Union pushes back against potential lifeguard outsourcing

WHEN the City of Coffs Harbour’s councillors passed a motion to adopt a recommendation in a confidential report concerning lifeguard services, it triggered an angry response from the United Services Union (USU) and costly court action.

The union condemned Council for “allegedly making a secret decision to outsource its Beach Lifeguard Service, without proper consultation or notification to affected staff”.

USU Acting Manager North Luke Hutchinson, said the move effectively breached the NSW Local Government (State) Award 2023 and demonstrated contempt for the Council’s own workforce.

“This is a disgraceful betrayal of the lifeguards who’ve protected our beaches for years,” he said.

The USU said it formally wrote to Council on 21 July, before its regular meeting, seeking consultation on the future of the service.

“Council told us nothing was happening. Then, days later, they told staff their jobs were gone.”

The USU requested an urgent intervention from the NSW Industrial Relations Commission (IRC).

At a hearing on 7 August at the Newcastle Courthouse, the IRC recommended that Council’s General Manager:

–  reports to the elected Council to rescind Resolution “2025/160”

–  cease all discussions about its implementation until at least 14 August

–  disclose all relevant documentation, including previously confidential reports

–  engage directly with the USU to resolve any operational concerns, and

–  return to the IRC for a formal hearing on 14 August.

Mr Hutchinson said it was “a win for transparency, fairness, and public safety.”

In response, a Council spokesperson said the City highly values and appreciates the work of the lifeguards and was dismayed by the “emotive and inaccurate” statements issued publicly by the USU, and that it had chosen to breach confidentiality.

They said any solution should advance the delivery of the Lifeguard Services Strategic Plan, maintain current service levels and provide a pathway to improve service levels, operate within available budgets, provide effective outcomes for staff and promote collaboration, integration and efficiency with volunteer surf lifesaving clubs.

The spokesperson said the City remains open to exploring opportunities, which may lead to an even more effective Lifeguard Service, and that while no decision has been made, it is committed to engaging with its employees.

The only councillor to oppose the motion was Cr Jonathan Cassell.

“It does not align with my values,” he said.

“I believe we should be supporting and keeping our local lifeguards who have invaluable knowledge of our beaches and water conditions, which has been built up from multiple decades of patrolling our unique beaches.”

The Northern Beaches Council in Sydney’s north has recently stopped outsourcing its lifeguard service and returned to it being in-house.

In Port Macquarie, the lifeguard contractor relies mostly on casuals.

“We should be asking critical questions of these Councils before making any decisions,” Cr Cassell said.

Councillor Tony Judge, who voted for the motion, has had a change of heart.

“This is an issue of enormous community interest,” he said.

“However, councillors are prevented from discussing the nature of the resolution or even the matters it covers.

“I can confirm that had I known what I have discovered since the Council meeting, I would have made a very different decision.

“A major part of our role as Councillors is to act as a conduit between Council and the community.

“That has been almost impossible in this matter.

“Thankfully, current and former lifeguards, their union and the community have been very clear in voicing their concerns.

“I am grateful for their efforts.”

A petition on change.org to keep lifeguards ‘in-house’ had attracted more than 1700 signatures at the time of writing.

By Andrew VIVIAN