Workforce Planning for Local Government in South Australia · Workforce Planning for Local Government in South Australia Results October 2006 3 RESULTS OF THE STUDY All 68 Councils

Workforce Planning for Local Government in

South Australia

2005 UPDATE

32690

Workforce Planning for Local Government in South Au stralia Acknowledgements

October 2006 i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The “Workforce Planning for Local Government in South Australia – Councils in Profile” 2005 update project was conducted by the Local Government Association (LGA) of South Australia with funding from the Local Government Research and Development Scheme. The LGA would like to acknowledge the team of people responsible for the conduct of the project.

Wendy Campana, LGA, Director Strategic Development who had overall responsibility for guidance, management and coordination of the project.

Tina Borg and Robert Wallace, Human Resource Management and Industrial Relations Consultants to the LGA who undertook the consultation, information gathering, surveying and final reporting. Dennis Whitford and Adam Renfrey, who undertook the manipulation of the statistical information and provided the update of tables and graphs

A reference group was established to oversee the development of the project and the contributions of the persons noted below are acknowledged:

Wendy Campana Director, Strategic Development, LGA Tina Borg Project Coordinator, LGA Consultant Monika Leniger Project Coordinator, LGA Consultant

The project brief required the involvement of 7 pilot Councils who assisted in the development of the survey used for the project and participated in a pilot survey. The invaluable feedback and assistance provided by the pilot Councils, listed below, is acknowledged:

• District Council of Alexandrina • City of Mitcham • City of Burnside

• City of Onkaparinga • City of Playford • City of Marion

Finally, thanks are extended to the 38 Councils who participated in the survey that has enabled this report to include meaningful data that will be of interest and benefit to Local Government in South Australia

Workforce Planning for Local Government in South Au stralia Results

October 2006 2

COMMENTARY The “Workforce Planning for Local Government in South Australia – Councils in Profile” project was undertaken in 2001 and now updated in 2006 using data gathered in 2005. Of the 68 Councils in South Australia, 38 completed the survey with a greater response from country over metropolitan. The results show that there is a higher percentage of staff engaged in human services than in the previous project and a better overall balance of female to male ratio although there is still an obvious wage disparity between the genders based on salaries attributed to certain job functions (graph 5). It should be noted (in graphs 12 and 13) that there is an improvement in the classification levels achieved by females under the MOA and a substantial improvement in the Award classifications of females under the LGE. In relation to age, the workforce in Local Government is getting older. This should not come as a surprise to anyone given the focus on the ‘ageing workforce’ in recent years but it is reflective of the decisions employees are making to defer retirement and the lack of youth coming into Local Government jobs. On average, the local government workforce is one year older then it was in 2001. The expectation is that this trend will continue for many decades. The ratio of full time employment to that of part time or casual employment has reduced. (graph 21) Whether this has been created by employee demand or by the employer filling gaps with temporary vacancies is unknown but given the ageing workforce issue, it would appear more likely that flexible employment with less than full time hours may appeal to some ‘older’ workers as a genuine alternative to full retirement. There is a disproportionately high percentage of women in part time and casual positions (graph 23) but again, it is unknown as to whether this is at the request of the employee. From the age of 55, it appears more likely that an employee will be engaged on either a part time or casual basis (graph 24). There is an increase in non-permanent employees which has been driven by the use of fixed-term contracts (graph 27) which appears to be most prevalent in human services (graph 28). The highest percentage of vacancy rates also happens to be in human services (graph 35). Employee turnover has actually decreased (graph 31) and absenteeism rates have remained stable. Above award salaries have increased in both the MOA and LGE (graphs 32 and 33) as local government competes for a reducing workforce. Recommendations resulting from this study can be found at the end of the report.


October 2006 3

RESULTS OF THE STUDY All 68 Councils in South Australia were invited to participate in the Workforce Planning Survey. Of the 68 Councils surveyed 38 or 55.9% participated in the survey resulting in over half of all Councils being represented in the study group. Of the 68 Councils in South Australia 72.1% are country and 27.9% are metropolitan. The study group was made up of 59.2% of country Councils and 47.4% metropolitan; representing a slightly greater response from country Councils. Table 1 Municipal Officers Award Classification for Counci ls

Classification All Councils Study Group Level Number % Number %

2 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3 8 11.8% 4 10.5% 4 8 11.8% 6 15.8% 5 11 16.2% 5 13.2% 6 12 17.6% 9 23.7% 7 10 14.7% 5 13.2% 8 6 8.8% 3 7.9% 9 4 5.9% 1 2.6% 10 3 4.4% 2 5.3% 11 5 7.4% 2 5.3% 12 1 1.5% 1 2.6%

Total 68 Total 38 About the Study Group The ABS refers to small, medium and large employers as shown in Table 2 opposite, by banding groups of employers by the number of employees a business has. The study group employs a total of 4,640 people with the largest employer employing 627 people and the smallest 16 people. The average employer within the study group employs 122 people, which is in the medium range.

Table 2 Australian Bureau of Statistics Size of an Employer

Size No. of Employees

Large 200 and over

Medium 21 – 199

Small up to and including 20


October 2006 4

Table 3 ABS Compared to Local Government

ABS Band Number of Employees All Councils %

Study Group %

Large 200 and over 14.7 13.2

Medium 21 – 199 70.6 78.9

Small up to and including 20 14.7 7.9 The study group of 4,640 employees is composed of a majority of males representing 56.9% of the study group, with females representing 43.1%, as indicated in Graph 1. When compared to the ABS working population figures, men make up 55.8%, and women 44.2%. This suggests that the gender balance within Local Government South Australia is only slightly different to the general working population. The study did gather data regarding the cultural diversity of the study group with 57.9% of the responding Councils providing information regarding the aboriginality and ethnicity of their employees. Of the responses, 20.2% were identified as Aboriginal employees and 79.8% were identified as employees being of non-English speaking background. Level of Education Not available (not gathered) Functional Groups Each employee position within the participating Councils was assigned a primary category or Functional Group and then a Work Group. The survey also required that all positions be given a position title with the expectation that the study would generate an interest in further and more detailed analysis in the future. The following shows the Functional and Work Groups identified for the study. Table 4 Functional Groups and Work Groups

Engineering-Infrastructure

Corporate

Environmental

Human Services

� Administration � Administration � Administration � Administration � Technical � Customer Service � Building � Community Services � Asset/Facilities � Records/Rates � Enforcement � Library/Local History � Works � Contract � Planning � Tourism � Parks/Gardens � Information

Technology � Health � Community

Development � Trades � Finance � Childcare � Waste � Human Resources � Economic

Development

Male56.9%

Female43.1%

Graph 1 Study Group by Gender


October 2006 5

Distribution of Employees by Functional Group When looking at the broad distribution of employees in the study group, as revealed in Graph 2 below, the largest Functional Group is Engineering/Infrastructure at 43.5%, followed by Human Services at 25.6%, Corporate at 20.2% and Environmental, the smallest of the study group at 10.7%.

Average Profile of Councils by Employer Type & Func tional Group When examining the profile of all participating Councils as opposed to the simple employee distribution, as discussed above, it can be seen there are some differences in employee distribution as well as the profile. The typical Council by Functional Groups is shown below, in Graph 3.

Corporate20.2%

Environmental10.7%

Human Services25.6%

Engineering/ Infrastructure

43.5%

Graph 2 Distribution of Employees by Functional Grouping

Graph 3 Typical Council by Functional Grouping

Human Services27.5%

Corporate16.5%

Environmental10.8%


45.1%

Graph 4 Profiles of Small, Medium and Large Employers

Engineering/ Infrastucture



Corporate

Corporate

Corporate

Env

Env

Env & Misc

HumanService

HumanService

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Sm

all

Larg

e


October 2006 6

The above graph shows medium employers within the study group are closest to a ‘typical Council profile’, which is to be expected given they are also the largest section of the study group. A typical medium Council will dedicate 43.9% to Engineering/Infrastructure, 21.0% to Corporate, 10.4% to Environmental and 24.6% to Human Services. Large employers in the study group have a profile, as shown in graph 4, which shows an average of 42.6% in Engineering/Infrastructure. Large employers allocate 27.3% of their human resources to the Corporate group, which is similar to medium and small employers. The Environmental Functional Group in large employers reveals a workforce allocation of 11.1%, which is only slightly larger than medium size employers. Human Services has a significantly higher number of resources compared to both medium and small employers representing 27.3% of employee allocations for large employers. Employee Gender & Functional Group As can be seen from Graph 5 below, the gender balance within the Functional Groups is very uneven.

Of the study group, the Engineering/Infrastructure Functional Group has a notable 90.8% of male employees and accounts for 43.5% of the total workforce. The Environmental Functional Group also shows a predominance of male employees, with 57.6%. When these percentages are set aside the overall gender breakdown that shows males represent 56.9% of the study group, it can be seen that the Engineering/Infrastructure functional group is significantly different from the industry average. When compared to the ABS working population figures of males, which is 55.8%, the Functional Group of Engineering Infrastructure is seen to be overwhelmingly male dominated. In contrast the Corporate and Human Services Functional Groups show a quite different picture. The Corporate group is 69.5% female and 30.5% male employees and 80.1% female and 19.9% male employees are in the Human Services group. The overall percentage of females within the study group is 43.1%. ABS working population figures of females is 44.2%.

Male

Male

Male

Male Female

Female

Female

Female

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Human Services

Environmental

Corporate

Engineering/ Infrastrucure

Male Female

Graph 5 Functional groups by Gender


October 2006 7

Engineering-Infrastructure Work Groups

Corporate Work Groups

Environmental Work Groups

Adm

in

Eng

inee

ring

Wor

ks

Tra

des

Par

ks/G

arde

ns

Ass

ets/

F

acili

ties

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Em

ploy

ees

Was

te

Graph 6 Typical Engineering/Infrastructure Functional Grou p Profile

Exe

cutiv

e

Fin

ance

Hum

an

Res

ourc

es

IT

Rec

ords

Cus

tom

er

serv

ice

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Em

ploy

ees

Admin

Graph 7 Typical Corporate Functional Group Profile

Admin Planning Building Health Enforcement

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Em

ploy

ees

Graph 8 Typical Environmental Functional Group Profile


October 2006 8

Human Services Work Groups

Award Classification Levels Graph 10 illustrates that 60.4% of the total workforce are categorised under the MOA and 35.8% are categorised as LGE. The remaining 3.7% consists of those employees covered by other awards, fixed term and contract employees, those with no award specified and vacant positions. As can be seen from Table 5 below, over half of the MOA employees are classified at level three and below. LGE employees, unlike the MOA are classified higher at level 4 and above. When comparing the classification levels between the two awards it should be kept in mind that the levels do not have any direct correlation as such, however it is interesting to compare the distribution of classifications. Table 5 MOA/LGE by Classifications

MOA LGE

Classification Level % Classification Level %

1 6.2 1 2.2

2 22.1 2 0.7

3 22.6 3 4.0

4 14.1 4 16.0

5 12.6 5 28.2

6 8.8 6 25.2

7 4.6 7 11.9

8 1.7 8 5.8

Other (incl SO) 7.2 Other 5.9

Graph 9 Typical Human Services Functional Group Profile

Adm

in

Com

Dev

Community Services

Chi

ldca

re Library/Local History

Tou

rism

Rec

reat

ion/

S

port

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Em

ploy

ees

Graph 10 Study Group by Award

MOA60.4%

LGE35.8%

Other3.7%


October 2006 9

When the distribution of the MOA and LGE structures is examined, as demonstrated in Graph 11 below, it can be seen that the profiles are quite different to each other.

The MOA structure is weighted towards the lower end of the classification scale, which climbs and then flattens out at levels 2 and 3, and represents the most occupied levels in that Award. The number of employees at classification levels 4 and 5 plateaus and then tapers off to the top of the classification scale. The minor peak above classification 8 results from the invalid inclusion of the ‘senior officers’ by some of the study group, as discussed earlier.

Award Classification Level and Employee Gender

Taken as a whole, the study group, as previously reported, comprises 56.9% male and 43.1% female employees. MOA Award Classification Level & Employee Gender LGE Award Classification Level & Employee Gender .

Females

Males

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Graph 13 LGE Award Grades by Gender

MOA

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Classification Levels

%

LGE

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Classification Levels

%

Graph 11 Classification Profile by Award

Female

Male

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Graph 12 MOA Employee Classifications by Gender


October 2006 10

Award Classification Level & Supervisory Responsibi lity Not available (not gathered) Age Profile Local Government South Australia would seem to have a typically ageing workforce with the overall average age of employees being 43.5 years. As Graph 15 below depicts, the Age Profile of the Study Group, demonstrates an aging workforce when compared against the ABS profile at Graph 16.

Average Age by Award The average age of MOA employees is 42.7 years, which is slightly younger than the average for all employees within the study group. The LGE employee average is 45.0 years which is slightly older that the overall average. When the gender of the whole study group is analysed, the average age for female employees is 41.1 years, which is younger than their male counterparts at 45.3 years. Graph 17 below shows the average age of female MOA employees is 41.0 years. Given that MOA has a high concentration of female employees, this would to some degree explain the younger profile of MOA compared to LGE. The average age of MOA male employees is 45.4 years, which is lower than the average age for male employees in the study group.

1.5

5.4

10.6

30.7

27.8

16.9

4.82.4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

15-19 20-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-59 60-64 65over

%

Graph 15 Age Profile of the Study Group

1.62.7

6.1

21.2

24.224.1

11.58.3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

15-1

920

-24

25-3

435

-44

45-5

455

-59

60-6

4

65 O

ver

%

Graph 16 Age Profile ABS (Labour Force Australia, March 2001. Table 10)

Graph 17 Average Age of MOA by Gender

35

40

45

50

Male Female Overall

Yea

rs

Graph 18 Average Age of LGE by Gender

35

40

45

50

Male Female Overall

Yea

rs


October 2006 11

Graph 18 above shows the average age of LGE male employees is 45.4 years which is marginally older than the average age for male employees in the study group. Given that the LGE has a high concentration of male employees, this explains the older profile of LGE compared to MOA. The average age of LGE female employees is 39.9 years, which is considerably younger than the overall average for LGE of 45.0 years. Average Age by Functional Group The average age by Functional Group as depicted in Graph 19, shows employees with the highest overall average age of 45.8 years are in the Engineering Infrastructure group which is marginally higher than the overall average of 43.5 years. The youngest overall average age by Functional Group is 41.3 years in Corporate.

Graph 19 above also considers gender and reveals that the youngest average age for female employees of 39.1 years is in the Environmental group and the oldest female average age is 43.9 years in the Engineering Infrastructure group. For male employees the youngest average age is 40.6 years in the Human Services Functional Group and the oldest male average age is 46.0 years in Engineering Infrastructure. Average Age by Metropolitan/Country Councils Graph 20 looks at the average age of metropolitan/country employees. The metro-politan average age is 43.3 years and the country average age is 43.6 years. When gender is analysed the average age of male metropolitan employees is 44.7 years and the average age of female employees is 41.5 years. The average age of country male employees is 45.9 years and for female employees is 40.5 years.

35

40

45

50

Engineering/Infrastructure

Corporate Environmental Human Services

Yea

rs

Male

Female

Overall

Graph 19 Average Age of Functional Groups by Gender

35

40

45

50

Metro Country

Yea

rs

Graph 20 Average Age of Metropolitan Country Employees by Gender


October 2006 12

Employment Categories To develop an understanding of the nature of work in Local Government in South Australia, the survey asked participants to provide information about the type of employment for each employee position ie full time, part time and casual. Of the total number of employees within the study group, the highest percentage of employees, as would be expected, are within the category of full time employment representing 74.2% of the total study group. Part time employment is at 15.2%, casual employment being at 10.6% of the study group. Employment Type by Award Graph 22 uses the awards as discrete indicators and reveals that there is a predominance of part time and casual work in the MOA compared to the LGE Award. Employment Type by Gender The profile of the employment types analysed by gender, is shown in Graph 23 opposite. The graph reveals that female employees are grouped into part-time and casual employment with part time employment at 83.9% being the most significant type of employment for female employees followed by casual at 73.0%.

Full Time74.2%Casual

10.6%

Part Time15.2%

Graph 21 Employment Type

0

20

40

60

80

100

Full Time Part Time Casual

%

MOA LGE

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


%

Female Male

Graph 22 Employment Type by Award

Graph 23 Employment Type by Gender


October 2006 13

Employment Type by Age As previously reported the overall average age of the study group is 43.5 years. The average age of full time and part-time employees respectively within the study group is 44.0 years and 42.7 years. Casual employees are younger than the overall average age at 40.7 years. Employment Type by Functional Group The contrast between employment types and Functional Groups as set out in Graph 25 below highlights some interesting information. The Functional Group with the highest percentage of full time employment is Engineering/Infrastructure with 91.2%. Human Services has the highest concentration of part time and casual employment with part time representing 33.9% and casual 25.1%. This would be expected, given this area covers libraries, childcare centres and other like work groups that are often employed on a casual or part-time basis.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

15-1

920

-24

25-3

435

-44

45-5

455

-59

60-6

4

65 O

ver

%

Casual Full Time Part Time

Graph 24 Employment Type by Age

0102030405060708090

100


%

Engineering/Infrastructure Corporate Environmental Human Service

Graph 25 Employment Type by Functional Group


October 2006 14

Employment Status Of the total number of employees in the study group, 78.5% are considered permanent employees and non permanent employees represent 21.5%. Of the non-permanent employment, 48.4% is fixed term employment and 51.5% are casuals.

When the award indicators, MOA and

LGE, are used to examine employment status, it can be seen in Graph 27 above, that the MOA accounts for the main non-permanent area. Of MOA, 24.9% are non-permanent and 75.1% permanent compared to the LGE at 11.6% non-permanent and 88.4% permanent employees. As can be seen in Graph 28 below, Engineering/Infrastructure has the highest proportion of permanent employment at 95.9% and Human Services has the lowest at 74.5%. Human Services has the highest proportion of both fixed term and casual at 25.5% and 36.3% respectively.

0

20

40

60

80

100

Perm Fixed Casual

%

Engineering/Infrastructure Corporate Environmental Human Services

Graph 28 Employment Status by Functional Group

Fixed10.4%

Contract0.0%

Casual11.1%

Permanent78.5%

Graph 26 Employment Tenure

0

20

40

60

80

100

Permanent Non Permanent

%

MOA LGE

Graph 27 Permanent & Non-Permanent Employment by Awards


October 2006 15

Employee Mobility Length of Service The average length of service for employees in the study group is fairly stable at 8.8 years. Female employees show a much shorter average length of service at 6.7 years with male employees being above average at 10.4 years. Graph 29 reveals that the average length of service of metropolitan and country Councils in the study group varies, with the metropolitan average being slightly higher than the overall average at 9.5 years and the country slightly below average at 8.0 years. Graph 29 also analyses gender in the metropolitan/country context, and reveals that female employees in metropolitan Councils have an average of 7.3 years of service, which is above the overall average for the study group. Country Councils have a lower female employee average service of 5.9 years. Male employees in the metropolitan area average 11.2 years of service and correspondingly country employees average 9.4 years. Graph 30 depicts that the average length of service using the awards as indicators, is 7.5 years for MOA. The LGE is quite different with the average length of service being 11.4 years. As the Graph 30 depicts, employees with the greatest average length of service of 11.8 years, are males in the LGE, and the smallest is females in the LGE whose average length of service is 6.5 years.

0

5

10

15

Metro CountryY

ears

Male Female Overall

Graph 29 Average Length of Service for Metropolitan & Country

Graph 30 Average Length of Service for MOA & LGE

0

5

10

15

MOA LGE

Yea

rs

Male Female Overall


October 2006 16

The disparity of length of service between male employees and female employees is shown in Graph 31 that follows. Specifically the Engineering/Infrastructure Functional Group reveals an average of 11.8 years of service for males and 7.4 years of service for female employees. This Functional Group is also made up of 90.8% male employees. The shortest average length of service is in the Environmental Functional Group, where female employees average only 5.5 years service. Male employees within the Functional Group have an average length of service of 6.4 years.

The Human Services Functional Group is the only group with male employees at 6.5 years, having an average length of service that is less than female employees at 6.7 years. Environmental Functional Group has the lowest overall average length of service at 6.0 years. Employee Turnover The turnover figure is derived from the study group respondents’ total number of employee terminations in the last 12 months. ‘Termination’ is defined as resignation on the part of employees or dismissal on the part of employers. The average turnover rate, which is calculated by dividing the total number of terminations, with the total number of employees for each Council is 10.7%. Of the study group the highest turnover rate was 32.1% and the lowest zero. The metropolitan/country distribution is similar with metropolitan Councils slightly higher with 11.1% and country with 10.5%. Absenteeism The overall average of the study group responding to the absenteeism portion of the salary survey was 37.57 hours, which is effectively a week per year. The highest absenteeism rate was 97.06 hours and the lowest was zero hours. When the metropolitan/country analysis of the absenteeism rate is examined, there is not a great deal of difference, with the metropolitan average being higher on 39.74 hours per week and country lower on 36.66 hours per week.

0

5

10

15



Yea

rs

Male Female Overall

Graph 31 Average Length of Service of Functional Groups by Gender


October 2006 17

Recruitment Graph 32 depicts the average above award salaries for metropolitan MOA General and Senior Officers compared to the average above award for country General and Senior Officers. Figures show that metropolitan General Officers are paid on average, marginally higher than country General Officers, 21.6% compared to 20.0%. When comparing the Senior Officer average above award salaries, the differential once again is larger and the metropolitan Senior Officer will receive on average 33.1% above the award, while their country counterpart receives 27.0%. When the LGE 'above Award' percentage is examined, country Councils are 18.8% above award and metropolitan Councils are 22.2% above award as shown in Graph 33 opposite. Unlike the MOA General Officers, the difference between metropolitan and country Councils is more significant. The difference between metropolitan and country MOA General Officers is 1.6% whereas the LGE metropolitan/country differential is 3.4%. Vacancies The listed vacancies for all Councils in the study group was 2.4%. Graph 34 opposite shows that metropolitan Councils have no listed vacant positions at the time of the study. By comparison country Councils had 5.7% listed vacant positions perhaps implying that employee turnover is greater in country Councils.

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

%

Metro Country

General Officer

Senior Officer

Graph 33 LGE ‘above Award’ percentages by Metropolitan & Country

8

13

18

23

%

Metro Country

LGE MOA (General Officers)

Graph 34 Listed Vacant Percentage by Metropolitan & Country

0

2

4

6

Metro Country Overall

Graph 32 MOA Average above Award General and Senior Officers, by Metropolitan/Country


October 2006 18

The majority of vacancies as shown in Graph 35 are in the Human Services Functional Group. ‘Period of the vacancy’ data not available. Traineeships and Apprenticeships The consultation groups also saw the use or lack of use of traineeships and apprenticeships as an issue. Councils within the study group had 31 positions that were identified as Trainees or Apprentices that represented 0.67% of the total workforce. The Engineering/ Infrastructure Functional Group has 54.8% of those positions. Salary Survey The LGA in 2005/2006 undertook a salary survey of all Councils in South Australia. As a result information on salary trends as they related to Enterprise Agreements was collected. This study builds on the previous study by reporting against the findings of the 2000/2001 salary survey. Enterprise Agreements All Councils in the study group are covered by Enterprise Agreements. Graph 37 shows the overall average percentage paid above Award for individual Awards and Streams for the previous salary survey 2000/2001 and this study 2005/2006.

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

MOA MOA SO LGE

2000/2001 2005/2006

Graph 37 Overall average percentage above Award 2000/2001 & 2005/2006

Graph 35 Percentage of Vacant Positions by Metropolitan & C ountry

0

5

10

15

%



Metro

Country

Overall


October 2006 19

Municipal Officers Award (MOA) - General Officers The Graph 38 below shows that of the respondents to the 2005/2006 survey, the MOA General Officers had a 27.7% maximum and 13.2% minimum, above award percentage paid compared to the 2000/2001 study, which revealed a maximum of 19.0% and a minimum of 3.0%.

Municipal Officers Award (MOA) - Senior Officers As can be seen above in Graph 38, the MOA Senior Officers data reveals that the maximum above award for the 2005/2006 study group is 31.7% compared to 26.2% in the 2000/2001 study. The minimum for the two studies show 24.4% in the 2005/2006 and 3.0% in the 2000/2001 study. Local Government Employers (LGE) Award The LGE Award data as shown in Graph 38 above illustrates a maximum above award for the 2005/2006 study of 21.5% and a minimum of 17.5%. The 2000/2001 study shows a maximum of 29.5% and a minimum of 1.7%. Metropolitan and Country Councils In the salary survey conducted in 2000/2001 metropolitan Councils were likely to have higher salary rates as an average percentage above the award than country Councils and this still proves to be the case when analysing the results for 2005/2006 as shown in Table 6 below. Table 6 Average Percentage Above Award by Metropolitan and Country Councils (2000/2001 &

2005/2006)

Metropolitan Average Country Average

2000/2001 %

2005/2006 %

2000/2001 %

2005/2006 %

MOA General Officer 13.0 21.6 11.0 20.0

MOA Senior Officer 16.5 33.1 13.6 27.0

LGE All Grades 12.0 22.2 9.1 18.8

Graph 38 Maximum/Minimum above award

M in

M in

M in

M in

M in

M in

M ax

M ax

M ax

M ax

M ax

M ax

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

MOA 2000/2001 MOA 2005/2006 MOA SO2000/2001

MOA SO2005/2006

LGE 2000/2001 LGE 2005/2006

Workforce Planning for Local Government in South Au stralia Appendix 2 – Council Grades

October 2006 20

APPENDIX 2 – COUNCIL GRADES (CEO CLASSIFICATION REV IEW 2005)

COUNCIL Grade 2000

Grade 2005 COUNCIL

Grade 2000

Grade 2005

CLEVE 3 4 GAWLER 6 7

ELLISTON 3 3 GRANT 6 6

FLINDERS RANGES 3 3 LOXTON WAIKERIE 6 7

FRANKLIN HARBOUR 3 3 MID MURRAY 6 6

KAROONDA-EAST MURRAY 3 3 NARACOORTE LUCINDALE 6 6

KIMBA 3 3 PORT LINCOLN 6 6

LE HUNTE 3 3 PROSPECT 6 6

MT REMARKABLE 3 4 VICTOR HARBOR 6 7

ORROROO CARRIETON 3 3 WATTLE RANGE 6 7

PETERBOROUGH 3 3 ALEXANDRINA 7 8

ROBE 3 4 BAROSSA 7 7

ROXBY DOWNS 3 5 MT BARKER 7 8

TUMBY BAY 3 4 MT GAMBIER 7 7

BARUNGA WEST 4 4 MURRAY BRIDGE 7 7

CEDUNA 4 5 PORT AUGUSTA 7 8

COOBER PEDY 4 5 PORT PIRIE REGIONAL 7 7

KINGSTON 4 4 WHYALLA 7 7

LOWER EYRE PENINSULA 4 5 YORKE PENINSULA 7 7

SOUTHERN MALLEE 4 4 ADELAIDE HILLS 8 8

STREAKY BAY 4 4 BURNSIDE 8 8

WALKERVILLE 4 5 CAMPBELLTOWN 8 8

YANKALILLA 4 5 HOLDFAST BAY 8 9

CLARE & GILBERT VALLEY 5 6 NORWD/PAYN/ST PETERS 8 9

COORONG 5 6 UNLEY 8 9

GOYDER 5 5 MITCHAM 9 10

KANGAROO ISLAND 5 5 PLAYFORD 9 10

LIGHT REGIONAL 5 6 WEST TORRENS 9 9

MALLALA 5 5 MARION 10 10

NORTHERN AREAS 5 5 TEA TREE GULLY 10 11

RENMARK PARINGA 5 5 ADELAIDE 11 11

TATIARA 5 6 CHARLES STURT 10 11

WAKEFIELD REGIONAL 5 6 PORT ADELAIDE ENFIELD 11 11

BERRI BARMERA 6 6 SALISBURY 12 11

COPPER COAST 6 6 ONKAPARINGA 12 12 Note:

Workforce Planning for Local Government in South Au stralia Appendix 2 – Council Grades

October 2006 21

Adelaide City Council for the purpose of this study have been classified at grade 11 using the MOA classification method even though the Council is not usually bound by the MOA

Workforce Planning for Local Government in South Au stralia Recommendations

October 2006 22

Recommendations

1. The lower levels in the classification structures are rarely used as the labour market tightens and a tendency towards ‘over-classification’ appears to be occuring to adequately compete for labour. It is recommended that both classifications structures be reworked to accommodate current needs utilising an external consultant working with the Human Resources Network. Application to be made from the R&D Fund for $10,000 to commence the work needed.

2. The development of pathways for women in non-traditional roles such as heavy

vehicle driving is recommended to address loss of skilled labour to the mining industry. Councils to be made aware of the significant incentives offered to employers who engage women under the apprenticeship/traineeship scheme in non-traditional roles.

3. The development of a broad cultural diversity program with an aim to include policies

and procedures designed to increase indigenous and non-english speaking background labour to join Councils.

4. The report establishes a significant increase in the portion of Council employees

engaged in human services. It is recommended that this expanding workforce be developed through professional development programs.

5. The average age of a Council employee has increase by one full year since 2001.

The recommendation is to increase youth participation through traineeships and cadetships but to also encourage older workers to work past the nominal retirement date by providing flexible working options such as part-time, casual or work-at-home. Salary packaging for older workers is also required to ensure there are financial benefits available to those who work past the age of 65.

6. Approximately one-quarter of the workforce in Local Government are engaged on

terms other than full time. The recommendation is that this is monitored to ensure Local Government continues to provide quality employment options.

7. The average length of service has fallen indicating the workforce is more likely to

seek other employment opportunities although it ought to be noted that retention levels in Local Government is significantly better than in private enterprise. Recommendation is that the Human Resource Network development staff retention strategies.

8. Over-Award payments are now the norm in the majority of Councils. Maintaining a

fair differential between the Award and actual wage rates is important to ensuring the Award structure continues to provide a useful basis for Local Government. Alternatively, Local Government may choose to utilise the Workplace Relations Act 1996 to essentially abandon the Award, however, this is not recommended at this time.

Documents

Workforce Planning for Local Government in South Australia · Workforce Planning for Local Government in South Australia Results October 2006 3 RESULTS OF THE STUDY All 68 Councils