People Smartz Blog

On Monday, Fair Work Australia finally laid down a decision that should have not been required in the first place.

Nearly a year and a half ago, a number of teenagers lost their after school jobs because of a clause within the General Retail Award which basically said a casual could not work for less than a 3 hour period.

For these teenagers, this effectively ruled out going to work after school as the time between school finishing and the retail outlet they worked in closing was less than 3 hours.

Now having restrictions on the minimum hours that can be worked is understandable.  In fact, to a certain extent, I support them.  However, when you are restricting the ability of teenagers to learn important work habits, then the law needs to be modified.  

Arguments from unions etc that easing this restriction would lead to "job losses" and "lower wages" did not really argue the primary point - that by enforcing this rule we were interfering with what is basically a vital learning area for our younger generations.  To suggest that allowing teenagers to work out of school hours was going to cost adults jobs just goes against the fact that most of those adults started exactly where these teenagers are now - with after school work!  Where did these adults learn the work habits that brought them to employment in later life if not in jobs such as these?

While it took 16 months and 3 rounds of arbitration to get there, this is a decision that should be congratulated. Despite the unions and government supporting the maintenance of the 3 hour limit, the tribunal has decided that provided a certain set of circumstances exist, a school aged person can work for less than a 3 hour period.

Under the new arrangements, school age persons can work a minimum of a 90-minute shift.  This will apply only if the employee is a full-time student; that the hours worked are between 3pm and 6.30pm on a school day; and the employee and their parent or guardian agrees on the shorter period. The shorter period is also allowed only if employment for a longer period is not possible because of the operational requirements of the employer or the unavailability of the student.

These arrangements are simple commonsense.  It is a pity it took so long to arrive at this decision!

When we first started People Smartz, our aim was to assist companies who understood that people are the most important asset a company can have.

Our aim has never changed, we believe that it is people who can drive a business to success and have not moved from this belief.

This means our aim has always been to work with businesses to assist them to build the individual and collective capability within a business - the aim being what we call "Mutual Success".

Last week we met with one of our long term clients.  They are a small company of 20 employees with offices in two states.

This company has strong leadership, some good managers and some good people - A recently completed employee survey assessed their employee satisfaction at 73%!

But it was the items that the survey raised that interested us - what they were doing well, and what they could do better.  

What the survey enabled us to highlight was the differences in management and leadership between the states.  Where one state was strong in communication, the other was not, where one state was strong in sharing company performance, the other was not etc.

This has enabled us to see identify the individual strengths of the managers and use them in our planning to assist the company in moving forward to "mutual success".  By developing a plan utilsing the individual competencies each manager is displaying, we can use those strengths to develop weak areas in another area of the company, or even in another individual.

Building on what you already have in an organisation can sometimes have a very positive effect on a company.  By identifying the strengths you have in managers and staff, and utilising them to build the business you are developing not only the company but building responsibility, accountability and ownership - all positives for any company!

If you would like assistance in developing a plan to improve the performance of your company and encourage "mutual success"  - Contact Us Today!

For the last two years, we have released many blogs posts on the unfair dismissal laws contained in the Fair Work Act.

Earlier this month, Fair Work Australia released its latest quarterly report.  It contains some interesting numbers in regards to unfair dismissal claims and the Fair Dismissal Code for Small Business

With unfair dismissals, the tribunal received 3219 unfair dismissal applications in the quarter. The overwhelming majority of these (2564), were settled at or before conciliation. The tribunal made decisions on only 64 dismissal claims in the quarter, finding 24 were unfair and 40 fair.  Only 18 claims resulted in a decision awarding compensation to the ex-employee.

Employees are now much more aware of their rights under the act and claims are on the rise.  Many of our clients are reporting that claims made against them have been frivolous and they have settled "just to make it go away".  The numbers released this month certainly seem to uphold what they are telling us!  

From the numbers presented by Fair Work Australia, The Fair Dismissal Code for Small Business is not working!  While 609 applications related to a small business employee, only two were rejected because the dismissal was consistent with the code. 
We believe this is a worry - if followed, the code is designed to protect a small business from unfair dismissal claims.  At People Smartz, our experience is telling us that, if they know about the code at all, most businesses are finding it difficult to understand - after all, it is basically a corporate process that they need to follow!

We believe that small businesses are generally finding it difficult to work with these laws and over time the issues they present are compounding.  The latest set of numbers from Fair Work Australia seem to indicate this is correct!

Given the current state of Australia's workplace laws, small businesses need to ensure they have the systems in place to protect them against unfair dismissal claims.  This includes having appropriate systems in place to manage poor performance and terminate staff.  

At People Smartz, we are experienced in assisting our clients to put such systems in place.  For many years, we have had in place a review process for small business called a "People and Business Review".  This is designed to review what is in place in your business and assist you to identify the changes you need to make to protect your business.  Why not book yours today?

Contact Us Today!





 

It appears that we are finally starting to see some real pressure being put on the Opposition to provide a real policy difference between the parties in relation to industrial relations.  Even Heather Ridout, once a supporter of the Fair Work Act, has recognised the need for debate in this area

And it is about time too!

The Fair Work Act does not balance the playing field in industrial relations and is providing disincentives to small and medium sized businesses.  It is complex and a minefield for players in the game who do not have the time, resources or knowledge to manage it.

At People Smartz we work predominantly with businesses who do not have a Human Resources team, they do not have experience in interpreting the awards and they do not have the time to understand all the complex points of the different areas of the law.

Only last week I conducted a review for a small business person.  His business was operating well and, as far as he was concerned, was compliant with the award and legislation.  However, by the time the National Employment Standards, the Modern Awards, the transitional arrangements and the difference between state and federal jurisdiction had been explained to him his comment was "how am I supposed to keep up and understand all this!"

This particular gentlemen was not working with his staff compliantly and needs to make changes to his employment arrangements.  Due to the changes between state and federal coverage, he had missed several important points of coverage, because of transitional arrangements he had missed increases in minimum wages, because of a lack of understanding of the National Employment Standards he was underpaying staff in accordance with the "Better Off Overall Test".

He is not alone.  We see small and medium sized businesses every week who are in some way not meeting the minimum entitlements under this legislation.  And it is important to note that this is because they don't understand the requirements on them.

Over 80% of those employed in Australian businesses are employed within businesses that have less than 5 staff. These businesses are the real engine room of Australia's economy and they are woefully ignored by an industrial relations system which is not designed to help or support them. Nor have we seen any real effort to provide them with the education they so badly need. 

Since 2005 we have had two pieces of legislation that have led the industrial relations debate - Work Choices and the Fair Work Act.  In my opinion, each of them has taken the debate to the extreme left or right in an effort to either decrease or increase the power of unions within the Australian political and industrial relations arena.  Their underlying aim has not been the development of any "fair and equitable" system, nor have they been designed with the primary aim of benefiting the Australian Economy. Their real and underlying focus was on union power.

It is time that we moved this debate along, the opposition needs to move on and start challenging the inadequate aspects of the current legislation and bring the discussion back to developing a system designed for all Australians and that can support all Australian businesses.  The Opposition needs to stop treating this as a "no-go" area, forget Work Choices and begin encouraging real debate in this area.

It is only through real debate that we will see change - thank god, we are beginning to see some movement in that direction.  
 

A recent case before Fair Work Australia has emphasied the importance of employers having a fair and published process in regards to handling disciplinary problems with staff.

The case (Michelle de Leon v Spice Temple Pty Ltd [2010] FWA 3497, revolved around the "abrupt and quite unprofessional" manner with which an employee had dealt with a high profile customer.

As a result of a complaint from the customer, the employee was dismissed from her position.

The Deputy President of FWA was very critical of the employer because:

• the decision to dismiss the employee was made prior to meeting with her to discuss the issue.  In the words of the Deputy President, she was effectively "ambushed" by the allegation and was given no opportunity to respond to the allegation.
• she was not given the opportunity to have a support person present at the meeting (the employer did suggest that the staff members immediate supervisor was present to support her but this was not accepted).
• she was not given any written warning about her conduct nor was she given a letter of dismissal stating the reasons for the dismissal.

The unions last week began a push to enable casual employees to transfer to permanent employment.

The plan proposed by the unions would require employers to make casual employees permanent after 12 months.  There was also some discussion in the plan about governments “favoring’ companies with majority permanent workforces in the awarding of contracts. The unions believe such an approach is necessary to tackle “precarious employment”.

Business groups were not happy (as you would expect) claiming that such moves would drive companies “to the wall”.  They called the approach a “misguided view of the jobs sector” and said “it doesn’t relate to the modern-day Australian economy, which is dominated by the services sector”.

We gave had such rules before.  In 2004/5, rules where “regular and systematic” casual employees were allowed to request part time employment were introduced.  We had a similar “hue and cry” then!

From my experience, very few casual employees wanted to take up the opportunity.  Australian workers generally understand the difference between casual and permanent employment and are often loath to let go of the 20-25% loading for casual employment. 

Casual employment is designed to allow an employer to handle the peaks and troughs of their business.  Casual employment contains no guarantees and no expectations of employment beyond the end of the current shift.  In its purest form, it is “call and come to work”.  Because there are no guarantees or expectations of future work, a loading is paid to compensate for the lack of annual leave, sick leave etc etc.

But the needs of the business often necessitate rostering casuals for work, sometimes weeks in advance.  Overtime, this leads to businesses adopting rostering systems which virtually “guarantee” work to a casual.  Basically, the employment becomes “regular and systematic”.  When work becomes regular and systematic, the question needs to be asked – are they really casuals?

This is the point behind the unions push.  If a person is employed as a casual but doing regular shifts and systematic work then they should receive the entitlements of permanent employees because in practice, that is what they are.

Whether you agree or don’t agree with the unions, there are many advantages to creating a permanent workforce in your business.  A guarantee of employment encourages commitment and develops “ownership” in the role.  Accountability is easier to assign to someone whose employment is guaranteed and your ability to develop consistent behaviors’ is improved.

Many businesses I deal with argue that putting on permanent staff “takes away the flexibility” from their business.  For some businesses this may be true, and for them, I would not recommend such a measure providing the employment they were offering was not “regular and systematic”.

Another argument I often hear is that it is too expensive to have permanent employees.  Well, the fact is that in the long run it is probably cheaper!  While you need to accrue leave etc, you will not be paying the 20-25% loading and your productivity will most probably improve.  The reality is that it often has nothing to do with “cost” but more to do with “ease” – it is easier to pay everything out with a 20-25% loading than have to “accrue”.

The ease of “getting rid” of casual employees is also stated as a reason for keeping people as casuals.  However, the reality is that if they are regular and systematic in their employment, the unfair dismissal rules will most probably apply – the end result being that this argument is flawed in its execution!

For any workforce, permanent or casual, I recommend you sit down and work out the number of hours being worked in your business.  Is there a constant number of hours worked in each week?  This is the first step in working out whether you can (or should) put permanent employees in place.  If you can, casual employees can then be used to handle the peaks and troughs – not for the constant hours.

If you must have casuals in your business, then think seriously about how you work with them.  Do you roster them in a regular and systematic way?  Do you need to do this?  Can you do it any other way?  In other words – do some workforce planning!

Would you like to know more about how you can improve the use of people in your business?  At People Smartz, we assist businesses in planning for the most efficient and effective use of their workforce.  We work with you to ensure that you are using your most important resource in a manner which leads to success for you, your business and your team.   Call us today!   

One of the things small business clients often talk to me about is the time it takes to process their superannuation obligations, particularly when they have a number of employees with different superannuation funds.

Well finally we have seen the establishment of a clearing house to help small businesses meet their obligations!

A free (and optional) super clearing house service is now available to small businesses with less than 20 employees to help them meet their super guarantee obligations.

The Small Business Superannuation Clearing House is administered by Medicare Australia and lets employers pay their super contributions to a single location in one simple electronic transaction.

Small businesses that register to use the service will have their super guarantee obligation discharged, as long as all of the following apply:

• they pay the correct amount;
• they pay by the super payment cut-off date;
• the payment is accepted by the clearing house; and
• the payment is not rejected by the super fund.

Employers who receive an employee's choice of fund nomination will have their choice obligation discharged if they pass the information to the clearing house within 21 days of receiving the choice of fund nomination.

Small businesses can register online for the service by:

• visiting the Medicare website at www.medicareaustralia.gov.au/super; or
• phoning Medicare Australia on 1300 660 048.

Recently People Smartz launched a new one on one workshop called "Mutual Success".

These workshops are built on the premise that employers and employees working together can achieve success on a business and individual level.  We've called this "Mutual Success".  Really, its all about building busienesses through stong connections between all members of a business's "Team".

The workshops take a whole of business approach to managing people in a business.  They begin with seeking the needs of the business owner and identifying those areas of the business which may be effecting the achievement of "Mutual Success".

This begins with the basics - is the business providing their team members with all their entitlements, is the business complaint with Australia's new industrial relations laws and what behaviours are effecting the achievement of success.

We then move on to talking about how the business can move someway towards achieving "Mutual Success" and putting in place a plan to start them on their way.

Having completed a small number of these workshops, I have found that the results are incredible.  Not only are businesses finding new ways towards success, they are also covering off on important areas of compliance.  For thoses businesses, managing people has become a factor in their success!  One comment made by a workshop participant was "this has changed the whole way I look at my staff.  They are part of my competitive edge - not just a cost on the business".

At People Smartz, we strongly believe the development of "Mutual Success" is essential to the success of small to medium sized businesses.  In fact, we believe so strongly in this concept that we have decided to offer the "Mutual Success" workshops to small and medium sized business for free for the next 3 months!

Businesses taking part in the workshops come away with

• A new awareness of what may be challenging your business in regards to staff within your business
• Identify 3 things you can do now to improve productivity, staff retention and staff costs in your business
• A 3 month “Getting the Basics Right” Smartz Plan individualized for your business that you can begin work on straight away!

Visit our booking page to find out more today!

Recently, Australia's newspapers have been full of the story regarding the Sexual Harassment claim against the CEO of David Jones.

These stories have highlighted the risks businesses have regarding harassment in the workplace. However, the purpose of this posting is not to discuss the David Jones case - it is to highlight the fact that we are now approaching that time of year where such complaints increase.

Yes it nearing the end of the year.  We are entering party season - a great time to unwind, rub shoulders with workmates etc.  This can be a fun time!

But end of year parties have a very serious side as many of these antics lead to "regrets" after.

Recent research in Australia found that 70% of people believed that hitting the booze led to a more "personal" feeling amongst staff.  Nearly a quarter of females interviewed admitted that their boss had made a pass at them at an office party. 

Such behaviours can present many problems for businesses, particularly if the "antics" involved lead to a complaint from a member of staff regarding the behaviour of another.

It would be easy to say "no office party" or "its too risky", but sometimes the advantages of holding the party far outweigh the negatives.  The decision to have or not have one is one for the business alone. 

I would recommend a level headed approach to this years Xmas party - making sure the party is well planned and your staff are aware of the required behaviours before hand.  This way you can have the fun while managing the risk!

To help you plan for your businesses party, download our Christmas Checklist today.