We haven't lost our focus

Details

Published: Tuesday, 13 October 2026 15:04

The last issue of depaNews was on 16 June, and not a peep from us in the meantime. It was not a bad issue, by the way, the good news on the Award to be made from the first pay period after 1 July, including the announcement of MyLeave, which is a qualitative change in how things operated in the industry, and then a report on the final day of depa V Thaler on the front page of the Sydney Morning Herald, no less, under the heading “Serial pest Thaler’s bad day in court”.

Then finishing with an hilarious insight into this contemptuous human being with an SMS to the CEO at Snowy Monaro complaining about not having his Council business papers and blaming her, alleging it was “deliberate… You organised this to annoy and frustrate me… why would my profile not be recognised? Because you had it removed is my suspicion”. To which the CEO responded in her usual exhaustively calm and civil way when she dealt with him, “you’ve spelt your name as Adrew.thaler, can you try again with”, and then provided his proper email address. Brilliant.

Good old Adrew.

When the case concluded with final written submissions, we were ready to get the first Anti-Bullying Order in Local Government in the new jurisdiction. Unfortunately, another anti-bullying application had been made for another employee treated unreasonably by Thaler. Cr Adrew challenged the jurisdiction. He started to challenge ours at the beginning but realised he was on a loser and withdrew.

But the USU application did fail on the grounds that the legislation is restricted to unreasonable behaviour “at work”, and their application had only four examples, two of which were not “at work”. Reduced to two examples, the application was withdrawn because the member concerned had poor health.

Given this judgement by the same Commissioner, handling ours, Commissioner Muir, the parties to our application were invited to make submissions about the relevance of the jurisdictional finding to our case. We did, more than one each back and forward, so the case itself only fully concluded at the end of August. That’s why we’ve had little to report.

As an aside, while we await the conclusion of our case, depa will separately be pressing LGNSW and the other unions to have it acknowledged in the Act that in Local Government there are people working who can be bullied outside the workplace - not “at work”, but because of their work. The jurisdiction should recognise that.

What else has Cr Andrew been up to?

Details

Published: Tuesday, 13 October 2026 15:04

He had an AVO taken out against him only last week by a female Councillor and was mentioned in the Local Court. He used his social media to announce that police had served him with an interim AVO against a Victorian woman which won’t be heard until next year, and he has the outstanding police action and application for an AVO by his neighbour. This is an extraordinary story that we covered in the April issue, including a link to a broadcast by 2GB’s Ben Fordham which is worth watching twice, under the heading "EXCLUSIVE - Cooma pest Andrew Thaler charged by police".

Underpinning all of this is the continuing argument about a three-month suspension imposed by the Office of Local Government on 28 July 2025. It was Thaler’s second suspension. All this misconduct and these suspensions pre-date our member, the CEO working at Snowy-Monaro!

This was appealed by the OLG to the NSW Court of Appeal on three grounds: the tribunal misapprehended a statutory function, it misapplied a principal from criminal sentencing to the disciplinary proceedings before it, and that the orders as to disciplinary action “were manifestly inadequate”.

OLG won, the Court emphasised Thaler failed to see the seriousness of this misconduct allowed the appeal on the other two grounds sending the proceedings back to NCAT to be determined in accordance with the law. Take that NCAT, the penalty had better be “manifestly adequate” next time. Well done OLG.

When NCAT, after that rebuke, suspends him, it will be his third suspension... He is heading irretrievably to be disqualified as a councillor.

We are confident our case will conclude before that happens.

Get your hands off MyLeave

Details

Published: Tuesday, 13 October 2026 15:04

MyLeave was the hardest fought achievement, the issue occupying more time of the Commission in mediation than any other, and a qualitative change in the industry providing a new flexibility for employees. It’s now all about cooperation. The Commission broke LGNSW’s obsession with restricting MyLeave if you had more than eight weeks annual leave. That’s a different and unrelated issue.

LGNSW has to stop listening to their advisory group of misery from HR and GMs.

It’s intended to break the mandatory restraints imposed over the years by reactionary HR/P&C functionaries and general managers - who much prefer it all to be black-and-white, founded on managerial prerogative and where everything requires the employer’s approval. The unimaginative and reluctant hate discretion - clearly they’re not prepared to back their own judgement.

We knew at the time there’d be many disappointed and hostile. Bit by bit we are dealing with those councils getting them to understand that the world has changed, the shackles are removed, a more cooperative approach to this form of leave has been imposed.

Leaving aside the transitional arrangements, this is the operational part of the clause in its entirety:

L. MYLEAVE

(i) Subject to this clause, an employee (other than a casual) shall be entitled to 1 week of MyLeave at ordinary pay during each year of service. MyLeave becomes available upon commencement or on each anniversary following the making of this Award.

(ii) MyLeave may be used by an employee for any purpose or activity and may be taken flexibly, in blocks of single or multiple hours or single or consecutive days.

(iii) Where practicable an employee must provide the Employer with advance notice of the intention to take MyLeave. Where an employee seeks to take more than 1 day of MyLeave consecutively, the Employer and employee shall agree on the period, provided that such agreement shall not be unreasonably refused.

(iv) MyLeave does not accumulate or accrue from year to year and is not paid out on termination of employment.

(v) An employee who is entitled to MyLeave can elect in writing that some, or all, of their unused MyLeave days be converted to sick leave (before it expires). Once such an election has been made it cannot be reversed.

(vi) Subject to exceptional circumstances, an employee’s election to convert unused MyLeave days to sick leave must occur at least a month prior to the employee’s anniversary date.

(a) To facilitate the election in subclause (v) an Employer is required once a year to provide:

(1) Notification (unless it is otherwise readily accessible) of an employee’s anniversary date; and

(2) Notification of the right to elect to convert unused MyLeave days.

(viii) The transitional MyLeave entitlements referred to in subclause (vii) do not accrue and expire upon an employee’s first anniversary following the making of the Award.

It’s a beautiful clause introducing a more cooperative arrangement in the workplace - it can be used for any purpose, if it’s practical you must provide advance notice, if it is impractical, you don’t, and if you want to take more than one day consecutively you are required to “agree on the period with your boss - providing that “such agreement shall not be unreasonably refused”!

Be kind to HR/P&C, they’re on a learning curve at the moment. It’s a novelty to have discretion instead of someone making the decision for you.

The Award Implementation Committee will focus on pulling Councils into line which are not doing the right thing. Please let us know if you think your council is doing the wrong thing, and we will put them on the list.

2026 State Award made today

Details

Published: Tuesday, 16 June 2026 12:55

Commissioner Howell in the NSW Industrial Relations Commission this morning consented to the making of a new Local Government State Award 2026.

It will apply from the first pay period on or after 1 July and will operate for 3 years, providing a 4% pay increase from the first pay period after 1 July, a further 4% from the first pay period after 1 July 2027, and a final 4% from the first pay period after 1 July 2028.

After submissions from the parties, the Commissioner observed he was “well satisfied“ that the Award provided conditions that are fair and reasonable and meet the requirements of the Industrial Relations Act and procedures to allow the consent award to be made.

Pay increases are always the most important issue to workers, and while conscious that the CPI at the time we were arguing about these pay increases hit 4.6% in the March quarter, the employers would not budge. It’s a good increase, and when the information went out to our members it was overwhelmingly and unanimously accepted.

In our information sent to members we noted “we were still exploring the possibility of opening the Award during its lifetime if the cost of living becomes all completely out of control, or the Fair Work Commission hands down a significant National Wage Increase intended flow on across the country.”

This issue was specifically argued in conciliation by Commissioner Howell on 26 May but we couldn’t get a no fuss reference in the Leave Reserved clause. We ended up with this:

“The parties to the Award are obliged to propose a package which is considered fair and reasonable. The Unions pursued the inclusion of a leave reserved clause to accommodate unanticipated spikes in headline inflation. LGNSW did not agree. The Award does not include a “no extra claims” clause and the Industrial Relations Act 1996 (NSW) (at section 17(3)) in conjunction with the Commission’s Award Making Principles allow for an Award to be varied during its nominal term to ensure that the Award remains fair and reasonable. The parties agree that the Award may be varied during a nominal term, either by consent of the parties or as a result of an Arbitrated Case”.

It’s better than nothing, it was included in the affidavits of the parties who requested that it be included in the statement and decision of Commissioner Howell when it is published.

But it’s not all about the money. We hated our proposal about Health and Wellbeing Leave in the 2014 Award being restricted and stifled unnecessarily by rigid-minded HR and GMs, and this Award will do something about it. This will be a very brief summary and for more details of the benefits that will flow, here is the document we forwarded to members as part of our argument recommending acceptance of the offer.

For us, the big deal improvement is the introduction of My Leave. It will be 5 days leave transferred from sick leave, which can be taken for any reason at all, and if not taken, there is a process to return any untaken MyLeave to your sick leave; paid parental leave will be doubled to 14 weeks and will be available to both parents; there are references to AI to try to make it less threatening and subject to consultation; and Working from Home is at last acknowledged in clause 2. The Award Implementation Committee is reinstated to deal with issues like AI, how to fairly calculate costs for EVs, the appropriate use of term contracts, and the implementation of My Leave, to ensure that the dead hand of HR doesn’t poison the intention of the parties that it be available for any purpose.

Read about MyLeave carefully - this is a unique arrangement converting the first week of sick leave to something more accessible, but allowing it to be transferred into the sick leave entitlements if not used during the year.

depa v Thaler makes it to the front page of the Sydney Morning Herald

Details

Published: Tuesday, 16 June 2026 12:55

Our original hearing dates set for 18 and 19 May had to be abandoned. Part-time Councillor Thaler had met with his senior solicitor in Parramatta for 4 hours on the Sunday before the hearings and the poor lawyer had to admit himself to hospital on his way home with a dramatic gastro crisis. Understandable, when you’ve spent time with Cr Thaler.

Nevertheless, over a messy day with six adjournments we pressed the notorious serial pest to agree to some behavioural standards until the next hearing dates on 1 and 2 June. In the meantime, his second suspension would expire before we returned to the Commission and we feared for our member’s safety and wellbeing. He refused - he believes he does nothing wrong.

On Monday 1 May as the Applicant, depa had previously filed two affidavits, I gave evidence and was then cross examined. This was followed by the evidence in affidavits of Snowy Monaro Regional Council’s GM and depa member Noreen Vu. There were some media outlets interested in this and the proceedings were available online to them.

This is how the ABC reported on the first day under the heading “SMRC CEO accuses Andrew Thaler of bullying”.

But it was the second day that drew the most critical press against Thaler’s behaviour. This was published electronically that afternoon and on the front page of the Sydney Morning Herald the following day under the heading “’Idiot', 'monster', 'witch': Serial pest Andrew Thaler’s latest day in court did not go well”.

The case concluded that afternoon pending further written submissions by Thaler’s lawyer and our barrister in response last Friday.

Commissioner Muir has reserved his decision. We claimed a seven-point Anti-Bullying Order, the Commission has the right to make an order which, given Thaler’s propensity to appeal, could be broader, or narrower, but it will be extremely carefully drafted.

It has been a grim process, but there are some things he says and does that make him a real entertainer (unintentionally of course). The latest is a frenetic accusation of GM Noreen Vu intentionally cutting off his email access since his suspension was lifted.

He posted in his Facebook account online last week, “Have you had your emails blocked by #snowymonaro Council??". This was followed with “Ooohhh... This is interesting because my emails are being blocked by #noreenvu“.

On Saturday, in an SMS to the GM, he really vented his spleen:

Hello Thaler!

Details

Published: Wednesday, 22 April 2026 16:06

In the March issue we reported on our application for an Anti-Bullying Order against Snowy Monaro Councillor Andrew Thaler, in the new Anti-Bullying jurisdiction of the NSW Industrial Relations Commission. We provided our application, a response from the Council and a response from suspended Councillor Thaler.

Suspended Councillor Thaler’s response challenged the jurisdiction, relying upon not being a worker under the WHS Act, not carrying out work “FOR” a person conducting a business or undertaking and that the Respondent was “not aware of any other cases of this kind”.

He railed about the absence of jurisdiction and when our application came on before Commissioner Muir on 9 March, the Commission listed the jurisdictional argument on 8 April, with the Commissioner committed to making a decision that day. The Respondent was ordered to file any evidence and an outline of submissions by 23 March and the applicant the applicant to reply by 30 March.

Councillor Thaler failed to comply with the Commissioner’s order requiring evidence and submissions to be lodged on 23 March. The following day, his lawyers advised us “Mr Thaler now seeks to file an amended response which resiles from the position”. Despite his vociferous and multiple assertions there was no jurisdiction, and without explanation, he had changed his mind. He chickened out.

Thaler Also Chickens Out.

On 26 March, when the jurisdictional argument would have taken place, orders were made requiring depa to file and serve evidence and an outline of submissions by 4pm on 30 March, Thaler to file and serve evidence and an outline of submissions by 4pm on 20 April, and depa to file and serve any evidence and or submissions in reply, by 4 PM on 28 April.

The matter was listed to be heard on 18 and 19 May in the IRC in Parramatta.

depa complied with the order and filed witness statements from the depa Secretary, and Snowy Monaro GM, Noreen Vu, and evidence from CCTV footage, transcripts and video of social media and a summary of submissions, but at 3:44pm a lawyer acting for Cr Thaler advised the parties:

“Our client has been delayed in preparing his evidence in these proceedings.

Given this, we anticipate being in a position to file and serve our evidence and submissions by 4 PM on 28 April 2026.”

No explanation of how the client had been delayed, nor why they needed more than a week longer than the timeframe ordered, nothing.

What else could we do but respond:

“Good afternoon, you want more than a week?

Where is your client, in jail?

We haven’t had a response, but earlier that day 2GB’s Ben Fordham on his breakfast program made an announcement that reminds us of the old saying attributed to Chaucer in 1390, that many a truth is spoken in jest.

"EXCLUSIVE - Cooma pest Andrew Thaler charged by police"

and over three minutes provided another fascinating insight into the behaviour of the suspended Councillor, that you need to hear for yourself.

Again, this will continue to be a very interesting story for the May depaNews.

Offer from LGNSW for 2026 State Award imminent

Details

Published: Wednesday, 22 April 2026 16:06

There has been more conciliation in this award than living memory, six days or parts of days to resolve sticking points on how to deal with a handful of issues including AI and a novel proposal about leave.

There is now general in-principal agreement between us except on salaries which will be determined at the next meeting of the LGNSW Board on 24 April.

Historically, formal offer go to the unions that afternoon or, given that it’s a Friday, the following week, the Committee of Management would review it with recommendations from me, and adopt it “in principle, pending circulating the offer to members for feedback”.

And we would go through a process of consultation with members, responding to questions and providing explanations where necessary, and recommending that they support the Committee’s in principle agreement and accept the offer. It we’ll do that this year as well.

depa nails serial pest councillor with application for Anti-Bullying Order

Details

Published: Monday, 16 March 2026 14:33

Our July 2025 issue announced a new bullying jurisdiction introduced into the Industrial Relations Act. While it is of general application in the workplace, it more importantly provides for the prosecution of councillors - and not before time.

Over the years, depa members have imposed bans on councillors who have publicly and inappropriately criticised or abused them, we’ve had industrial disputes about it, we’ve sought apologies and obtained them. The significance of the new jurisdiction is that it can make orders to stop bullying, and if they are not complied with, substantial financial penalties - up to $18,000 for an individual. At last, some teeth in dealing with councillor bullies and unreasonable behaviour.

On 19 February we filed the first application for a Stop Bullying Order in local government against councillor Andrew Thaler at Snowy Monaro Regional Council.

Described by the SMH as a “ratbag broadcaster and scrapyard owner” and both a ”serial pest” and a ”town pest”; the ABC reported his behaviour as “bullying, harassment, intimidation, overbearing and abuse of power”; the Office of Local Government/Department of Planning found multiple examples of misconduct which was “targeted and intentional misconduct”; The Minister for Local Government Ron Hoenig observed “grubs feed on the oxygen and notoriety of publicity” and issued a Performance Improvement Order aimed at improving his behaviour; the Federal Minister for Local Government and Federal member for Eden Monaro Kristy McBain worried about the consequences “if we allow thugs to scare off good candidates”.

The ABC reported Monaro Labor MP Steve Whan had spoken directly to Thaler “about the concerns about the government and the Snowy Mountains community” and said “I share the concern the community has, and I personally sent to this councillor that you do not get any results by being abusive, by treating people disrespectfully and that has to cease. I know that is the message, which has been given very strongly on this, and it cannot be tolerated”. Whan supported “other councillors and other members of the community to go about having discussions about issues without being subject to denigration or abuse or to feel physically threatened”. NCAT has found he engaged in bullying behaviour to a fellow councillor as well as comments which were “grossly and inexcusably offensive about an NDIS recipient“.

NSW Nationals MLC Nicole Overall criticised the lack of action from the Minister claiming Thaler was “flagrantly violating” the Minister’s PIO and told Parliament Thaler’s behaviour “is an attack on the integrity of local governance itself” and "there is no alternative but to act immediately”. He was banned from Council buildings in 2018 for the wellbeing and safety of staff, a ban that was lifted only in 2024 when he was elected as a councillor. He has been banned from local businesses and the Country Women’s Association premises.

Appointed as a councillor with 111 primary votes in 2024, Thaler’s behaviour has resulted in dozens of complaints, from staff, other councillors and prominent locals - the overwhelming majority of whom are women. He has been suspended twice.

While the case is called the Development and Environmental Professionals’ Association V Cr Andrew Thaler, it’s the union acting on behalf of our member, CEO of Snowy Monaro Regional Council, Noreen Vu.

Our action is a significant step in defending general managers and other staff against the sort of unreasonable behaviour Thaler wallows in.

There have been multiple complaints to OLG, resulting in suspensions, all of which are met with hostility and abuse, particularly from his social media presence, and a propensity to appeal everything.

The application was listed before Commissioner Muir in the Industrial Relations Commission and came on for Conciliation and Orders on 9 March. depa as the applicant, represented by our long-time barrister, Ian Latham, the Council has been listed as a respondent and has their lawyers, and Thaler had two lawyers representing him.

Here are the details - they are all interesting reading:

Our application for the Anti-Bullying Order, examples of the appalling behaviour and the remedy sought.

A response by the Council as a respondent detailing the actions that have been taken by the Council, the Office of Local Government, and the suspensions.

And a response by Thaler.

Thaler’s response included a challenge to the jurisdiction, and the Commission set a timetable for the parties to prepare written submissions. Thaler is required to have his argument filed by 23 March, and the applicant by 30 March, with a formal hearing on Wednesday 8 April. A decision is expected that afternoon.

And that will make a very interesting story for the April depaNews.

2026 State Award negotiations continue

Details

Published: Tuesday, 17 February 2026 16:36

Like an evenly matched tug-of-war, we work our way through the negotiations. Tomorrow it will be the eighth day we have met - still in a Socratic way, without sledging, arguing about the changes that we should make for the 2026 Award. We now start to meet weekly. We are under pressure to have an “in principle” agreement between us by the last week of March.

As far as we’re all concerned, it’s all about the money. Interest rates, Treasury projections of 4% inflation in 2026, and the increasing cost of living all mean that must be the primary focus.

The unions pressed the employers to recognise that while wages have kept in line with inflation over the last decades, we’ve never had the opportunity to provide increases that will actually attract and retain people to the industry. The employers don’t match the unions’ enthusiasm, but what could possibly go wrong with that approach?

Protecting General Managers

Details

Published: Tuesday, 17 February 2026 16:36

The brutal treatment handed out to the former GM of Parramatta, aided and abetted by grubby local media, has brought things to a head. It’s time to provide better protection for General Managers.

It may have taken decades, but senior staff have better protection after removing the concept of senior staff from the Local Government Act and employing those people under the Local Government State Award or local Enterprise Agreements, where they apply. And having access to the Industrial Relations Commission for Unfair Dismissal.

When the senior staff legislation was introduced into the Legislative Assembly, everything was very celebratory and in a casual lunch in Parliament House we discovered what has to be the best kept secret in local government. The Minister for Local Government Ron Hoenig announced he had always thought General Managers should be better protected.

We emailed the Office of Local Government to have this issue discussed by the next meeting of the Employment Matters Reference Group, an employment group established by the Office at the time of the mergers to deal with employment considerations which found that there were good reasons for it to continue.

Amongst other things, we said:

Our Committee of Management unanimously resolved at their last meeting on 20 November:

Following the termination of the General Manager at Parramatta City, Gail Connolly, as a result of political battles amongst councillors, depa resolves to take all steps, starting with an approach to OLG and the Minister for Local Government, to achieve consensus that it’s time to be extending protections now available to former senior staff, to general managers.

I know that we have discussed this in the past and LGNSW has had little appetite for curtailing the rights of their members to remove general managers for a variety of reasons (or none at all, meaning that there was a reason but it couldn't be published) but you never know your luck.

We've always taken the view that if there isn't consensus on extending the senior staff provisions to General Managers, then making the "no reason" termination provision something significantly more than 38 weeks, would assist in putting a stop to these practices. Or at the very least make councillors think more financially responsibly about the cost, and the risk of public/political humiliation.

65 weeks sounds like a reasonable compromise.

Unfortunately, despite our best intentions, I was in the IRC at the time of the meeting, and the Committee hasn’t met since. Maybe it was our suggestion that the current 38 weeks exit payment “for any reason”, should five weeks become 65 weeks that has struck them dumb. That amount of money should make councillors spend a bit more time contemplating the departure of the GM.