COUNTRY SURVEY

Put a fence around the cliff edge!

Changes to workplace safety laws promoting psychological health are welcomed by Branch Vice President Dash Taylor Johnson.

Risk is a part of life and it is part of every choice, every decision we make. Being able to identify and manage risk well keeps us safer and healthier for longer. Physical risks are commonly understood but when it comes to our psychological health, it is not as clear as it should be.

On 20 May 2021, this nation’s Work Health and Safety (WHS) Ministers met to consider the 34 recommendations that Marie Boland presented in 2018 after Safe Work Australia commissioned her to conduct an independent review of national WHS laws.

That psychological injury be treated the same as physical injury was a key recommendation that was supported by at least 6 of the 9 Ministers. (Allegedly, it was not supported by South Australia).

The drafting of regulations has begun and unions are part of this process. This could take another 6 months and will need WHS Minister approval, but it will compel employers to assess and reduce psycho-social hazards.

These hazards include bullying, unrealistic work demands, sexual harassment, poor change management and fatigue due to long work hours. Familiar? With 20 regulations relating to physical injury in existence and none for psychological injury the adoption of this recommendation has been welcomed by workers Australia-wide.

Now we recognise the problems, what about prevention?

The Employee Assistance Program (EAP) is a regular go-to for the Department for Education, described to me by a mental health professional as the help you get once you’ve fallen off the cliff. So how about putting a fence around the edge of the cliff?

And that’s where risk assessments come in. Identify the hazard and then make some changes to reduce that risk and hopefully eliminate it. The risks, as clearly identified in the Department’s ‘Employee Mental Health and Wellbeing Procedure’, are known, but is the frequency, duration and impact of exposure to these risks, being considered like it should?

“We’ve got your back – you report and we’ll support.” So says the DfE intranet page on workplace violence.

And for those psychologically injured, are you being supported as outlined in the procedure? Reporting any hazards or injuries is critical (no pun intended), and essential if support is to be provided. This procedure is very clear on where responsibility lies and for whom, powerful in print.

As a worker, you have responsibilities too in the SA WHS Act, to “take reasonable care of his or her health and safety”. Knowing what your rights are is a good place to start. You don’t know what you don’t know.

The ‘Employee Mental Health and Wellbeing Procedure’, available on the Department intranet, is one procedure that you should be familiar with. Open it. Read it. Use it. Safety is union business. Mind your head. n

For more information on psycho-social hazards visit:

8: www.mindyourhead.org.au

Working in the Country: what you think

Hundreds of members have shared their experiences about what has attracted them to the country, why they’ve stayed and why they have left. These stories are invaluable as part reviewing the incentives offered for educators working away from the metropolitan area.

Here is a snapshot of what members have said:

What attracts you?

• Permanency • Right of return • Lifestyle • Sense of adventure.

Why do you stay?

• Relationships • Leadership opportunities • For the students •Transfer rights

Why do you leave?

• Lack of professional support •Isolation • Access to specialists •Lack of care/recognition from the employer • To be closer to family.

Many members have also provided detailed responses and contact details for follow-up, which are much appreciated. As part of our consultative process, targeted visits to country regions are set for the first part of Term 3 to continue this conversation.

You can also contact our Country Conditions Standing Committee members directly, via www.aeusa.asn.

au/CountryConditions

AEU members are ready, now we need the Department to listen. n

Step carefully!

Meredith Farmer, AEU Industrial Organiser, surveys the minefield of information and misinformation about parental leave.

Ask any colleague who has recently taken leave associated with parenting a child and they will attest to how complex and confusing it can be. In the AEU Information Unit we regularly hear from members who have been given inaccurate, out of date information by the employer on such entitlements.

But believe it or not, people are still having babies!

Much of the misunderstanding, particularly in regards to paid and unpaid maternity leave, relates to the many changes in entitlements over the years, many bought about by our union winning improved entitlements through enterprise bargaining.

The first (unpaid) accouchement 16-18 weeks paid maternity/adoption leave was achieved, and in 2014, 16-20 weeks, depending on length of service.

“But believe it or not, people are still having babies!”

leave provisions were included in the Education Act (Regulations) in 1968, over 50 years ago. Since then, particularly in the last 20 years members and their families have enjoyed the benefits of increased entitlements to paid maternity, adoption and surrogacy leave.

In 2000, paid maternity/adoption leave for women was two weeks. Through enterprise bargaining, members won 6 weeks by 2002, 12 weeks by 2005, and 14 weeks by 2009, plus a number of improvements to the eligibility and conditions around that leave, including the right to return part-time. In 2012,

Current entitlements

Maternity, adoption and surrogacy leave entitlements are outlined in clause 4.5 of the SA School and Preschool Staff Enterprise Agreement 2020 and clause 4.6 of the TAFE SA Education Staff Enterprise Agreement 2016.

A permanent employee of the Department for Education (DfE), who has been continuously employed for a 12-month period prior to the birth of a child, is eligible for paid maternity, adoption or surrogacy leave.

A contract employee, who has been continuously employed for a 12-month period prior to the birth of the child, is also eligible. However, the employee must be currently in a contract.

The tenure of a contract appointment will be extended by an employee’s entitlement to any paid maternity/ adoption/surrogacy leave

A TAFE employee (other than a casual employee) who has completed 12 months continuous service immediately prior to the birth or adoption is entitled to paid maternity leave. continued over page 3

An eligible employee with more than five years of service is entitled to 20 weeks of paid maternity leave. An employee with five years’ service or less is entitled to 16 weeks paid maternity leave.

In the case of DfE employees the total amount of paid/unpaid leave cannot exceed 104 weeks. The total amount of paid/unpaid leave for TAFE employees cannot exceed 52 weeks.

Paid maternity leave can be taken in any combination of full and half pay.

Paid maternity leave will be at the employee’s ordinary rate of pay. Parttime employees are eligible for this entitlement on a pro-rata basis.

Paid maternity leave is extended by both the school vacation periods and by the Professional Support Strategy for Week 10 of Term 4 for eligible DfE employees.

Contract teachers, be aware

Contract teachers should consider the following when planning their maternity leave: • Avoid a break in service – if your paid leave ends and you do not work for

DfE at all for three months, excluding school vacation periods, you will be considered as having a break in service and may lose any accrued sick leave and service toward long service leave. A day’s TRT can prevent the break in service. • The 18 weeks’ federal government paid parental leave prevents an employee from working while in receipt of the payments. Consider taking this at the same time as your

DfE paid leave.

What about holiday pay?

For DfE employees maternity leave ceases during school holiday periods. Only those who would usually be paid for holidays (permanent, full year contract and long-term contract employees) will be paid, but the amount you will be paid during vacation periods will vary from the ‘usual’ depending on a range of factors.

Members should contact the AEU Information Unit for advice in regards to school vacation pay, and TAFE members in regards to how other types of leave interact with paid maternity leave.

“Members are encouraged to contact the AEU Information Unit on 8172 6300 for further assistance if they feel they are being unfairly disadvantaged.”

SAVE THE DATE!

Don’t forget about the PPL!

Employees may also be eligible for the Federal Government’s Paid Parental Leave (PPL) scheme.

The federally funded PPL does not impact on or alter any of your existing leave entitlements with DfE or TAFE. The PPL scheme can be split in to a continuous leave period of up to 12 weeks (60 days) plus 30 flexible leave days at a later date or in a continuous 18-week block.

For further information visit the Commonwealth PPL site.

Partner leave

If both prospective parents/spouse or partner are employees of DfE or TAFE the paid maternity/adoption leave can be shared as long as it doesn’t exceed the total entitlement of paid leave.

Both TAFE and DfE Enterprise Agreements provide an entitlement of 5 days paid partner leave which is to be debited from accrued sick leave.

Both TAFE and DfE employees have access to up to 15 days under Special Leave – Partner Leave to support their partner attending medical appointments and treatments related to pregnancy, including attendance at the birth of a child.

Support staff entitlements

This is a broad summary of the entitlements. If you are a contract SSO, ECW or AEW your circumstances may be different. For further detail contact the AEU Information Unit to clarify your situation.

Returning to work part-time?

When returning from maternity leave, an employee is entitled to return to work on a part-time basis up until the child’s second birthday. The fraction of time needs to be a negotiated with the employer.

As many members would be aware DfE have, after consultation with the AEU, recently updated the Part-time Teachers Procedure. The change which we expect to have most impact on members is the change which limits the temporary reduction in time to 3 years after which any request for reduction in time will need to be on a permanent basis, except in exceptional circumstances where a further temporary period may be approved.

However the procedure states, “A request to return to work on a part-time basis until a teacher’s child is of school age following a period of parental leave is an example of a request to temporarily reduce time that can be approved for longer than 3 years. Where this request is not able to be accommodated due to the operational needs of the school, this will be outlined clearly to the teacher.”

The procedure also asserts that a request for a temporary change in time of more than 3 years due to family caring responsibilities will also be positively considered.

In recent communications with the AEU the Department has indicated that they intend to apply this procedure retrospectively. The AEU has asserted that this should not be the case and remain concerned that some members maybe disadvantaged by the employer’s application of the new procedure.

Members are encouraged to contact the AEU Information Unit for further assistance if they feel they are being unfairly disadvantaged. n

Meredith Farmer was acting in the Women’s Officer role in Term 2, while Tish Champion took some well-deserved leave.

AEU Women’s Conference 2021

Saturday 28 August

Details on page 19. For further info email Tish Champion on: 8: tchampion@aeusa.asn.au

Six minutes

If we worked together, what could get done in 6 minutes? Emma Lowe, AEU Campaign Organiser, shares some inspiration.

Each day you will see something that is not fair. There are problems everywhere in public education – IESP applications knocked back, TAFE courses closing, and passionate educators denied permanent employment. We face significant challenges, and we are not the only community to do so – in South Australia, Australia, and all over the world.

A few years ago I had the privilege of listening to two organisers tell the story of wanting something better for their community, and how they went about this by building a collective that transformed the power structures within that constituency and moved the community members from object to subject.

NIsreen Haj Ahmad and Samar Dudin knew the deep and widespread social issues in their own community in Jabel Al Natheef, an urban community in Jordan: lack of play spaces for children, high rates of youth unemployment, extremely low literacy levels, and a 17% school dropout rate. They lived this.

Over the years multiple initiatives by governments and non-government agencies had been attempted to resolve these issues, particularly around the literacy rates, such as reading competitions, new libraries, and new books for schools. Even with all this effort and resourcing, the improvement in literacy rates was nil.

And it continued a tradition of the community being reliant on a service model. They were passive recipients of the initiatives.

Haj Ahmad and Dudin could see this was not working and after researching social movements around the world, they committed themselves to launching a community organising campaign. This required a core leadership team, and they went about recruiting leaders by asking “who are the people in pain?” This embedded the core team in their own constituency, rather than paid professionals.

This core team was comprised of mothers, female and male teachers, librarians, and youth. Once established this core team collaboratively developed the strategic objectives of the campaign, designed the structure to deliver on it, and essentially created the shared narrative of why the campaign mattered.

And from there this team developed its theory of change for its campaign: that for children to be motivated to read, parents themselves should read, thereby becoming role models.

Each family in Jabal Al Natheef would commit to read for 6 minutes each day. Their goal was 5,000 pledges.

After participating in organising training, each team was charged with collaboratively developing their own sub-campaign: what would it take for reading to be part of the daily life and culture of our community in Jabal Al Natheef? The mothers team used coffee reading meetings in homes. The youth held events with celebrities, used social media and marketing, but found the greatest success from Saturday morning ‘reading walks’.

There was a big celebration event when the 5,000 pledges were achieved. The improvement in literacy levels was measurable in the school data. Harder to measure was the feelings in the community: pride, love, and loyalty. The team members at every level saw themselves as change makers, as organisers.

Those without a voice, now had one, particularly the women and children. And when asked if the community could come together again and create change, 96% of the 500 team members said yes.

When I first heard this story it gave me hope. The context may be different to ours, but it teaches us how we can build our power. Many of our struggles focus on who holds power over us and pressures them to be a bit better. How about our own power? If we come together in creative and resourceful ways, what could we achieve? What can we realise with our own vast aggregated potential? As Marshall Ganz reminds us, “turning what you have into what you need to get what you want.”

What would your 6-minute campaign be? What change could you achieve with your AEU sub-branch by using 6 minutes each day? n

“Many of our struggles focus on who holds power over us and pressures them to be a bit better. How about our own power?“