Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
Australian Security Worker
 
  Return to Website Recent Posts HomeHelpSearchLoginRegisterBroadcast Message to Admin(s)  
 
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
GHM SECURITY SERVICES PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT (Read 17403 times)
Reply #7 - 11. Mar 2010 at 10:56

Administrator   Offline
Administrator
Dob in a Dodgy Operator
Australia

Gender: male
Posts: 1003
*****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Spike

I wish I had all the information you have given over the last posts.   Now I know your old agreement was the Rannan agreement which cast a whole new light on the situation.   Here is the Rannan 2007 agreement:

http://ca.workplaceauthority.gov.au/docs/CAs/CAEN073526198.pdf

The Rannan agreement is still in force unless the workforce and the employer agreed to terminate the agreement.   It does not expire until 20/10/2010.   Did your workforce agree to have it terminated?

There appears that Ranann negotiated another agreement in 2009 and I made comment on it.   What is the story, did Ranann get sold to Cooloola or did it change its name?

http://ausecurityworker.com/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1258270927

The 2009 agreement is only a reference on the Fair Work Australia website and you cannot access the actual agreement.

The employer's agent for the 2007 Ranann agreement was another scumbag in the industry Peter Eather who was once a LHMU official.   There is a good chance that the workers got screwed in this agreement but looking at the Rannan agreement it looks as though the employer got screwed.   No wonder he was in a hurry to have a new agreement.

Clause 4.11 in the Rannan agreement is very poorly worded and says the 25% loading will be paid on top of your hourly rate an in your case it is the aggregate hourly rate because you work a 4x4 shift.   I would say the intention of the clause is only to pay 25% on the normal hourly rate contained in clause 5.2 (c) but Peter Eather wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer. This must have irked the new owner because he is paying penalty rates on penalty rates contained in the aggregate hourly rate.

The voluntary extra hours clause has not been excluded from the agreement - see para 4.11.   The amended agreement states you will be paid at the casual rate of 23% on the ordinary rate of pay for your classification  
Annex B which is the request for extra hours form, is still very confusing.

If you and your workmates haven't voted to terminate the 2007 Rannan agreement and if it still applies to your employment under a new owner, the workforce can ask to have the Cooloola agreement made null and void because the 2007 Rannan agreement does not expire till 20/10/2010.   I suppose your claims for being paid the way you have been can be justified.

The modern award, the Security Services Industry Award 2010 came into force on 1 January 2010 and the Cooloola agreement was not assessed against it.   The Cooloola agreement was assessed against the NAPSA which was the Security Contractors Award Queensland.

You have to ask yourself why Cooloola needed to have this agreement voted on before 1 Jan 2010 and it is because they did not want it assessed against the modern award and it shows up in different clauses.

Don't hang around a mining town for 4 days between shifts, why not have the other guards form a partnership and go into the nearest large city and contract for work.
 

Ah! Working in Security where finding the real thief could be your employer. Now is the time to check your super account.
IP Logged
 
Reply #6 - 10. Mar 2010 at 20:39

spike   Offline
High Level Contributor
Workers Unite

Posts: 108
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Dear sir

You are right in most of your asscements but the Cooloola was first negotiated (I think) in late September 2009 and wasn't voted for and made, I think late early November or early December 2009.

The Modern award was made early 2009.

The Full Bench didn't insert the transitional provisions including the industrial allowances until late December 2009.

I now work for a company in North Queensland, 4 on 4 off.

Yes I met Mr.Jones in Townsville and he advised us that although our previous agreement (Ranann) had a voluntary extra hours clause, it was highly unlikly this clause will get up in the new agreement because of the NDT, even though we had fallen below the award in our old agreement, as we need to prove that;

       Avialability of overtime hours histrorically,
      employees current access to additionaly hours " if they work for a second employer" and many more conditions.

I also believe that Mr. Jones argued on behalf of the employees in the Garden City case on voluntary extra hours before Commission Lewin, and I may quote ' transcript" which was given out by a certain employer. "the voluntary extra hours was initated by the employees and not by the employer, it is cheaper for the employer to employ a casual  rather than pay overtime".

The voluntary extra hours has now been excluded from our agreement, and the agreement has passed the NDT.

Mr.Jones did advise us to get the Lhmu involved as the voluntary extra hours would have a better chance to be approved if a union supported it, but we wern't members and anyway they didn't return our calls when said we would join.

At the end of the day on your post we argue about , flash lights, training (which is most important), Crowd Control, spraying people with all sorts of stuff and how to hurt people. We are not security officers to hurt people, we are  about protecting people and properity.

The most pressing issue for security officers and the Rambo Crowd Control Officers on your post who have other full time jobs  is industrial relations for full time/partime  Security workers.

Yes I have been hurt as a security officer severely.

Lets look after the full time professional Security officer.

Please do come up to a NQ mining town and sit with Security Officers for their Donga for four days off with nothing to do while other people are working!

Ok I accept we have lost that argument and as far as joining the CFMEU, there is a MOA with the LHMU and the CFMEU that there will be no further poching of members of the LHMU ( Security Officers) with the agreement of Contract Cleaners.

Yours sincerely

 
IP Logged
 
Reply #5 - 10. Mar 2010 at 11:14

Administrator   Offline
Administrator
Dob in a Dodgy Operator
Australia

Gender: male
Posts: 1003
*****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Spike

The situation is this, an agreement was drawn up by the employer with the aid of an agent and presented to the workforce.   You voted on this agreement with the employer assuring you that the dog allowance had been included but failed to state that the Voluntary Extra Hours arrangement had fundamentaly changed.   You took his assurances and voted for the agreement.   When the employer submitted the agreement for approval he signed this declaration contained in form F17 so go to this webpage and click on the relevant form:

http://www.fwa.gov.au/index.cfm?pagename=resourceforms

The commission has only this declaration assure itself that the bargaining process was fair.   When they applied the no disadvantage test they found that full time employees doing overtime would first have to ask for it and then only be paid normal time.   This goes against the National Employment Standards and therefore had to be amended.   This does not stop your employer engaging casuals to do extra hours at the casual rate.

If you and your fellow workers want this Voluntary Extra Hours clause inserted guaranteeing you the loaded rate then you may be able to vary the agreement  according to Section 7 of the Fair Work Act:

http://www.fwa.gov.au/documents/legislation/fw_act/FW_Act-01.htm#P3583_336796

You can challenge the agreement making process that led to the agreement being voted on.   Have a look through F17 and see if the employer, from the employees perspective, lied.   Go to the webpage in the website 'Bargaining' and see if the steps in the bargaining process were adheared to.

http://ausecurityworker.com/bargaining.htm

If you and your workers want to fight this and you see a basis on which to challenge or renegotiate, then try to get the LHMU involved or failing this employ the services of an Industrial Relations Consultant.   Weigh up what you will be losing  in wages under this agreement when looking at the cost  of fighting this as the union or IRC are proficient in the law and can tell you if there is a chance of winning.   Or you can be like your cleaner cousins and join the CFMEU and see what they can do for you.

There appears to be a few security agreements which are connected to Mr Jeffrey Jones of P & J Industrial Solutions which were challenged by the Commission and I suspect that he was the employer agent in the Cooloola agreement.   Kalabex Pty Ltd T/A Garden City Security Service and Specialised Security Service Pty Ltd T/A Specialised Security Service are some of his clients.   If you know of anyone working for these companies then see if they have been screwed.
 

Ah! Working in Security where finding the real thief could be your employer. Now is the time to check your super account.
IP Logged
 
Reply #4 - 10. Mar 2010 at 10:12

Administrator   Offline
Administrator
Dob in a Dodgy Operator
Australia

Gender: male
Posts: 1003
*****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Spike

Here it is as I see it and I could be wrong.  In workplaces where the amount of work to be done can be accomplished by the current workforce each working 38 hrs a week then there is no need to employ extra workers.   If the amount of work increases then the employer has three options, offer the extra work to permanent workers and pay overtime, employ a casual or if the work appears to be ongoing then employ a full time employee.   The most advantageous is to employ a casual because with the casual rate the employer may pay slightly above what it costs for a permanent worker but he has the option to only offer the amount of work that is available.

It is for this reason that many full time workers in unions through their unions have tried to shut out the option of the employer employing casuals so that full time workers will be offered overtime.   This has probably happened with the CFMEU in the mine that you work so there are no casual vacancies in the mine.

Your employer has recognized the huge pool of off duty miners who want to work as casual security workers.   I do not know under what arrangements or agreements you worked under before but either your employer voluntarily chose to employ full time workers in overtime positions or was forced to under some agreement.   The employers argument is that why should they pay overtime when the full time workers want the overtime as much as the employer needs to have someone work it.

Hence the Voluntary Extra Hours clause is there which says that I the employer have extra hours to be worked and I am offering it to you the full time workforce if you want to work it but if you do not want to work it I can offer it to a casual worker.   This is where a 'restrictions of trade' element is brought into play.   Why should I the employer be forced to pay more to have a job done when there are others willing to do it at a cheaper rate.   This is why the employer is first offering you the full time worker the opportunity to accept working the extra hours at casual rates but if you decline I have the right to employ a casual.

The Commission only evaluates the agreement against the National Employment Standards which guarantees full time workers 38 hrs per week and other leave and employment rights and the conditions contained in the NAPSA or the Security Contractors Award Queensland  which governed your employment in Queensland.   The LHMU argued for the 'Dog Allowance' which was in the Queensland NAPSA, be included in the transition phase so you are not disadvantaged because the new award does not have a dog allowance and neither did it exist in any other NAPSAs security state awards.   Unless you can prove that the Voluntary Extra Hours arrangement existed in a previous agreement you will have no case because it did not exist in the NAPSA.   I am at my character limit for a post so will continue it in the next post.  

 

Ah! Working in Security where finding the real thief could be your employer. Now is the time to check your super account.
IP Logged
 
Reply #3 - 09. Mar 2010 at 21:46

spike   Offline
High Level Contributor
Workers Unite

Posts: 108
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Dear Administrator
Deeply sorry how I indicated I was somewhat related with GHM Security, I guess I was trying to up load a document and got confused. I have no idea who GHM is and never worked for them.

However while I do believe your comments, the  Commission is trying to do the right thing by the employees, but realy don't you think that when there there is a major change to an Enterprise Agreement by the Employer and the Commission, that the Employees who voted on the agreement, should be consulted?

This happened in the Cooloola agreement and others where the employees wanted voluntary extra hours, not the employer, and the Commission never consulted employees about the change until after the event.

I have an issue that in a mining town where miners who hold security licenses are employed now to do security work at a lower rate, at the expense of security officers getting the loaded rate, or extra voluntary hours at the loaded rate plus 25%, but other licance security officers who also have 4 on 4 off ( as the miners) can't get extra hours as as a labourer in the mine. All have the same mine passport. The miners are getting up to $190K as miners per year we were getting $70K but now without the extra hours could be getting as little $60k

Than there's the poor cousions the Counsel Workers with security lincenses who who want to moonlight and compete with security officers on the weekends .

This particular hurts when we are getting the loaded rates and mine workers on week days our 4 days off getting $15.50 per hours plus 3hours at time and half and the last hour at double time as pernament partime as now they are being rostered.

Trust me the employers don't lose by not having the Voluntary extra hours but the proffessional officer do, particular in these circumstances.

Unions, Government Officials, Bscaa, Asial and the FWA should take this into account when assesing Agreements with Voluntary extra hours the circumstances, but I guess it's easier for the employer to give an undertaking to the Commission not to use the Voluntary extra hours wether the employees agree or not, the employer wins again.

I supposed at the end of the day we are not the only one to get raw end of the prawn, contract cleaners have the same problem, however with the cleaners the LHMU has handed the coverage of some cleaners on mine sites to the CFMEU, at least now only in  circumstances the cleaners wages and conditions have inproved greatly(coal bonus), but the coverage dosen't extend to Security Officers.

Sorry in some cirmsutances voluntary extra hours does benifit workers, in these towns we are here to make money, otherwise why would anyone live here, particular in a Donga.

Yes there are many companies that abuse voluntary extra hours and one great person said to to me could this be used as a tendering ploy for a company, I said no for the simple reason what if all empolyees refused  to signed the voluntary extra hour form.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #2 - 08. Mar 2010 at 08:05

Administrator   Offline
Administrator
Dob in a Dodgy Operator
Australia

Gender: male
Posts: 1003
*****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Spike

This post appears under GHM Security services.   I thought your interest was with the Cooloola agreement?

I will comment on the Cooloola agreement.   The terms for voluntary extra shifts contained in the agreement in clause 4.11  and in the form for applying for voluntary extra shifts at the end of the agreement.   Under these terms you would only receive the casual rate for the time of the shift with no overtime component.   This is what the commission saw as violating the no disadvantage clause.   Under the award conditions, time worked over 38 hrs had to be paid at overtime rates.   The reason they were paying at the casual rate was to make up the pro rata leave and sick leave component that you were entitled to by working over 38 hrs.

I am not sure about the voluntary extra shifts clause of the Tempo agreement but when I was working for Wilsons which was covered under the same agreement, it was a clause that was negotiated by the LHMU and the three security companies.   It appeared that it was a clause that the employers wanted and the LHMU accepted because they negotiated it for some other benefit.   From my recollection, any time worked on these extra shifts were paid at overtime rates.

This was a sneaky way for your boss to get this clause through the agreement and it appears you and your fellow workers approved it without reading and understanding it.   You pointed out in previous posts that you were a member of the LHMU and they failed to help you negotiate this agreement.   I wonder if you can sue the LHMU?

If this was an agreement under the old Workchoices legislation, they would have approved it and you and your fellow workers would be worse off.   Believe me some crappy agreements were approved under the Workchoice legislation.   The went on the premise that if the workers approved it then it must be the pay and conditions that the workers wanted.

As a party to the agreement anyone of your fellow workers can go to the hearing because you were not represented by the union.   If any of your workers are still union members then ask if the union will represent you.   Go to the hearing and state that what was the arrangement with voluntary extra shifts prior to the agreement and the monetary loss you will suffer.
 

Ah! Working in Security where finding the real thief could be your employer. Now is the time to check your super account.
IP Logged
 
Reply #1 - 07. Mar 2010 at 12:18

spike   Offline
High Level Contributor
Workers Unite

Posts: 108
****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
Dear Aministrator

I understand that there is an appeal against a document failing because of a voluntary extra hours clause, and or employers are being asked to delete that clause.

I believe that the appeal is on the 17th and 18th March 2010.

The LHMU is opposed to any voluntary extra hours/shifts and yet when I was working for Tempo/ISS Security, the LHMU agrued for the inclusion of the voluntary extra hours.

I have a friend who works for another company and they have deferred their agreement until after the above hearing.

In my circumstance the new agreement has cost me an extra shift per fortnight equal to $358.20, or $9,300 per year.

We voted on the agreement on the understanding that we continued to get the voluntary extra shift. This hasn't hurt the employer but hurt the employees.

For the extra shifts the employer now brings in a casual from another company rather than pay overtime.

We were never asked if we wanted the voluntary extra hours dropped, many of my fellow workers including my self rely on the extra shift per fortnight. We work 4 on 4 off 12 hour shifts, the voluntary extra shift was plus 25% above loaded rate.

We also get the loaded rate for our annual leave.

The casual gets the ordinary casual hourly rate of $19.06 plus overtime and not the $23.88 loaded rate or the $29.85 per hour we recieved for the extra shift.

If I could work out how to attach an attachment to this post, I would attach a letter my employer gave us re the Commissioner decision on voluntary extra hours for our agreement.

There's not much to do in a small town in North Qld for 4 days off but to work, stay in the camp or drink beer.

I guess it's time to look for another job.

Thanks for listing the agreements and their links I found mine.

Sorry for having a winge.

Kind regards
 
IP Logged
 
04. Mar 2010 at 13:42

Administrator   Offline
Administrator
Dob in a Dodgy Operator
Australia

Gender: male
Posts: 1003
*****
Alert Board Moderator about this Post! 
The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 16 September 2009. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 16 September 2013

http://www.fwa.gov.au/decisionssigned/html/2009fwa260.htm
 

Ah! Working in Security where finding the real thief could be your employer. Now is the time to check your super account.
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print