Clerical Union’s agreement with staff rescinded

Press, 19 April 1985, Page 5

Clerical Union’s agreement with staff rescinded

An in-house agreement covering staff of the Canterbury Clerical Workers’ Union has been rescinded. An occasionally stormy special meeting of about 170 union members on Wednesday evening decided to rescind the agreement, which covered the union’s organisers and office staff. The meeting lasted about four hours. About 10 union staff were suspended by the executive for three days last week, after the staff took industrial action in support of improvements to the agreement. The executive has described the in-house agreement as greatly superior to the clerical workers’ award. The executive called the special meeting to explain the breakdown in the agreement negotiations and to get members’ support for its actions. The meeting also agreed to increase union fees. The increase is thought to be 40 per cent, but the union’s

president, Mrs Lena Schenkel, would say yesterday only that the increase was substantial. Most full-time union members now pay $1.25 a week in fees. Mrs Schenkel said that the meeting called for a report by officers and the executive on employment conditions of the union secretary and employees. This would be presented to the union’s annual meeting in June. In the meantime the terms and conditions of the in-house agreement would continue, although the meeting rescinded the agreement, she said. Present salary rates would continue, with future increases to be in line with changes to the general clerical award. At present, staff wages are linked to the Public Service, not the general clerical award. The staff would not lose anything by the meeting’s decision and they had

agreed to abide by it, said Mrs Schenkel. The union staff did not want to comment yesterday. A pamphlet prepared by staff and circulated at Wednesday evening’s meeting said the staff were given suspensions notices “only seconds” after they had given their written acceptance of the executive’s proposal to resolve the dispute. The next day (April 11), when they went to the office for normal work the office door lock had been changed, the pamphlet said. During the negotiations the staff were told that the union’s finances were “very ■.tight.” They had not been told this before, they said in the pamphlet. The claims they sought included a one-week stress leave each year for organisers, a ?17-a-day away from home allowance (a $5 increase), changes to the leave without pay provisions, and the retention of an annual bonus of one week’s pay.