The Educator forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

School cleaning reforms to reduce principal workload

Notify me of new replies via email
  • Stu | 12 Aug 2017, 10:42 AM Agree 0
    If there was a serious effort to reduce principal workload it wouldnt be through cleaning. It wouldbe through complisnce with OH&S being centralised.

    If people are treated more fairly because of the changes thats a good thing. But - bringing in these changes under the veil of 'reduced workload for principals' is s joke. It hasmuch more to do with pressure on government from the United Voice union who represent cleaners than anything else.
  • Contractor | 15 Aug 2017, 03:52 AM Agree 0
    Hi im a cleaning contractor.
    I think the hole thing stinks! It all wrong.. Its all about the union and getting staff to pay fees.
    I have been building my company for 23 years and do all the right things by the school and my staff and now im going to be forced to close my company down and loose everything I have worked for. The Department should be ashamed of them self. 23 years cleaning up after teachers and student's just to be told (see ya). The union are full of it.... going around bulling my staff, liaing to them, telling them they are not getting paid correctly 4weeks before the wage increase on the 1st of July making the staff think they are being ripped off when tbey are not, tell staff they are from the goverment not the union, telling staff that they must fillout a form when it is really a voluntary survey when they declined. We services 15 schools and the principal have very little to do with regards to (taking care of cleaners) we do our jobs we are seen but not heard. If the Department thinks that this will make thing better then they have no idea about what it takes to keep a school clean. That make clames that all the cleaning staff will be retained but what about the people that have trained these staff members, have dedicated there lives to there business and schools what do they get? I will tell you (bankruptcy) thats what contractors like me have to look forward too. Its nice to know that after 23 years of employing people, generating job, looking after schools, unblocking maybe 1000 toilets one would think that they would be looking forward to retirement in the years to come but now with the Departments backwards thinking it now bankruptcy.. I hope this thinking isn’t in the school curriculum. Way to go DEECE
  • Cleaning Contractor- Name withheld | 18 Aug 2017, 09:16 AM Agree 0
    I have worked in the cleaning industry for more than 30 years. What has been occurring to cleaning rates over the past 10 years especially is distressing.

    Yes there are many unscrupulous, unethical operators in our industry who exploit the people at the very heart of the work. These people are happy to take advantage of the people doing the work, rip off the system and reap profits that are ill-gotten.

    But please, let's not be delusional, it is not all contractors, it is not happening in every school.

    What the department fails to acknowledge is that the system as it stands has failed because there is no check and balance at the department level. Dare I say that the school councils, who ultimately make the decisions, will be romanced by low pricing as they see that cleaning is just cleaning.

    The reality is that cleaning is about delivering services with adequate labour resources and management knowledge, generally learnt over time not the minutes it takes to register a business name, grab an ABN , mop bucket and vacuum cleaner.

    If the school councils entrusted with oversight of school budgets, had the remotest understanding of direct labour and associated employment related costs and guidance on realistic productivity rates, they would be able to genuinely assess the wheat from the chaff in the tenders they receive. They would see that a school that might take 10 hours per day to clean should cost about $400 per day to clean. Instead they get a price half that and an assurance from the contractor that they will be doing 10 hours labour.

    If you do the maths, that is the equivalent of $20 per hour. The direct wages alone for an afternoon shift cleaner is $22.48 plus all the trimmings.

    Maybe what should be happening is that the department cast an eye over the bids.

    This new planned intervention by the Department will assure one thing and it is not the things they want to assure (good service and fairness in wages), it will kill businesses who are good honest and ethical businesses, because the department can't get its act in order.

    Given the backlash that we are seeing from the Principal class, who legitimately fear having their good contractors turfed out, only to be appointed one of no more than eight companies (where the people who own the businesses will never meet the Principals or the cleaning staff on sites) Mr Andrews and his Union mates may just have a bit of a fight on their hands.

    Another calamitous decision by our illustrious Premier. At what cost this time?

    260 companies are about to lose their livelihoods, and @DanAndrews we vote too.
  • | 07 Sep 2017, 05:22 PM Agree 0
    The proposed school cleaning reform agenda is just a disgrace. Yes there needs to be worker protection from unscrupulous operators but what about those family businesses that rely on school cleaning for their survival, they are going to loose their businesses and go broke !

    Surely the way this should have been handled is through a comprehensive audit by the department on all cleaning contractors at each school to ensure wage and condition compliance . Non compliant cleaning companies would be stripped of their contracts.
    - after all this is what the unions want isn't it !

    With only 8 regions up for tender it is impossible for any small operator to apply - no single operator could handle 120-130 schools !

    Small business assistance hasn't been considered in this union driven government who have no thought about the consequences of their pure political "game".



Post a reply