Dear members
Enterprise Bargaining continued last Thursday, with further disappointment communicated to the
AFPA team. After eleven months of bargaining, AFP Management are still to make a decision about
the continued payment of the composite allowance to employees assigned to the Operations
Working Pattern. In effect, the bargaining process is stalled while the AFP negotiating team await
direction from AFP Management about this fundamental element of the Enterprise Agreement.
In the AFPA’s submission to the Senate Inquiry into the Government Bargaining Policy, we expressed
our extreme frustration at the snail pace of these negotiations. It is preposterous that the future of
the central pillar of our Enterprise Agreement is still the subject of consideration so far through the
bargaining process. Surely a properly planned and considered approach to bargaining by the AFP
would have seen the status of the composite allowance settled at the outset. Unfortunately, this
process has been anything but considered.
Meetings are spent discussing terms and conditions which frankly pale into insignificance compared
to the elephant in the room, being composite allowances. If the AFP propose to remove the
allowance from the Operations Working Pattern they should say so and quickly. The AFPA have been
unequivocal in respect of our position on the composite – it is NOT negotiable. That the AFP are
apparently still contemplating its removal can only be interpreted as a deliberate ploy to engineer a
no vote to any proposed agreement. The AFPA represents two-thirds of employees. We said it was
not negotiable. The AFP said nothing about it for 11-months and now apparently, it is still being
considered. If this represents a delaying tactic by the AFP it is unacceptable. If it represents a lack of
attention being paid to negotiations by Senior Management, it is unforgivable.
Unfortunately, it appears the decision about removing composites is not being based on
modernising the current agreement or improving the flexibility of the AFP and its workforce. Rather,
the sole intention appears to be fixing the AFP budget by cutting the salaries of operational
members of the AFP, with little regard to the consequences this will have on the ability of the AFP to
deliver an effective national law enforcement response in a complex criminal and national security
environment.
Removing the composite allowance from the agreement constitutes a fundamental re-engineering
of the structure of our employment conditions. If the AFP wanted to achieve this, they should have
started the process years ago by making an argument to employees that it is a good idea and they
should vote for a 22% pay cut. Instead, the AFP have been lazy and may now be seeking to make this
change in the context of Enterprise Bargaining. It’s not enough work in too little time and the AFPA
rejects it outright.
The AFPA calls on AFP Management to make a decision on the composite allowance so the
bargaining process can be concluded.
In Commander Rippon’s EA Bargaining update of last week, he made comment of a significant
bargaining party being prepared to accept a salary increase less than 2% no for loss of conditions.
The AFPA did not make this proposal and we reaffirm our position in respect of 2% salary increases
each year, consistent with the provisions of the ELEA.
By way of correction, I have had opportunity over the last week to increase my knowledge of the
pre-99 Annual Leave entitlements enjoyed by sworn members. I thank all of you who contributed to
this valuable learning outcome. I now understand it was unsworn employees who received 4-weeks
Annual Leave, while sworn members received 6-weeks. I was hoping to illustrate that ADO’s were
not the same as MRD’s in that they only existed because of the unpaid hours worked at the time, so
were not a leave entitlement at all. ADO’s routinely get raised as an example of how our conditions
have been eroded over time, as once upon a time there were 12 ADO’s and now there are 4 MRD’s
and that is less and they must be the same thing.
At bargaining last week, the AFP reaffirmed the proposal to link MRD accrual to Annual Leave
utilisation. Data was cited indicating in 2015 about one quarter of band 1-8 employees used less
than 4-weeks Annual Leave, so this apparently justifies the proposed provision. This of course
illustrates that three quarters Band 1-8 employees used more than 4-weeks Annual Leave and the
other quarter could have their leave utilisation managed more rigorously. So, the proposed linking is
pointless, won’t achieve an appreciable outcome, will result in an unnecessary administrative
burden and we continue to reject it. Fundamentally, provisions in the Enterprise Agreement should
not be made more complex as a surrogate to managing people.
Cheers
Graeme Cooper
Chief Executive Officer
Australian Federal Police Association
23 Murray Crescent, Griffith ACT 2603
Ph. +612 6285 1677 | Mob. 041 877 8892
www.afpa.org.au | [email protected]
"Important: This transmission is intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain confidential or legally privileged information.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you receive this transmission in error please notify the author immediately and delete all copies of this transmission."