Letter from Telstra’s Darren Fewster shines a light on HR’s real strategy
August 8, 2008
Last week we revealed that Telstra HR was out on a limb - with an MoU found legal by the Department, and our constant assurances that we would bargain with absolutely no preconditions, Telstra HR had no excuses left for why they walked away from EA talks.
Yet this week, Telstra HR claimed in a variety of communications to staff and the media that unions and the ACTU told “blatant whoppers.” They said, for example, “the ACTU and unions had [...] publicly trumpeted a subsequent amended document not even given to Telstra during negotiations as the reason why the company should return to the bargaining table.” The Australian
We’ve made no secret of the fact we’ve worked hard on finding a document that would be acceptable to Telstra HR. We offered to have the constructive relationship agreement checked over by the Department of Workplace Relations – we even offered to go jointly to the Department with Telstra HR to work on something together.
Unlike Telstra HR, we don’t go around calling people liars or saying they’re telling “blatant whoppers”. Instead we’ll just let you judge for yourself. Here is an extract from a letter from Darren Fewster, Director of Workplace Relations and People Services at Telstra. [Click the link to read more]
‘We therefore welcome your commitment that the SBU [the unions' Single Bargaining Unit] “will come back with a revised document/position in relation to the CRA [constructive relationship agreement“,’ Darren Fewster replied. Here is a copy of the letter.
On the basis of this invitation we went to the Department with the MoU for their advice. This was later refined into the MoU the Department declared legal.
During this time, as we were refining the MoU and trying to craft a constructive relationship principles Telstra HR would sign up to, we were very clear we would always, always keep bargaining on the EA.
Read this June 30 letter from the Telstra unions
We said, “The SBU have not sought to make agreement on the CRA or MOU a precondition for ongoing talks or agreement around the Enterprise Agreement. The unions intend to bargain in good faith and our judgment on support for a Collective Agreement will depend on the outcome for members (a significant proportion of which are on AWAs) and on outcomes for potential members.”
The truth is Telstra HR has never been serious about bargaining. They are only interested in bargaining if we agreed with them. They walked away because:
* We would not accept a reduction in the conditions of our members and their colleagues;
* We would not ignore the plight of thousands of employees locked into AWAs until 2012;
* We would not accept complete management discretion on the level of pay rises and performance pay;
* We would not accept the job classification system where workers base salaries for doing the same work could be completely different;
* We would not accept pay rises below the level of inflation;
* We would not drop a demand for a proper grievance procedure, including a role for an independent umpire;
* We would not accept two classes of employees, with new employees on substantially lower wages and conditions;
* We argued that the performance pay system must be fair, objective and achievable;
* We argued workers should have a decent capacity to be represented and see their union; and
* We argued workers deserve a pay rise which keeps up with price rises and recognises their significant contribution to the company is demonstrated by the productivity improvements.
Above all we argued that Telstra should respect its employees, respect their right to be represented and to bargain collectively. That’s why Telstra has walked away. All the rest is a smokescreen.
Advertisement
Latest Headlines
- Telstra and communications industry unions agree on important principles
- Sign petition for a single union negotiated agreement
- Enterprise bargaining – what’s next?
- Well done everyone, Telstra ready to talk
- Government build of NBN good news for telecommunications industry
- My work area voted for an ECA. What happens now?
- Members’ Welfare Fund - CEPU
- Sol’s parting gift for call centre workers
- Get all the facts about the non-negotiable ECAs
- Telstra’s HR strategy is worsening every day
Sections
Archives
Comments
4 Responses to “Letter from Telstra’s Darren Fewster shines a light on HR’s real strategy”
Got something to say?
It would appear that Telstra have taken their bat and ball and gone home, simply because they couldn’t get their own way.
To say this is disappointing and indicative of a young child with behavioural issues would be somewhat of an understatement. Perhaps Telstra’s hierarchy were off shore (as most would not be required to vote in a Federal election), on the 24th of November 2007 when the majority of Australian constituents voted to change the government and subsequently the oppressive industrial laws introduced by that regime.
Let’s not misunderstand Telstra’s recent behaviour toward staff, most of which are or were customers and shareholders.
A recap:
On November 15th 2005 at 10am newly appointed CEO Sol Tujillo endeavoured to upstage the national ACTU Your Rights @ work rally by announcing that 12,000 jobs would be cut across Telstra’s workforce over the following 5 years. Since that announcement there has been what can only be described as massacre of loyal, experienced staff throughout Telstra.
A major part of Sol’s transformation of the company has been the outsourcing of thousands of jobs to the Philipines and India. This appears to be an ongoing cost reduction strategy which commenced shortly afterward the 15 November announcement. Jobs which require access to personal consumer credit information and account passwords are also now performed off shore.
In October 2007, one month out from a federal election which promised to remove the autocracy provided to employers under Work Choices, Telstra asked call centre employees to support a non union agreement. This agreement jeopardised redundancy entitlements, equality in the workplace, the opportunity to access an independent arbitrator and inhibited the right to access union representation. Telstra thought this was a pretty good deal, however, over 75% of staff rejected this proposal.
The Monday following the federal election , a new government had been elected, and the prohibition of AWA’s became imminent, Telstra was ready. They rolled out pre prepared AWA road shows, offering ‘profiled’ staff new 5 year contracts, arguably in an attempt to maintain the control over staff they had come to enjoy under the Work Choices legislation. Was there misleading information, pressure and intimidation and scare tactics utilised to encourage people to sign a new AWA?
The answer to that depends on who you speak with!
During late February early March 2008 it was revealed, and not by Telstra, that staff who were employed on AWA’s, (AWA’s have been a condition of new employment in Telstra for at least 9 years) which placed a percentage of actual earnings on achieving company set targets had been collectively underpaid by around $700.000.00. Some for the life of their AWA. Would Telstra have remunerated staff properly had this issue not been identified and publicised? Given Telstra’s consideration of remuneration decisions, even shareholder views at an AGM, we may never know.
If Telstra are genuinely interested, as they now profess to be, in the welfare of staff, affording employees respect, treating them honestly, providing freedom to join, or not to join a union, allowing for arbitration by an independent umpire, and affording both AWA and Award employees equality and a respectable pay increase why would they attempt to remove the involvement of the unions and/or the ACTU. Decency, respect, honesty and fairness both in the workplace and the community are values that the unions and the ACTU represent.
Perhaps we need to question whether the importation of alleged expertise has compromised the principles of a fair go and our Telco?
I work at Telstra on an AWA and could not be happier. I work hard an get rewarded accordingly. I was one of the 15000 who was re-offered an AWA til 2012. As an adult I wirked out I was better off under an AWA and sugned accordingly. I used to be a memeber of the CPSU and one of the things I found frustrating about his union was that it always protected the trouble makers and low performers, because they were after all the ones always calling on the CPSU for assistnace whilst ignoring the high performers who had to carry this lot. is it any wonder that two thirds of Telstra employees have turned their back on the CPSU/CEPU and signed onto AWA’s.
PS bet this won’t be posted!!!!
All credit for posting my comments.
I work at Telstra on the award, and could be a helluva lot happier. I work hard, and always have throughout my 20+ years of service. Of late, this has been for ever-reducing rewards. My cubicle is now covered in little cardboard rectangles decreeing what a wonderful worker I am. Perhaps I can build a house out of them one day. I am now owed several days in lieu of overtime (there’s “no money in the budget for overtime”), which I find myself unable to take conscientiously due to the increasing load of work being placed on me, with a corresponding decrease in training required to perform this work. I take pride in my work, but I admit it is getting harder to maintain this pride in current times. I have proudly been a CEPU member my entire career, and I too (it’s not just the trouble makers & low performers) have needed them at times when my exemplary performance has been no shield against uncaring (or worse, malicious! Managers have human foibles too) management decisions. I have watched an entire centre in Sydney (which was one of the best performers in the country) made redundant and dismissed as they were unfortunate enough to be in a building Telstra wanted to sell. This is reward for effort? It pains me as a friend, as an employee, as a shareholder and as an Australian to know the incredible skills & workforce that have been tossed away here. An immense loss to our company. The Union fought this, unsuccessfully. Like any organisation, it is only as strong as the people that support it. WE are the Union. The ousted Liberal government’s laws have weakened it, but it is MORE weakened by members leaving instead of remaining to support the battle to improve our conditions. And yes, this includes rectifying perceived failings on the part of any Union–WE ultimately make the world we live in. I’ve been bitten by the company I work for often enough to know that an appropriate balance in the form of the Union is an absolute requirement.