E-Peril News No. 8/2006

Contents:Air monitoring for Asbestos removal; AGL Classification Review; ETSA Wage Increase for 1 July 2006 ETSA Rem Review; Major Incident Allowance clarified; ETSA Alcohol Code

Air monitoring for asbestos removal
ASU members have identified a number of concerns with the proposed air monitoring regime proposed by ETSA Utilities for the removal of asbestos cladding from the warehouse at Angle Park. An email has been sent to HR at ETSA Utilities with our concerns as set out below:

1. Spot monitoring at sites designated by employees.
While ETSA have quite rightly designated an independent contractor to conduct the air monitoring at the Angle Park site while asbestos cladding is being removed, it is also important for workers at the site to be confident that all bases are being covered in respect to the interests of their health and welfare. Employees, through a recognized representative structure need to be confident that if they have concerns about the air monitoring sites they can raise this issue and have it addressed in a meaningful way.

2. Clean up of structural elements.
Structural elements of the workshop including, rafters, purlings, posts, lintels, & etc to be vacuumed and wiped or washed to remove all potential deposits of fibres.

3. Final Inspection
Worker representatives to be included in any inspection on completion of the removal of the asbestos cladding. Whilst the final sign off may remain the responsibility of the ETSA Responsible Officer, employees have a right to know that any inspections are carried out to their satisfaction.

4. Reporting of incidents
Workers need to be informed when an incident occurs, including the steps taken to clean-up following an unsatisfactory air monitoring result. The ASU believes this is best carried out on a regular basis, such as a daily briefing for all workers on site. Records of all incidents to be maintained for perusal of employee representatives.

5. Records kept of workers at the site.
A register of workers (and other visitors) to the site during any asbestos removal to be kept by the company.

6. Information to be available to workers & briefings at commencement and end of each shift.
Key factors to ensure that legitimate concerns of workers are addressed in a responsible manner is the provision of timely information. The ASU has suggested to ETSA Utilities that briefings be scheduled for the start of each shift when asbestos removal work is to be carried out so that all employees at the site get the same message at the same time and questions can be asked. In addition a debriefing at the end of the shift will give employees an opportunity to ask any questions or raise any points about observations during the shift. For consistency all workers and contractors or visitors to the site should receive a summary of the key factors raised at a briefing when entering the site during a shift.

Members who have concerns with health and safety issues are encouraged to speak to your ASU Energy Organiser Ian Heard who can be contacted on 0413 444 687.

The Classification Review Work Group met on Thursday, 18 May to progress the discussions on a new classification system.

The Work Group will consider a review of Main Work Activities (MWA) and an overview of the Determining Factors Matrix (DFM).

What is a Main Work Activity?

It is the main job functions. Your job profile is made up of these Main Work Activities and are tasks which are grouped into logical 'chunks'

Some MWA are generic and found across all streams, eg: teamwork, communication. Some MWA are technical and relate to specific streams or job roles, eg; billing functions. Main Work Activities reflect the work that we do divided into differing complexity levels.

What happens with the Determining Factors Matrix?

The DFM is used to evaluate jobs once the job profile & main work activities have been reviewed.
Each component of the DFM has points allocated. The tally of the points and the value of the MWA will combine to provide an overall point score for the position. The point score will determine the band for the position.

More information will be available following the Work Group meeting on 18 May. If you have questions please contact your ASU Workplace Representatives on the Work Group: Michelle Epton, Dave Sedgwick and Rob Wilson.

ETSA Wage Increase
ETSA Utilities 2006 Wage Increase of 4.9% to Salaried Rates
ASU Organiser, Ian Heard wrote to Lew Owens (on 27 April) seeking information about the wage increase set out in the ETSA Utilities Agreement.

The Utilities Management Pty Ltd Enterprise Bargaining Agreement 2005 at clause 10.2 sets out the criteria for a pay increase of 4.9% to be paid to Appendix 1A employees effective from the first pay period commencing on or after 1 July 2006 "contingent on achievement of the business performance target" of $192.2m in the 2005 financial year.

Members will be aware that the provision in the agreement provides a sliding scale of wage increase based on performance.

ETSA Utilities responded on Tuesday, 16 May indicating that the increase to be applied was 4.9%. Below is a short extract from the letter which also addresses the issue of setting the target for the next wage increase due on 1 July 2007.

"I advise that the expenditure target as set out in Clause 10.2 of the Agreement has been investigated and audited. That has resulted in the figure being determined as $184.4m compared to the maximum allowable target of $192.2m in the Agreement.

This will therefore result in the maximum increases allowable under the Agreement (ie 4.9% for Appendix 1A employees ....) being paid in 2006.

I also take this opportunity to advise that we need to set another target for 2006 along the lines of the 2005 target (refer Clause 10.3). ETSA Utilities will now undertake the preliminary work on this and advise you of the planned figure in due course. Of course, at that time we will need to reach agreement with you on the figure to be used.

Clause 10.3 of the Agreement sets out:

".....The identical formula and ratios (as applies in Tables 1 and 2 of clause 10.2) will be used to determine the business performance target and subsequent payment outcomes for the 2006 calendar year (2007 payment). .....

By 28 February 2006 discussions between the parties will commence to seek agreement that the 2006 business performance target is challenging but realistically achievable. The parties recognize that those discussions need to result in an acceptable figure that can be established and commit to undertake those discussions in good faith."

When those discussions commence ETSA Utilities members will be informed of the progress through E-peril.

$150 only for workers significantly exposed to the elements
Correspondence received by the ASU Office has clarified the position taken by ETSA Utilities in offering the Major Incident Allowance. In brief the ASU wrote to EU Human Resources about the proposal put by EU management in March.

A summary of the ASU questions and the ETSA Utilities reply is provided for your information:

Q1. What about workers other than TSW and GSW who are "involved in performing work to restore supply"?
A1. To be eligible "employee's must be directly involved in either supply restoration work in the field or working out of depots in support of supply restoration work.. .... the $150 rate will only be paid where an employee's work function during such times results in them being exposed to the elements to a significant extent."

Q2. Will a person who is trained, qualified and has the competency to carry out the work and volunteers to be available, but is currently not in a TSW or GSW position be paid the allowance?
A2. Allowance would be paid at the appropriate rate.

Q3. What is being considered for call centre or other staff who do other support work during a major incident?
A3. These employees will not be paid the Major Incident Allowance, but will be paid all entitlements provided in the Enterprise Agreement such as overtime.

ETSA - Alcohol Code
The Code of Conduct distributed by ETSA Utilities late last year raised a number of concerns with members. The ASU wrote to Human Resources about the wording in the code relating to the consumption of alcohol. In particular the ASU Representatives were concerned with the directive contained in the Code of Conduct for employees to -

• not "return or report to work under the influence of alcohol", and

• not "drive a motor vehicle on ETSA Utilities' business under the influence of alcohol"

The question that needed to be asked of ETSA was whether the standard they sought to apply in the Code of Conduct was more rigorous than that applied at law to a person driving a standard passenger vehicle?

ETSA Utilities have responded on Monday, 15 May that -

• employees should not return or report to work where their work performance might be regarded as being impaired by their consumption of alcohol, and

• no (ETSA Utilities) vehicle is to be driven by an employee under the influence of any drugs or with a blood alcohol level in excess of that permitted by law. For some vehicles and situations that means a zero tolerance. In the case of a standard passenger vehicle the level is 0.05%

Any comments or questions can be directed to Ian Heard, ASU Energy Organiser, email: iheard@asu-sant.asn.au