The Force’s EB Log of Claims seeks to remove many of the protections currently afforded by agreed policies and industrial agreements.  This trade-off would mean that many of the HR rules that exist today may vanish in the next agreement, reducing the stability and security of employment that you enjoy today.  

The Force is seeking to replace policies currently contained in the 2001 Certified Agreement with a ‘set of principles’ that seek to provide ‘fairness and reasonableness’.

In the Force’s claim it is asserted that a “prescriptive rules approach to the treatment of our members is a barrier to managers and members”.

While the Police Association is not averse to flexibility, it is concerned with the replacement of rules with ‘principles’ that are subject to interpretation, offering little to no surety for members at work.

What’s more, this approach is likely to result in a different application and interpretation between regions and departments, making it impossible for members to know exactly what conditions of employment they will inherit should they move or be transferred.

We also question that the Force should be trusted to deliver fair or reasonable outcomes for members. We remind members of the many unfair and unreasonable decisions that have been made even with prescriptive rules in place. The removal of the Police in Schools Program, the flawed  ESD restructure, the disbandment of the Armed Offenders Squad, the
12-hour roster dispute and the MCMM debacle are but a few examples that showcase just how ‘fair and reasonable’ the Force can be.

Our members should not be fooled into thinking that an unstructured approach alone will deliver anything more than increased management flexibility and unrivalled management prerogative at the expense of working police officers.

I suppose we can’t blame the Chief Commissioner for chasing every employer’s dream, rules that are not rules!