We met with VHIA and DHS on 15 July 2009 to discuss the Union’s claim for upgrading of the dietitians’ structure, arising from the 2008 public sector bargaining round. 

The claim has been developed by dietitian members of the Union in 2007, and has been published in the Stat Report a number of times over 2008 – 2009. A copy of the proposed structure is available on our web site. We first served the claim on the employers in 2007, since it was served once more on the VHIA and DHS on 1 April 2009.  

Despite the VHIA having had our claim for three and a half months, we have still had no response to it. The meeting on 15 July 2009 at the VHIA offices was a complete farce as none of the health services turned up to the meeting! 

The claim provides new community health-specific criteria, which are currently lacking in the award definitions which are biased towards dietitians employed in the acute sector. The Union is currently surveying members in community health in relation to the proposed structure. Please contact the office if you have not received the survey form. Please return the survey to the office as soon as possible. 

The claim also amends the criteria at Grade 2 [currently subclause 19.3.3(c) of the Award] to ensure that dietitians who have special knowledge or depth of experience and are required to apply it in their work are paid accordingly at Grade 2. The current definition allows a manager of a dietitian to deny a Grade 2 to a dietitian even when they meet the Award criteria which members rightly believe to be anachronistic. 

Similarly, the claim also seeks to delete the right of employers to deny Grade 4 senior clinician status to a dietitian who otherwise meets the work value requirements set out in clause 14.1 of the 2004-2007 Public Sector Certified Agreement. Again this is outdated and unfair. 

Unfortunately, there appears to have been misinformation provided to health service managers, some of whom are under the impression that the Union is seeking automatic progression from Grade 2 to 3 after 7 years experience and from Grade 3 to 4 after 10 years experience. This is completely false and such a proposition would never be supported by our members who believe strongly in merit-based classification. It is of concern to us that such wildly inaccurate assertions are being relayed to health services which are then being asked to waste time costing a phantom claim. 

We will be inviting Chief Dietitians and community health service dietitians who are members of the Union to a meeting to discuss the costing implications of the claim. The preferred date for this meeting is 29 July 2009 at our offices. Time to be advised. An email of confirmation will be sent to the relevant members next week.