Senior FRMOs, FRMOs & DPRFOs guaranteed redeployment but FENZ can't account for work being undertaken by fixed term employees and others

FENZ RENEGES ON UNION COVERAGE AGREEMENT REACHED

On 30 June and 1 July NZPFU and PSA representatives met with FENZ to discuss the Tranche 2 decisions and the “re-consultation” document and to commence negotiations for terms and conditions for the new proposed roles.

During that meeting it became apparent that the unions did not have all the information necessary to have a full picture of FENZ’s decisions and proposals, including the impact on the tasks currently being undertaken by Senior FRMOs, FRMOs and DPRFOs and the impact of the new duties. FENZ’s decisions and proposals do not include the work being done that is not covered into the new CR and RR positions, or the positions covered by secondments and fixed terms employees.  FENZ has not articulated who or how that work will be done or managed with the new additional workloads.

• The NZPFU and PSA’s question:

Can you confirm that there will be sufficient appropriate new positions for everyone currently undertaking the work captured in Tranche 2B?  This would include those on fixed terms as they are undertaking the work and many were replacing full time permanent position?

Kerry Gregory’s  response:

It is proposed that there are 268 new positions to be established in the new structure – including those positions already confirmed to be established in the decision document, and those proposed to be established in the re-consultation document. There are 171 people employed in positions that are being disestablished as part of this change process. This represents significant opportunities for redeployment for those in disestablished positions and we are not currently planning for any redundancies, which will only be considered as a last resort once all options for redeployment have been considered. People employed in disestablished FRMO, SFRMO and DPRFO positions are guaranteed redeployment to the new CRR and RR Advisory positions, as set out in the decision document.

The numbers in my above paragraph don’t include fixed term employees because their positions are not being disestablished. People on fixed term contracts will continue in their positions under the terms of their fixed term contract. Similarly, people on secondment will be ‘affected’ only if their substantive position is disestablished.

Of course, the guaranteed deployment does not mean deployment into a role that the employee wants or prefers, or because they are the most qualified and experienced candidate.

In addition to the unaccounted for workloads, FENZ has slashed positions in the CRR and RR Manager, Senior and Advisor roles since the September 2020 proposal to save money:

The September 2019 proposal was presented post Board and SLT approval provided for the following 173 positions:

• 8 District and Community Readiness and Recovery Managers;
• 8 District Risk Reduction Managers
• 9 District Risk and Community Readiness and Recovery Managers.
• 73 Risk Reduction Senior Advisors and/or Advisors
• 75 Community Readiness and Recovery Senior Advisors and/or Advisors

The June 2020 re-consultation document has slashed 26 positions with FENZ now proposing: the following 147 positions:

• 17 District Community Risk Managers
• 17 Risk Reduction Senior Advisors
• 17 Community Readiness and Recovery Senior Advisors
• 20 Community Readiness and Recovery Advisors
• 76 Risk Reduction Advisors

Post the meeting FENZ provided some of the documentation the unions had requested including a CRR/RR FTE analysis-re consultation proposals. 

The NZPFU and PSA dispute the weightings and accuracy of FENZ’s calculations

The information provided did not explain where the work undertaken by the listed positions that were not included in CRR and RR was going to be done or accounted for. 

• The NZPFU and PSA’s question:

The fact that FENZ has not got a breakdown of the “other work” currently being done by the affected roles means FENZ does not actually know all the work currently being undertaken by the current positions.   FENZ has not been able to explain who will be doing this “other” work in the future, or the impact of this work on the organisation.  FENZ is therefore not in a position to appropriately size these positions or the workloads.  It is extraordinary that the organisation has no regard for what the incumbents in these roles have actually been doing and how that work will be done in the future when it has made decisions to disestablish those roles.  The structure is likely to be a complete fail with either necessary work in fire risk management and rural fire officer’s work being dropped or result in unsafe workloads. How can the organisation claim it is enhancing its structure when it cannot articulate where functions and tasks will lie?

Kerry Gregory’s  response:

Regarding the additional document we provided ‘RR-CRR FTE resourcing key points’, this was put together specifically to help answer some of the questions you raised about increased FTE numbers during our conversation. It is unfortunate you did not find it to be of assistance, as was the intention.

The above response says it all about the genuine level of engagement.  FENZ is resisting negotiating variations to the NZPFU and PSA agreements to reflect the new positions and roles.

FENZ RENEGES ON COVERAGE AGREEMENT

FENZ has already reneged on one agreement reached at the 1 July 2020 meeting.  It was agreed at that meeting that the Auckland Strategic Advisor, Senior Advisors/Advisors CRR and RR, Senior Operational Intelligence and Senior Specialist Fire Investigators would have dual PSA and NZPFU coverage. 

In his email dated the 3th July 2020 Kerry Gregory reneges on the inclusion of the Auckland Strategic Advisor coming under joint coverage claiming it will only come under the PSA agreement but it does not come within the NZPOFU collective coverage clause because:

“As a member of the Region Leadership Team, the Auckland Strategic Advisor will lead and manage the organisation’s engagement with key stakeholders and partners across the Auckland Districts (Waitemata, Auckland City and Counties Manukau).  They will be the primary point of contact for external organisations wishing to engage with Fire and Emergency NZ to coordinate relationships across the Auckland Districts.
The Auckland Strategic Advisor has prime accountability for enhancing the three Auckland Districts relationships, building alignments and developing a consistent understanding of the city’s key issues and risks.”

We are strongly of the view the role fits within both the PSA and NZPFU coverage clauses.

The reneging on the agreement is a breach of good faith.  It undermines the level of trust needed for unions to discuss and negotiate with FENZ on key matters.  We don’t accept that FENZ can agree one day and then renege the next.

Members are reminded that they do not need to apply or put in any expressions of interest for the CRR and RR positions as those roles are part of the “re-consultation”.

In unity,