Officer competencies will require a significant period of demonstrated fire and emergency and fire and emergency management experience. Attachment 1 is an initial draft which may be subject to further development.”
5. Skills Recognition Panel
Add an additional member of the panel as follows together with a note that there is no requirement for the panel to operate on the basis of consensus and that this will only apply for processes after the current process to fill the reliever vacancy in District 18.
“A UFU nominee who is an Operations Officer or Operations Manager conversant with RPL/RCC principles, competency based training, the Public Safety Training Package and their application within CFA.”
6. Appointment Process
Add a point that provides that an appointee can only perform duties commensurate with their competencies until they have successfully completed their Individual Learning Plan, including the CFA Induction Program.
7. Add a new section after Performance Monitoring- Review of Business Rule
“Attachments 1and 2 and the Induction Program shall operate on a trial basis for the purpose of filling the Operations Officer Reliever vacancy in District 18.
Following the filling of that vacancy the following shall occur:
[1] The CFA have commenced a process to fill the vacancy in District 18 by lateral entry. It is not intended that the process should be required to start again from the beginning but some modifications to the finalisation of the process may be required to reflect this decision. It is intended that the CFA should be able to complete the process in respect to District 18 expeditiously.
[2] The document as amended should be entitled the policy for Operations Officer lateral entry pursuant to Clause 122 of the Agreement. There is no problem with the policy being issued by the CFA as a Business Rule. The CFA should also advise the steps it proposes should now be taken to complete the process in respect to the vacancy in District 18.
[3] The CFA is to provide a revised version of the policy which reflects this decision within three working days. The UFU is to provide any comments in the form of marked up changes together with reasons for the proposed alterations within two working days of receipt. There will be a short hearing to finalise the policy document at 9am on Friday 23 November 2012.
COMMISSIONER
Appearances:
Mr R.C. Kenzie, QC, with Mr T. Dixon and Ms A. Forsyth of Counsel, on behalf of the UFU.
Mr J. Bourke, SC, with Mr T. Jacobs of Counsel on behalf of the CFA.
Hearing details:
2012
Melbourne
November 2
ATTACHMENT 1
RELEVANT PROVISIONS FROM THE AGREEMENT
65. NO EXTRA CLAIMS
65.1. There shall be no extra claims by either party.
15. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
15.1. This dispute resolution process applies to all matters arising under this agreement, which the parties have agreed includes:
15.1.1. all matters for which express provision is made in this agreement;
and
15.1.2. all matters pertaining to the employment relationship, whether or not express provision for any such matter is made in this agreement;
and
15.1.3. all matters pertaining to the relationship between the CFA and UFU, whether or not express provision for any such matter is made in this agreement, and
15.1.4. all matters arising under the National Employment Standards.
The parties agree that disputes about any such matters shall be dealt with by using the provisions in this clause.
15.2. To ensure effective consultation between the employer, its employee(s) and the union on all matters, the following procedure shall be followed in an effort to achieve a satisfactory resolution of any dispute or grievance:
15.2.1. Step 1 The dispute shall be submitted by the union and/or employee(s) to the employee’s immediate supervisor.
15.2.2. Step 2 If not settled at Step 1, the matter shall be submitted to the appropriate senior officer.
15.2.3. Step 3 If not settled at Step 2, the matter shall be recorded. The matter shall be submitted to the appropriate delegated Industrial Representative of the employer for consultation.
15.2.4. Steps 1 - 3 Must be concluded within a period of ten (10) consecutive days. Disputes are to be resolved at a local level wherever possible.
15.2.5. Step 4 If the matter is not settled at Step 3, the dispute shall be formally submitted in writing to the Manager Employee Relations, setting out details of the dispute and, where appropriate, with supporting documentation. The Manager Employee Relations shall convene a meeting of the employer, employee(s) and the union within a period of one week (7 days) of receipt of such submissions and endeavour to reach a satisfactory settlement.
15.2.6. Step 5 If the matter is not settled following progression through the disputes procedure it may be referred by the union or the employer to FWA. FWA may utilise all its powers in conciliation and arbitration to settle the dispute.
15.3. Notwithstanding the words contained in the above sub-clause, the steps of the procedure apply equally to a dispute raised by an employee, the union or Officer in Charge.
15.4. While the above procedures are being followed, including the resolution of any dispute by FWA pursuant to clause 15.2.6, work must continue and the status quo must apply in accordance with the existing situation or practice that existed immediately prior to the subject matter of the grievance or dispute occurring.
No party shall be prejudiced as to the final settlement by the continuance of work in accordance with this sub-clause.
15.5. This clause shall not apply to a dispute on a Health and Safety issue.
15.6. A dispute may be submitted, notified or referred under this clause by the UFU.
15.7. A decision of FWA under this clause may be appealed. A dispute is not resolved until any such appeal is determined.
“PART A - CONDITIONS APPLYING TO ALL EMPLOYEES
....
7. STRUCTURE AND APPLICATION OF AGREEMENT
7.1. The agreement consists of parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G.
7.2. Part A of this agreement applies to all employees.
7.3. Part B of this agreement – Conditions applying to Firefighters and Station
Officers – applies to employees referred to in clause 67.
7.4. Part C of this agreement – Conditions applying to Operations
Managers/Operations Officers – applies to employees referred to in clause
100.
13. CONSULTATIVE PROCESSES
13.1. Consultation
Consultation means the full, meaningful and frank discussion of issues/proposals and the consideration of each party’s views, prior to any decision. Committees established for the purpose of implementing aspects of this agreement are part of the consultative process.
13.2. CFA / UFU Consultative Committee
The parties agree to establish a CFA/UFU Consultative Committee comprising people involved in the decision making processes of both organisations.
The Committee’s terms of reference, membership and working arrangements will be negotiated by the parties within six months of this agreement being lodged.
13.3. Enterprise Bargaining Implementation Committee
13.3.1. The parties are committed to effective consultation and communication throughout the CFA. As a demonstration of that commitment, the parties have undertaken to continue to operate an Enterprise Bargaining Implementation Committee (EBIC) to
facilitate the implementation of this agreement and ongoing workplace reform.
13.3.2. The Committee comprises equal numbers of management and employee representatives as determined by the respective parties, and decision-making will be by consensus.
13.3.3. There is an obligation on Committee members to cooperate positively to consider matters that will increase efficiency, productivity, competitiveness, training, career opportunities and job security.
13.3.4. The Committee will program meetings on a regular basis (initially at least monthly) and communicate the outcomes of meetings to employees covered by this agreement.
13.3.5. The respective parties, at their own initiative, may require the endorsement of their constituents in relation to proposals for change. No proposals for change arising from this agreement shall be implemented without referral to the Enterprise Bargaining Implementation Committee.
13.3.6. The aims of the Enterprise Bargaining Implementation Committee will be to:
(a) consult where provisions in this agreement require consultation:
(b) monitor the implementation of this agreement.
(c) consider and make recommendations regarding issues arising under this agreement.
(d) provide a mechanism for employee input into the implementation of this agreement. Thus providing an opportunity to utilise employee knowledge and experience to provide a mechanism for improving communication and cooperation between the CFA and its employees.
13.3.7. The Committee may, by agreement, alter its size and/or composition or establish working parties to research and make recommendations on specific issues for determination by EBIC at a later date.
13.4. Operation of Consultative Committees
13.4.1. Consultative Committees convened under this agreement will meet at times and localities which cause the least disruption to the operations of the Authority.
13.4.2. Where the UFU nominees are serving Authority employees the following will apply:
(a) When the employee is on duty, arrangements will be made to facilitate his or her attendance at meetings without loss of
pay.
(b) When a meeting occurs while the employee is off duty, the employee will be paid for the time involved at overtime rates.
13.4.3. There is not a set number of representatives for any Committee.
Nomination will be consistent with the task to be undertaken and the required expertise.
13.4.4. All Committees established under this agreement are recommendatory in nature and will operate on the basis of consensus when developing recommendations.
13.4.5. When a UFU representative who is a CFA employee travels to a meeting on days when the person is not on duty, the following shall occur;
(a) The person shall be provided with a vehicle to enable him/her to travel to the meeting. This shall be by way of CFA car or hire car to travel to and from the meeting. As a last resort the person may by agreement use his/her own vehicle and
receive the appropriate vehicle allowance as prescribed in the agreement for each kilometre travelled;
(b) In the case of a person who requires air travel he/she shall be provided with air travel from his/her location to Melbourne and return. Such transport shall be arranged and paid for by the CFA. Travel to and from the airport to the meeting venue shall be provided by way of car hire or taxi as appropriate.
(c) Payment for travel time shall be as provided for in this agreement based on the distance between the persons work station and the station at which the meeting is being held or at a station of equivalent distance where the meeting is being held at a venue which is not a current career fire station.
(d) Payment for the time spent flying to and from the person’s location to Melbourne Airport will be paid for at single time rates. In addition, the allowance prescribed in this agreement is to be paid for travel from Melbourne Airport to the meeting and return.
(e) Employees travelling to and from the same work location are to travel in the same vehicle wherever possible.
(f) The above matters in 13.4.5 with the exception of payment of airfares and transport for employees requiring air travel and vehicle allowance for the use of private vehicles are to apply when CFA employees who are UFU representatives attend meetings on days when they are not on duty.
(g) UFU will normally limit participation by CFA employees to no more than three on the basis that CFA will not unreasonably withhold agreement to UFU requests for greater numbers of participants. Requests for more than three representatives must be agreed between the parties before the relevant meeting occurs.
14. INTRODUCTION OF CHANGE
Where the employer wishes to implement significant change in matters pertaining to the employment relationship in any of the workplaces covered by this agreement, the provisions of clause 13 will apply.
28. SECONDMENT & LATERAL ENTRY
28.1. It is the parties’ intention that vacant positions within the CFA that can be filled by career firefighters/officers will be filled by CFA career firefighters/officers. However, there will be instances where short-term secondment is appropriate. Further, there may be instances where an internal CFA appointee cannot be found to fill a permanent vacancy, even after the provision of appropriate support and training. This clause sets out the process to be followed.
28.2. Secondments and lateral entry will not be used to diminish promotional opportunities available to CFA career staff.
SECONDMENT
28.3. Where the CFA has identified a need to second to a long-term vacant position, the following shall apply:
28.3.1. The vacant position will be filled by secondment for no longer than 2 years;
28.3.2. Secondment will only be into positions that hold the rank of Leading
Firefighter, Station Officer or above;
28.3.3. The person seconded into the position (the secondee) must be an operational firefighting employee of a recognised fire service. A
‘recognised fire service’ is a fire service of a government of Australia or New Zealand. It does not include a private firefighting service;
28.3.4. The secondee must hold the same or equivalent rank as that of the position to which they are being seconded;
28.3.5. The secondee will undertake a short course of about 3 to 4 weeks duration to ensure that they possess any CFA specific requirements and skills relevant to the position. These requirements will be as determined by Skills Australia. Once this course is completed, the secondee will form part of the CFA’s minimum staffing complement. However, the secondee will not be counted towards the CFA’s minimum establishment figures.
LATERAL ENTRY
28.4. The CFA may only permanently fill a vacant position by lateral entry in accordance with the steps in this clause.
28.4.1. The CFA must advertise any vacancy at least twice internally (i.e. to operational employees in one of the firefighting ranks).
28.4.2. If there is still a vacancy, the CFA may second someone into the position in accordance with clause 28.3 above.
28.4.3. If there is still a vacancy at the end of any secondment period, the position will be advertised internally once more. If there is no internal applicant, the position may be offered to the secondee on a permanent basis.
28.4.4. If there is no secondment, or if a secondee does not wish to take up the position on a permanent basis, then the CFA may seek external applications. The following conditions will apply:
(a) Lateral entry will only be into positions that hold the rank of
Leading Firefighter, Station Officer or above.
(b) Applications can only be received from, and the position may only be filled by, an operational employee of a recognised fire service.
(c) Any applicant for such a position must hold the same or equivalent rank as that of the position being advertised.
(d) The successful applicant will undertake a short course to ensure that they possess any CFA specific requirements and skills relevant to the position. These requirements will be as determined by Skills Australia.
PART C - CONDITIONS APPLYING TO OPERATIONS MANAGERS
/ OPERATIONS OFFICERS
...
120. PROGRESSION
120.1. Competencies
Schedule 12 sets out the competencies expected of Operations Officers levels
1-4 and Operations Managers levels 1-4.
Progression through the ranks and levels shall follow a consistent theme from Firefighter to Operations Manager (i.e. validation/assessment, cross over/overlap of competencies between ranks). All internal appointees to the ranks of Operations Officer or Operations Manager must hold all Station Officer competencies and the competencies of the underpinning ranks.
120.2. New Internal Appointments
120.2.1. Employees appointed to an Operations Officer position will be required to demonstrate/validate their proficiency for Level 1
Operations Officer competencies. This validation must occur prior to
appointment. All new appointments to Operations Officer will be to a level commensurate with their competency.
120.2.2. Employees appointed to an Operations Manager position, will be required to demonstrate/validate their proficiency for Level 1
Operations Manager competencies. This validation must occur prior to appointment. All new appointments to Operations Manager will
be to a level commensurate with their competency.
120.3. Personal Development and Progression
120.3.1. Employees at either Operations Officer or Operations Manager level will progress automatically through the pay points level 1-4 in accordance with their competencies.
120.3.2. There is an obligation on both the employer and the employee to complete the required training as mentioned in Schedule 12.
120.3.3. No employee shall perform the Regional and/or State Duty Officer role unless they have Operations Officer Level 2 competencies. No new appointee shall perform the Regional Duty Officer role unless they have Operations Officer Level 2 competencies and appropriate underpinning knowledge associated with Firefighter through to and including Senior Station Officer.
120.3.4. The employer will assist employees to formulate a development plan which facilitates the employee:
(a) Acquiring the expected competencies of a Level 2 employee within 12 months of appointment to Level 1; and
(b) Acquiring the expected competencies of a Level 3 employee within 24 months of appointment to Level 1;
(c) Acquiring the expected competencies of a Level 4 employee within 36 months of appointment to Level 1
101.11.2. Notwithstanding clause 120.3.1 above:
(a) any Operations Officer who possesses or gains the competencies associated with Operations Officer 1-4, at any earlier time, will be paid in accordance with those competencies; and
(b) any Operations Manager who possesses or gains the competencies associated with Operations Manager 1-4, at any earlier time, will be paid in accordance with those competencies.
.....
122. LATERAL ENTRY
Where it can be demonstrated that no suitably qualified internal applicant (as per clause
120.1 and 120.2) exists and after advertising internally on two occasions, CFA will seek to fill the vacant position through:
122.1. internal appointment of a person who does not meet all the requirements of
Schedule 12; or
122.2. lateral entry of an external applicant
in accordance with the outcomes of consultation or, if not resolved, by determination of FWA of a competency based lateral entry process. A determination of FWA pursuant to this clause will be effective only for the classifications covered by this agreement and only for the life of this agreement.
.....
123. OPERATIONS MANAGERS/OPERATIONS OFFICERS CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
123.1. Consultation means the full, meaningful and frank discussion of issues / proposals and the consideration of each party’s views, prior to any decision. Committees established for the purpose of implementing matters relating to OO/OMs only have been established under this section and shall form part of the consultative process for OO/OMs.
123.2. The parties are committed to effective consultation and communication and agree to establish the above Consultative Committee to assist the parties to
improve productivity, efficiency and to provide for the effective involvement of OO/OMs in the decision making process. The Committee will consist of an equal number of CFA and employee representatives for OO/OMs.
123.3. The objectives of the Committee are to investigate and make recommendations on matters effecting OO/OMs only, including but not limited to:
123.3.1. Introduction of new technology
123.3.2. Changes to work organisation
123.3.3. Expansion and organisational development
123.3.4. Quality
123.3.5. Productivity improvement
123.3.6. New management practices.
123.4. All proposals for change effecting OO/OMs only shall be written and tabled to the Committee for consultation. Alternative proposals in writing may be developed and tabled to the Committee for consultation in response to proposals for change.
123.5. Employee representatives on the Committee will have adequate time and access to the employees they represent:
123.5.1. Prior to the Committee meetings to prepare for agenda items; and
123.5.2. Following Committee meetings to report back and seek endorsement, when necessary, on issues discussed.
123.6. Committee members will be provided with all relevant information and access to documentation and data pertaining to the subject matter in order to assist the consultative process, save that information concerning the identity, income
or any other information relating to any individual employee(s) is not to be provided pursuant to this clause.
123.7. Any dispute arising under this clause may be referred by the employer, the employee or his/her representative, to be dealt with in accordance with the dispute resolution procedures of this agreement.
SCHEDULE 11 - POSITION DESCRIPTIONS
Operations Officer
POSITION DESCRIPTION: Reports to:
Reports to the Operations Manager.
Provides support to the Area Management Team.
Primary Objectives of Position:
To assist the Operations Manager in the provision of leadership, management and direction to regional personnel, Brigades and Groups to ensure the effective emergency service preparedness and response within the Region.
To assist the Area Management team in the provision of leadership, management and direction to career and volunteer personnel, Brigades and Groups -to ensure effective delivery of a range of CFA activities including volunteer I brigade support, infrastructure planning/ maintenance, risk management, training and service delivery preparedness and response programs.
Key Result Areas:
Regularly advise and report to the Operations Manager on service delivery preparedness and performance and future implications relating to issues and trends within the Area.
Assist the Operations Manager(s) in managing career staff and supporting volunteer personnel, including reviewing performance, career planning, recruitment, Brigade support and administration.
Within policy guidelines, undertake the role of media liaison and represent the
CFA as required.
Undertake risk management inspections, provide recommendations and ensure appropriate guidelines and procedures are adhered to and develop plans to address issues.
Assist the Area Management team in ensuring CFA statutory requirements and Standing Operating Procedures are met. This will include provision of regular advice and reports on a range of issues affecting CFA emergency preparedness and service delivery performance.
Develop effective working relationships and liaise with other government bodies as required.
Assist the Risk Manager in facilitating community acceptance and responsibility for risks within their control.
Assist the Area management team in maintaining existing infrastructure and planning/implementing future infrastructure requirements.
Develop and promote CFA as a professional community service organisation and adopt a total risk management approach within the Service Area.
Provide support in emergency management through participation in the
Incident Control Systern. Support the Risk Manager in:-
-developing an accurate risk profile for the Area covering wildfire, structural fire and dangerous goods environment.
-establishing an effective risk management plan for the Area.
-monitoring and assessing the effectiveness of risk management strategies and compliance with regulator responsibilities.
-delivering and co-ordinating risk management programs (eg., Fire Protection, Fire Prevention, Juvenile Fire Awareness and Community Fireguard).
-developing effective networks within the community to manage risks.
Support the Training Manager in:-
-developing and implementing a training and development strategy and program that addresses the technical and career development needs
of personnel and meets the CFA corporate policy and Area business objectives.
-undertaking a needs analysis to determine the technical and career development requirements of career and volunteer personnel within the Area.
-developing and implementing integrated career development and succession planning for the Area.
-the management, functioning and forward planning of field training grounds and undertake the role of Field Training Ground Executive Officer if required.
Provide support to the Training Manager in the delivery, co-ordination of training and identification of Regional training requirements.
Contribute to the development of the Budget and ongoing management of expenditure.
Undertake other duties as directed by the Area Manager, Operations Manager and/or Chief Officer.
Selection Criteria:
An understanding of, and proven performance in fire and emergency management strategies and practices, and the ability to command and control major incidents.
Demonstrated conceptual skills and an ability to develop solutions to a range of organisational issues and performance improvements initiatives.
Sound knowledge of Risk Management principles and practices relevant to
CFA environment.
Sound knowledge of fire behaviour and the qualities of dangerous goods. Demonstrated skill and experience in physical, human resource,
administrative, financial management (including computer skills in word
processing and spreadsheets) and proven capacity to manage projects and achieve specific objectives within set time frames.
Proven experience in co-ordination, development and delivery of training and development activities.
An understanding of competency based training and assessment techniques and an ability to undertake training needs analysis.
Demonstrated effective leadership and supervisory skills.
Knowledge of relevant CFA Policy, legislation, procedures and Codes of
Practice.
Effective interpersonal, written and verbal communication skills including the ability to liaise effectively with volunteer and career personnel to encourage a spirit of commitment and teamwork.
Working environment and other requirements of the position:
Satisfactory progress towards a tertiary qualification or equivalent in an appropriate discipline would be an advantage.
Work flexible hours as required and attend activities and meetings outside normal business hours, including evening and weekend work.
Ability to work co-operatively with Government Agencies, Local Government and Industry.
Incumbent will be required to undertake extensive travel within the Area and
State as required.
Experience working within or with volunteer organisations and an appreciation of an integrated paid staff/volunteer organisational culture is essential.
Incumbent will be expected to work in a team environment which will involve input and support to a range of projects and programs across all CFA functions.
Incumbent will be expected to perform other duties as required by the Area
Manager within their level of competence.
SCHEDULE 12 - COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK FOR OPERATIONS
MANAGERS / OPERATIONS OFFICERS
Rank and Level | Competencies (Operational) | Competencies (Management Human Resources Administration) | Comment |
Operations OFFICER LEVEL 1 | All Station Officer competencies 4.16 Leadership and Team Management 4.02 Pre Incident Planning 4.03 Ops Management 4.04 Incident Control Systems 5.04 Incident Management Skills | All Station Officer competencies 4.20 Fire Law | Entry Level competencies where an individual does not meet the minimum criteria for Region Duty Officer responsibilities. This level will apply to Lateral Entry personnel. |
....
NB: The process foreshadowed in clause 121 will result in a competency based entry pathway to employment as an Operations Officer or Operations Manager for persons who are not currently employed by CFA as Station Officers with underpinning competencies. The process will define the necessary underpinning knowledge equivalent to FF through to and including SSO qualifications.
1 PN494-5 and PN509-10
2 Statement of McGuinness at paragraph 16
3 Evidence of Mr Johnstone PN 98 and PN109-113
4 Schedule 11 of the Agreement
5 Evidence of Mr Purdy PN532-3, PN455 and PN460 and Submission of CFA at PN 977-979
6 Clause 13.3.5 and Clause 13.3.6 read in conjunction with Clause 123.1 and 123.4
7 Clause 13.4.4
8 United Firefighters’ Union of Australia v Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Services Board Print 973884 Vice President Lawler, Vice President Watson, Commissioner Williams at Paragraphs 14-16
9 Attachment JS 2 to Exhibit CFA 5
10 Attachment JS 2 to Exhibit CFA 5 at paragraph 7 under the heading Recruitment, Selection & Appointment
11 PN566-570
12 PN695 and PN701
13 PN543-9 and PN554
14 PN700 and PN899-906 and PN 922
15 Last Paragraph of Section 4 of Attachment SP4 to Exhibit CFA 7
16 PN595-602
17 PN465-487
18 UFU v CFA (2012) FWA 7155
19 Exhibit CFA 3 and 4
20 PN1143
21 Exhibit CFA 5 Attachment JS 2
22 Note to Schedule 12 of the Agreement with emphasis added and reference to Clause 121 corrected to Clause 122. Both parties agree that the reference to Clause 121 is a clear error
23 Exhibit UFU 2 Attachment MM 20 Recruitment, Selection and Appointment at paragraphs 2 and 3
24 Agreement Clause 120.3.3
25 PN 784-791
26 Clause 121 corrected to 122
27 Evidence of Mr Purdy PN 532-2 and 526 and evidence of Johnstone PN109-116
28 Exhibit UFU 3 Paragraph 5(j)-(l)
29 Exhibit UFU 4
30 Exhibit UFU 3 paragraph 5(m)
31 Exhibit UFU 3 paragraph 5(n) and Attachment MM22
32 Mr Purdy at PN 541-2
33 PN366
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code G, PR531292>
0
1
0