Surveillance Officer CIM Prosecution update and more – November 2018 (PDF version)

The PSA provided timelines with regard to filing of further evidence in our 24 August bulletin as part of the CIM prosecution. You can read that bulletin HERE.

This was predicated upon the transcripts of the proceedings being available to the parties by 5 October.

However, the Reporting Services Branch of Attorney General’s’ Department have advised the PSA lawyers that the transcripts of the proceedings are not ready, and currently reside with the outsourced contractor.

This causes an issue with regard to those agreed timeframes – ultimately pushing them out further and giving the sitting Magistrate insufficient time to properly address those submissions in determining a finding.

The length of time that this has taken clearly identifies the issues with the current justice system and the need for more resources so that justice is dispensed more quickly.

So what does this mean?

The likelihood is that the Magistrate will provide the parties with new dates in order to file our further submissions. So this means that the date for decision of 5 February will most likely change. When those dates are finalised, they will be provided to members.

What happens in the meantime?

The PSA highlighted the need for a lasting industrial solution when dealing with working hours and pay for Surveillance Officers.

This could involve changes to the award and the adoption of a specific Surveillance Officers portion of the agreement.

The PSA is still considering options with regard to this however, will make no representations to the RMS before any finding is made with the CIM prosecution.

Put simply, it is not in member’s interests to discuss anything until such time as the CIM process is finalised. If the PSA gets to this position, continuing discussions with members will be the priority. Members get their say on these processes, non-members don’t.

Different grading of Surveillance Officers

Part of the PSA survey into the next award negotiations highlighted Surveillance Officer concerns on the grading of Surveillance Officer positions.

There is correspondence that stems back to 2000 with the reclassification of Superintending officers and the differences.

However, since that time, there has been quite a blurring of the differences between USS5, USS6, USS7 and USS8 Surveillance Officer positions.

This is further complicated by the previous grandfathering of Surveillance Officer positions.

The advice from members is that a competency committee may provide the staff and the RMS with:

1. a better understanding of the roles being fulfilled by Surveillance Officers
2. a better understanding of the changes in some roles over time
3. a better understanding of staff development requirements
4. better workforce planning as the age demography of Surveillance Officers is definitely skewed.

The PSA considers this to be a good way to deal with the issues prescribed and this will make up part of the log of claims for the next RMS Award.

Not getting these updates? Surveillance Officer members who are not receiving these bulletins should call our Member Support Centre on 1300 772 679 to identify yourself as a Surveillance Officer.