By Tom Flanagan
SYDNEY — Opposition is rising among public servants in New South Wales to a pay offer made by the state Labor government. The pay deal is being put forward as an agreement between the NSW government, the Public Service Association of NSW (PSA), the NSW Nurses Association, the Health and Research Employees' Association of NSW, and the Labor Council of NSW. It will cover nearly 200,000 public sector employees.
Leaders of the nurses' and the health and research employees' unions have already agreed to the offer, without a membership vote. Activists in the PSA, however, have succeeded in pressuring their union leaders to put the proposal to a membership-wide vote in early February.
The agreement's wide coverage and the involvement of the NSW Labor Council and three different unions gives it something of the character of a mini-Accord. Union activists should have learned to be wary of such deals by now, after the experience of the original Prices and Incomes Accord in the 1980s and early 1990s, which locked unions into an all-encompassing agreement with the Labor government which did not work out in their favour.
The NSW government is offering pay increases of 2% for each of the next two years, followed by a 3% increase in 2002. While the term of an agreement is generally limited to three years, this pay offer promises a further 4% in 2003 and 5% in 2004 — beyond the life of the current government (which is up for re-election in March 2003) and therefore beyond its capacity to deliver.
The 7% total pay increase in the first three years is only slightly above the current inflation rate and amounts to a virtual wage freeze.
In exchange for a wage freeze now and empty promises of increases later, the unions are required to agree to productivity and efficiency improvements. These are outlined in a "memorandum of understanding" attached to the pay offer.
The memorandum is full of high-sounding phrases which, when deciphered, represent a severe restriction of public servants' work conditions.
For example, the memorandum speaks of the integration of "agencies to provide a range of government services", of "greater flexibility and mobility" between agencies, of "local arrangements to respond to service delivery needs" and of an "improv[ed] utilisation ratio of office accommodation".
Behind the doubletalk, this means more pressure to combine the functions of various agencies into one office. Other offices will close, jobs will go and staff will need a wider knowledge of government programs, inevitably increasing already high stress levels. Opening times are likely to be extended in response to "local service delivery needs", meaning more pressure to work evenings, public holidays and weekends.
Other items which the government wants implemented include performance-based pay, which will add pressure to do unpaid overtime and place more power over staff into the hands of supervisors and managers, and "modernised employment flexibility", which is likely to mean increased casualisation.
Job losses are expected in information technology services, purchasing functions and personnel. Progression and salary increments are to be reviewed.
The memorandum even requires that there be "no new salaries or conditions claims arising from negotiation of productivity and efficiency improvements covered by this agreement". Key short- and medium-term goals of the "reform" process are to be developed after the agreement is voted on.
The PSA is yet to give its agreement to these measures and a members' vote is scheduled for February 2, via Sky Channel. But the PSA's leaders showed their true colours at a January 5 union central council meeting, where they decided that only the "yes" case would be put to members on February 2.
A motion calling for the "no" case to be put to members, moved by representatives of the Progressive PSA caucus (PPSA), was voted down. The PSA executive committee didn't even make the motion available to central council members until shortly before it was to be voted on.
Union activists, including those in the PPSA, are organising a campaign for a "no" vote and are formulating an alternative proposal to be put within the PSA. To get in touch with the PPSA, e-mail or send your details, including daytime telephone number, to <progressive@angelfire.com>, or PO Box K519, Haymarket NSW 1240. You can also visit the PPSA web site at <www.geocities.com./capitolhill/2960>.