12
[Extract from Queensland Government Industrial Gazette,
dated 22 December, 2006, Vol. 183, No. 21, pages 976-988]
QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION
Industrial Relations Act 1999 - s. 230 - action on industrial dispute
Queensland Independent Education Union of Employees (on behalf of Jennifer Koch) AND Diocesan Catholic Education Office, Rockhampton (D/2005/508)
VICE PRESIDENT LINNANE / 13 December 2006Application for arbitration of a dispute notification - Reclassification of position from Level 3 to Level 4 of Information Services Resource Employee at School sought - Application made pursuant to The Diocesan Catholic Education Employing Authorities in Queensland Certified Agreement - Claim dismissed.
DECISION
[1] This is an application by the Queensland Independent Education Union of Employees (QIEU), on behalf of Jennifer Koch, seeking the arbitration of a dispute lodged on 13 December 2005. Ms Koch is employed by the Diocesan Catholic Education Office at Rockhampton (Respondent) and is employed as School Officer (Library Co-ordinator) at the MacKillop Catholic Primary School, Andergrove (School). She has been employed in that position since 23 January 1995. The position which she occupies is classified as a Level 3 in the School Officers' Interim Award - Non-Governmental Schools (Award) and has been classified at that level since 20 January 1997.
[2] At the outset this arbitration involves a determination of whether the position occupied by Ms Koch is correctly classified based on the position description accepted and endorsed by the Respondent. It is not for me to vary or amend the employer's position description. It is for the employee to work to the position description that has been approved by the Respondent and provided to the employee. As the QIEU submits, the outcome of this hearing should be a determination of the "appropriate classification level based on the work which is required of the position".
[3] The Diocesan Catholic Education Employing Authorities in Queensland Certified Agreement (Certified Agreement) was certified on 12 January 2004. Clause 2 of Schedule 3 to the Certified Agreement provides for a process whereby employees whose terms and conditions of employment were covered by the Certified Agreement could seek a reclassification of their positions. The relevant provisions of the Certified Agreement are as follows:
"2. RECLASSIFICATION PROCESS FOR SCHOOL OFFICERS
2.1 A school officer may request a reclassification of their position. Such a request may be made either in relation to the classification level of an existing position or where the classification level of the position has been changed. Except in exceptional circumstances no employee shall be permitted to seek a reclassification of their position on more than one occasion in a 12 month period.
2.2 The employee shall make any such Request for Reclassification, in writing, to the employer.
2.3 The employer shall consider the Request for Reclassification and notify the employee in writing of the decision regarding the employee's request.
2.4 If after receiving the employer's notification, the employee believes that their position has not been classified at the correct level, the employee may apply for a review of that decision. In this case the employee shall make written application for a Review of Classification to the employer.
2.5 Where the employer receives a Review of Classification application, the employer shall advise the Queensland Independent Education Union (QIEU) in writing that an application has been received.
2.6 A joint review of the classification by QIEU and the employer shall then take place. The persons representing QIEU and the employer will, wherever practicable, have substantial experience in the classification of school officers. Further, wherever practicable, the person who made the original decision in relation to the classification will also be involved.
2.7 The joint review will seek to reach a consensus position. The school officer will be advised in writing of the outcome of this review.
2.8 If an agreed outcome cannot be reached between the employer and QIEU then the employee may refer the matter to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission in the terms of the Grievance Procedure.
2.9 The provisions of this clause 2.2 will be in addition to the provisions of clause 5.1.1 of the Award.".
[4] Following certification of the Certified Agreement, Ms Koch, in a letter dated 9 September 2004 made a request to the Respondent for the reclassification of her position from School Officer Level 3 to School Officer Level 4. Her reasoning for the request was stated as follows:
"I believe that I work under general supervision and that I am responsible for the outcomes/deadlines in the library. Discretion and judgment are a big part of my position description: in the planning/work organisation, selection of equipment/resources, services actions and achieving outcomes within time constraints. I believe that the duties as stated in my modified position description will verify my claims and support my request for reclassification.".
[5] In correspondence dated 23 November 2004 from the Respondent's Senior Personnel Officer, Ms Koch was advised that her position had been reviewed by Employee Support Services in consultation with her and her Principal and that the classification level would remain at Level 3.
[6] Ms Koch, in a letter dated 3 December 2004, then sought a review of that decision to a review panel established under Clause 2 of Schedule 3 of the Certified Agreement. That review panel had both employer (the Diocesan Catholic Education Office (DCEO) Personnel Manager, Karen Elliott, and the DCEO Payroll Manager, Gary Cooper) representation and QIEU representation (the QIEU Industrial Officer, John Spriggs, and the Mackay School Union Delegate, Caryll Schofield) on it.
[7] On 3 November 2005 Leesa Jeffcoat, the Diocesan Director Catholic Education, wrote to Ms Koch advising that the employer representatives on the review panel held the view that the position was appropriately classified at Level 3 whilst the QIEU representatives held the view that the position should be classified at a higher level. MsJeffcoat then summarised the review panel's deliberations as follows:
"The DCEO representatives felt that the role of Information Services Resource employee in the school will require some discretion and judgement involved in the selection of equipment, work organisation, services provided, actions required, and achieving outcomes within time constraints. It also involves the application of knowledge with depth in some areas and a broad range of skills.
The Employee indicated that she was required to regularly purchase resources using her own discretion and judgement.
DCEO representatives:
Acknowledged that this role required some discretion and judgement and the application of knowledge with depth in some areas in the purchasing of resources for the Library. Purchases are authorised by the Principal and are within set guidelines. Recommendations are provided by the Administration Team and teachers who are seeking resources to be purchased.
QIEU representatives:
The first 'specific duty' in the employee's position description is to 'evaluate, choose, order and purchase library resources'. The employee described that she makes the decisions in relation to the resources to be purchased for the library. In making these decisions she consults with the Assistant Principal Curriculum and also with the relevant teachers.
However, the employee's advice (and this was not disputed by the principal) was that whilst information was sought from the assistant principal and the teachers, it was Jenny Koch who made the decisions in relation to the resources to be purchased. It was also revealed that Jenny Koch expended money from not only the library budget but also other budgets within the school for the purchase of library resources.
The employee advised that she was required to develop the collection of resources so that it is appropriate and therefore better able to fulfil the requirements of the curriculum.
The position description states that the purchase of library resources is 'in consultation with the principal'. The advice of both Jenny Koch and the principal was that a meeting took place once per fortnight to monitor her role in the library. There was no information which indicated that Jenny Koch was required to discuss the purchases with the principal, nor was she required to seek the principal's approval prior to purchase. Order forms were completed by the employee and approved by the appropriate administration personnel as a matter of course.
We were advised that the employee participated in purchasing at least weekly.
The Employee indicated that she prepared and maintained the Library budget each year.
DCEO representatives:
The total library budget is approx. $4500 which includes amounts for consumables, licensing etc. and is set by the Principal with input from the Information Services Resource employee. The Principal indicated that all staff, including parents are invited to make submissions for items that they would like to have included in the next years budget.
QIEU representatives:
The employee prepared a yearly budget and submitted that budget to the principal for approval.
The Employee indicated that she was required to manage the circulation desk and work area and operate the circulation system.
DCEO representatives:
Understand that the employee is the only employee in the Library and as such works under the limited supervision of the Principal. The Information Services Resource Employee meets with the Principal fortnightly to inform each other of relevant issues. Agreed that the position was required to maintain circulation systems where some discretion and judgement are involved.
QIEU representatives:
The employee was the sole library employee. It was unquestioned that the employee worked independently. Consequently, in our view, it was obvious that the employee had and has a significant level of autonomy.
As the sole employee in the library Jenny Koch was required to manage the operations of the library, including the circulation system and the cataloguing of all resources.
The position description identifies two of her specific duties as 'catalogue resources using SCIS' (i.e. Schools cataloguing Information Service) and 'descriptive cataloguing of some resources'. The employee identified that she was also required to perform original cataloguing.
The principal indicated that he could not disagree with any of the information provided by the employee in relation to cataloguing.
In relation to the performance of original cataloguing the position description was shown to be less than one hundred percent accurate.
The employee advised that she was regularly (at least each week) required to perform original and or descriptive cataloguing. In relation to the use of SCIS it was apparent that not all resources were contained within that database. Therefore, the employee was required to perform original cataloguing for resources not listed din SCIS.
Further, whilst SCIS may have allocated a particular reference 3 number (and therefore a particular location within the library) to a specific resource, it was again obvious that the employee used her discretion and judgement to modify the cataloguing number given to a specific resource so that it could be more effectively used.
The DCEO Representatives confirm that the role Jennifer Koch performs in the Library of MacKillop School is highly valued by the Principal, teachers, students and parents. We believe that the Level 3 position that Jennifer Koch occupies at MacKillop is appropriately classified. This level recognises that an employee is such a position is allocated a level of autonomy, is required to apply some discretion and judgement about their own work and actions on a regular basis and involves the application of knowledge with depth in some areas and a broad range of skills. However, much of the role is performed within routines, methods and procedures.
QIEU Representatives:
Based on the above, it is our view that the level of supervision applied to Jenny Koch's work is more correctively described at Level 4. This supervision (the conduct of only a fortnightly meeting to monitor her role) in our opinion is more correctly described as general supervision.
The discussion of her work would indicate that she is required to achieve certain outcomes and that the monitoring of progress towards those outcomes is subject to only general guidance.
As the sole employee in the library there is, in our opinion, a wide variety of tasks and roles, in a variety of contexts, which the employee is required to perform.
The level of discretion and judgement exercised in investigating and determining the resources to be purchased, in our opinion, is that described for a Level 4 employee. Similarly the discretion and judgement exercised in descriptive and original cataloguing is, if anything, more appropriately classified at Level 5. Certainly the employee exercises her skills and responsibilities independently in both routine and non-routine settings. Again this exercise of skills and responsibilities is identified at Level 5.
In our opinion the discretion and judgement required to manage the operation of the Library, including the use of volunteers and other staff (from time to time) is more appropriately at Level 4.
In our view the employee operates at or above Level 4 as described by the Certified Agreement. Whilst not all of the typical duties of the employee have been addressed in this analysis we are confident that those identified are used sufficiently regularly, and constitute a sufficient proportion of the employee's work, to justify our assessment. If other duties were to be considered in more detail, it is our view that a similar Level would be determined.".
[8] Ms Koch was then advised by Ms Jeffcoat that the panel were unable to reach consensus on the classification level of her position. The matter was then referred to this Commission by the QIEU pursuant to Schedule 3 of the Certified Agreement. The matter was unable to be conciliated and this arbitration resulted.
[9] The position description for Ms Koch's position is as follows:
"Purpose of Position:
Under limited supervision of Principal or nominee, provide support services which facilitate organisation and coordination of the library as a learning centre.
Key Characteristics:
Skills:
§ Demonstrate tolerance, maturity, patience and capacity for self-organisation and the ability to respond and adapt whilst operating an environment which is often demanding and busy.
§ Facilitate effective communication with staff, students, parents and visitors in a way that enhances the school image and contributes to the goals of Catholic Education.
§ Demonstrate a capacity for tact and discretion and an ability to maintain confidentiality.