The state government has claimed a Tasmanian Industrial Commission ruling - that it has no power to rule - is a victory in its push for four school terms next year.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The state government welcomed yesterday's decision, which said the commission could not rule on the number or length of school terms but that Education Minister Nick McKim had the required authority to do it.
Mr McKim said he would push ahead to implement the four-term school year for 2013 for all state schools.
"As there will be no reduction in teachers’ entitlements, I now intend to continue with the implementation of the four term school year from next year," Mr McKim said.
The term dates for 2013 will be:
Term 1:
(Easter break will be March 29 to April 2)
Term 2:
Term 3:
Term 4:
However, the commission's ruling has apparently not ended the dispute between teachers and the education department.
The Australian Education Union state branch said that a decision hadn't even been made by the commission and it was continuing to fight the move to four terms.
After three months of hearings in the commission, late yesterday Commissioner James McAlpine found he did not have the jurisdiction to mandate the number and-or length of school terms.
He said he had ruled now to try to help reduce problems in planning for next year.
He said a decision on a proposed amendment to the teachers' award which would be required in the shift to four terms, would be handed down later.
It is five months since the state government first went to the commission seeking a variation to the teachers' award.
At the end of March the commissioner agreed to the government's argument to have the matter heard in the commission.
The union had argued it wanted a negotiated outcome.
Education Minister Nick McKim has welcomed the decision and the ruling that under the Education Act 1994, he has the authority to decide on the number and timing of school terms.
Last night the union's state branch manager Chris Lane said it would seek legal advice about what exactly the commissioner's ruling was.
Mr Lane said the union believed the commissioner had made only a preliminary ruling, and it was too early for the government to pat itself on the back.
"We can appeal it but we can't appeal anything until we know what the final decision is,'' Mr Lane said.
"This seems like it is a preliminary decision and it talks like he will make a final decision.''
He said after the union had sought legal advice, it may appeal the ruling.
Mr McKim said in accordance with the commissioner's recommendation the department would work with the union to work through any areas of concern.