SCAM ALERT: We will never contact you requesting money. Learn more.

Complaints

Submissions

From: Family Responsibilities

Sent: Friday, 7 April 2006 4:34 PM

To: Family Responsibilities

Subject: FW: submission on 'Striking the Balance' paper- LATE SUBMISSION

Attachments: InterScan_Disclaimer.txt

From: LEWIS Emily Sent: Monday, 17 October 2005 1:21 PM

To: Family Responsibilities

Subject: submission on 'Striking the Balance' paper- LATE SUBMISSION

To whom it may concern,

I apologise for missing the 14th October 2005 closing date however I have on today come into possession of the paper.

Please accept my submission with apologies.

I would like to outline some of my specific concerns regarding working women with families in the public sector.

I am currently in the public sector working for the Department of Environment. I have been working with the same Department since February 2002 with one break of 12 months in which I ceased work to care for my second child.

I am currently expecting my third child and am 35.5 weeks pregnant.

Since working in the Department I have struggled to secure ongoing work on a permanent basis as there have been no permanent part time positions created.

I have however, been working part time for the majority of my time with the department. It infuriates me that the management are not willing to create opportunities for permanent part time work as I am not able to accept full time work due to parental responsibilities.

My children are currently aged 4 and 2, with one in day care and the other in kindy. I have been fortunate that my husband works for himself and has been able to look after them one day a week while I work a full day, and for the 2 days my 4 year old is in kindy, I put my 2 year old in day care. I am only able to work a 5 hour day on these occasions due to kindy pick up and drop off times (I am lucky enough to have two full days kindy, 8:50-14:45, instead of four half days, at least).

I understand that there are some managers who are unwilling to support part time workers due to incompatability with duties however I have demonstrated that part time work is both effective and manageable in particular circumstances particularly in project based work, strategic planning and assessment type positions in the Department.

WORK HISTORY

  • I first started work in Nov 2002 on a 5 month, fixed term level 2 full time position as a Water Licensing Officer when my eldest child was one. I was subsequently given a second 3 month fixed term contract to September 2002. As I was pregnant with my second child, I was kept on until just prior to my date of confinement through an employment agency so that I could 'finish working when I was ready'. I worked part time from September to November through this agency doing exactly the same job. This continuous work was filled by newly selected persons after I left in a similar capacity (non- merit selection short term arrangements)- I trained them and they are still working in the same roles, now in a permanent role.
  • After 12 months of being at home with my second child I discussed options of re-commencing work with the HR officer and applied for a merit selected fixed term position in the same role as I had previously occupied. I was offered the level 2 position after merit selection however my request to occupy the position part time was refused. Instead, a separate non merit selected contract was offered to me for 6 months in a part time capacity in the same section. The role was still as a 'Natural Resource Management Officer' however duties differed very slightly from allocation of water licenses, to assessment of land use planning applications.
  • When this contract ended, I was offered a part time position in another section by a different manager for 6 months through the employment agency again. Whilst working in this role, another manager of a different section shared my costs and management of duties. She then offered me a fixed term non merit selected contract in October 2004. I remained on employment agency payment in this new role under this DOE manager until August 2005. The contract was finally formally enacted on August 2 2005 after 13 months on employment agency payments but working in the same role in the Department.
  • As my contract wasn't officially commenced until August and my date of confinement is November, my request to be granted paid parental leave has been knocked back. I have now worked for the Department for 24 months continuously but because for some of this time I was paid through a payroll agency, I have been told that I was not considered and officer during these periods so can't prove 12 months continuous service. I am currently appealing the decision with the Director of Regional Operations and am yet to hear back with only 4 1/2 weeks to go until my confinement date.

I deplore the practice of employing public service workers through employment agencies and consider that I have been discriminated against many times due to parental responsibilities and pregnancy.

I did not apply for the current recruitment pool that was advertised for selection of natural resource management officers in the DoE south west region over the next 12 months as it was discussed with my current manager that the pool would last 12 months and it was unlikelyI'd be selected for a position during this time due to my (un-)availability. I did say to my manager that I would most likely take 12 months off from work after my third child was born, however since then the HR consultant in the Perth office (during my parental leave request process) told me that if I had of applied for the pool I might have been selected for a position and been able to activate unpaid parental leave immediately until I was ready to commence work. Too little, too late.

I have also been through another merit selection process for a level four position earlier this year for a fixed term (renewable) part time position that I was considered highly competitive for and 'suitable for the position'. As the first and second ranked applicants knocked back the position due to other offers, I expected I would be offered the position as next ranked. However, I was told they had decided to readvertise the position and that I was welcome to apply again. The position was never readvertised and a person was placed in the position from an employment agency with no merit selection process.

I also appealed this decision but was unsuccessful in my appeal due to the fact that the merit selection process had been completed and the placement of the agency person was done after completion of this process. An internal review was done after I lodged a grievance, with the final recommendation being that I 'was considered suitable for the position in the panel report but that upon internal review (only one internal person was on the panel so only one panel member was interviewed- months after the interview) I shouldn't have been considered suitable for the position, but there was nothing wrong with the merit selection process'.

The agency person in the position has now successfully applied for the pool after valuable experience doing the job (3 days a week not four, as advertised) and I have been told he will now be put on a renewable contract in the position. When I asked his current manager (shortly after the agency person was placed in the position) what he had been told about the selection process for the position (he wasn't on the panel), he told me that he had been informed by the panel chairperson that there were no more suitable applicants from the merit selection process, and 'you couldn't do the four full days anyway could you? ... and you are much better off in the (level 3) position you are in as it's less stress for you anyway.'

I would be more that happy to expand on my situation if you would like more information. I have documentation to support all of my claims and am most likely going to be taking my employer to the Public Sector Arbitrator and also making a claim of parental and pregnancy discrimination through the EOC.

I hope that the case study I have supplied fills a gap in your findings and you are reminded that even though provisions may be in place to support working parents in awards and policies, individual managers don't always implement them and the cultural environment in government departments is not always well placed to support family friendly arrangements in the longer term.

Regards,

Emily Lewis