|
|
AIRC decides that it is against the public interest to lengthen the working Dad's time away from their children. |
In 12 months of negotiations, 200 contractors working on ESSO's oil and gas rigs in the Bass Strait have been involved in strikes, lock-outs and legal action. The major issue of contention between the parties is the proposal by ESSO that the offshore employees move from a roster which involves seven days of 12-hour shifts followed by seven days off work to a 14-day on /14-day off roster. The major issue of contention between the parties is the proposal by ESSO that the offshore employees move from a roster which involves seven days of 12-hour shifts followed by seven days off work to a 14-day on /14-day off roster. |
Despite the lure of a 15 % pay rise over three years and the possible extension of the life of the Bass Strait platforms contained in the 14-day roster offer, the Australian Workers Union (AWU), on behalf of the workers, argued that the changes would reduce the regularity of involvement by fathers in family life and disrupt the continuity of their involvement with children. This included survey results showing 90% of workers' wives opposed the new plans. |
The AWU then went on to point out that the new Agreements were contrary to established Government policy and constituted a breach of the international Convention Concerning Equal Opportunities and Equal Treatment for Men and Women Workers: Workers with Family Responsibilities; which calls for the Government to adopt measures to ensure "the recognition of the common responsibility of men and women in the upbringing and development of their children". |
As a result of the stalemate, the Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC) was then asked by ESSO to terminate the 7-day-on/7-day-off rosters contained in the Certified Agreements. In response to this request, the Commission decided that the Convention relating to workers with family responsibilities "extends to measures to enable workers…to engage in employment without conflict between their employment and family responsibilities" and later, "at a time when for reasons of public policy emphasis is being given to the need for children to have greater involvement of males in their day-to-day lives, to lengthen the time period for which the father is totally absent from these families seems to me to be contrary to that policy and to the public interest." |
In the specific circumstance of the implementation of 14/14 rosters for the employees, the Commission found that they should not facilitate such a process unless it was satisfied that the process:
- Will not adversely affect the ability of the employees to balance or reconcile their work and family responsibilities effectively;
- Will not increase the level of conflict between their employment and their family responsibilities;
- Will assist the employees to balance their work and family responsibilities;
- Will reflect mutually beneficial work practices in relation to family responsibilities;
- Will enable employees with family responsibilities free choice of employment; and
- Will take account of their needs in relation to their family responsibilities.
|
peter.mcnamara@cml.com.au
|
