Delegate sacked:
Tales from the Telstra crypt

Index

MELBOURNE: In May of this year, Telstra dismissed a CPSU delegate, Mervyn Vogt, from its Burwood site. His 'crime' was to produce an information sheet, Nighthawk's Newsletter, for distribution to union members on the nightshift working in the Telecard Centre. The newsletter was well received and gained a wider circulation within the Burwood site. Merv is regarded highly by the union membership at Burwood for his unfailing commitment to unionism, and his determination to stand up to the management.

For this, management laid five charges against Merv. The charges, all dismissible offences within Telstra, relate to 'failure to obey a directive'. The group manager at the site claims she instructed Merv to cease production and distribution of the newsletter) a claim Merv vehemently refutes.

He was also charged with 'inciting fear and insecurity' in the employees, by suggesting that their positions were insecure. He was further charged with being in 'conflict of interest with Telstra's code of conduct' ie. you do not criticise Telstra Management.

This code of conduct was one of the issues that Merv Vogt had highlighted in the Nighthawks Newsletters. The code was delivered unsolicited to the homes of all Telstra employees last Christmas, at an enormous cost to the taxpayer, in response to scathing criticism of higher management by the Senate estimates committee.

The initial 'in-house' investigation of the charges found Merv Vogt guilty and he was dismissed. Merv appealed the decision in the Disciplinary Appeals Board. This also is an 'in-house' body made up of a Telstra management representative, a 'neutral' chairperson (in fact a barrister employed by Telstra) and a union nominee.

The board initially arranged a deal between the parties. Telstra agreed to drop all charges if Merv agreed to be relocated to another site. Yet, following intervention by Telstra's 'employee relations' heavy, Robert Cartwright (formerly of CRA), management backed away from the deal, citing 'the broader political implications' of the deal. The Disciplinary Board took several weeks to come to a decision in the case, and found Merv guilty of one charge of 'failing to obey a directive' and 'being in conflict of interest with Telstra's code of conduct'. The decision of the board was apparently unanimous.

Mervyn Vogt now intends to proceed to the Federal Court in an Unfair/Unlawful Dismissal case against Telstra. It would appear that Telstra under Mr. Cartwright, will not countenance any opposition to its slash and burn staff reduction program.

Telstra's mismanagement and the millions of dollars worth of losses through the poor decisions in the Foxtel deal and the Jorn Project will be paid for with workers' jobs. Telstra management are certainly 'making life easier' for themselves in ensuring that dissent is silenced.