The Honourable Chris Kourakis, Chief Justice of South Australia announced today that he has instructed the State Courts Administrator to take immediate steps to undertake two tasks. The first is to establish an independent grievance complaints body. It is not intended to, and the body could not, replace the legislated grievance procedures in Part 7 of the Public Sector Act 2009. It will look at complaints about systemic matters, even if they are matters of perception only. It will receive confidential complaints if that is what the employee prefers. It will do more than take and then pass on a statement to management, an arrangement which the Courts Administration Authority already has in place with the Stopline Service.
The independent body will have the co-operation of senior management and be able to interrogate them. It will be invited to make recommendations directly to the State Courts Administration Council.
The mechanism may be established through the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment or through independent consultants.
However, it should be understood that in June and July of this year, a Participant Hazard and Identification Risk Management toolkit, developed by La Trobe University, was applied to the Sheriff’s Office. The toolkit is designed to identify risk factors which may develop into bullying. Ninety-four of about 140 Sheriff’s Officers responded. The most serious hazards identified were:
- Coping with unhappy people
- Lack of opportunity for new skills and promotion
- Lack of variety in what was repetitive work
- Lack of staff amenities
- Getting things done without following correct procedures.
The only unfair treatment identified, and it was the last of 10 identified hazards, was the unequal allocation of extra working hours. Harassment and bullying, or discriminatory conduct in disciplinary proceedings did not get a place.
The second task is to engage independent consultants to hold meetings and provide information sessions for Sheriff’s Officers to explain the implications of a transfer to the Department for Correctional Services and to discuss those implications privately and, if necessary, anonymously, with individual Sheriff’s Officers. After that process, the views of Sheriff’s Officers will be canvassed carefully. Anonymity will be assured for those who wish it. Those who wish to speak openly or publicly will be assured they can do so safely.
The Chief Justice stated that if there is a strong consensus amongst Sheriff’s Officers to transfer to the Department for Correctional Services, he will for the most part be supportive when making recommendations to government.
It is necessary to explain the diversity of the functions of Sheriff’s Officers before mentioning just two reservations. Some Sheriff’s Officers are employed in the basement cells of the Sir Samuel Way building from which the District Court operates. Defendants are transferred from prisons to those cells by an independent contractor engaged by the Department for Correctional Services. The employment of Sheriff’s Officers in the Sir Samuel Way building cells is an anomaly. In the Magistrates Court in Adelaide, the suburbs and regionally, a private contractor engaged by the Department for Correctional Services performs that work. That contractor also transfers defendants from the cells into the courtrooms. To transfer the Sheriff’s Officers who work in the basement cells to the Department for Correctional Services will bring the position in the Sir Samuel Way Building in line with the Magistrates Court. On the other hand, if those Sheriff’s Officers indicate that they wish to remain with the Courts Administration Authority, the Chief Justice will respect their wishes and will do whatever can be done to ensure that their workplace is a respectful one.
Other Sheriff’s Officers provide security services at the entrance to court buildings. It is not necessary that those officers be Sheriff’s Officers. In the Federal Court, for example, a private security firm provides those services. The Chief Justice said he would be sorry to lose those Sheriff’s Officers from the staff of the Courts Administration Authority. He sees and speaks to many of them daily as he moves through the Courts. They are good people. However, again, the Chief Justice will be respectful of whatever feedback is provided, and represent their views in making any recommendations to government.
Sheriff’s Officers are also employed to manage courtrooms. They take the names of lawyers and parties appearing in courts and provide it to the court staff assisting the presiding judicial officer. They often show witnesses to the witness box. They also perform the very important function of managing juries. A transfer of those staff to the Department for Correctional Services would be problematic to say the least. They work in close co-operation with judicial officers and their administrative staff. The Chief Justice said he would be surprised if they chose to transfer to the Department for Correctional Services. It would make the management of courts very difficult if they did. All that can be done to assure them that they will be supported appropriately and that respectful workplace behaviours are maintained, will be done.
Finally, some permanent Sheriff’s Officers, but mostly independent contractors, serve civil court processes including the execution of warrants against real property and goods when civil judgments are not paid. It is an essential element of a court that it has the capacity to enforce its judgments. The Sheriff, throughout the centuries in England, Australia and other common law jurisdictions, although an officer appointed of the Executive, has been placed at the disposal of the Courts so that they can enforce their orders. It is no accident, therefore, that in jurisdictions without an independent courts administration authority, the Sheriff has sat within the Office of the Attorney General and its court services department. It was also natural for that reason that the Sheriff should be placed with the Courts Administration Authority when it was established. The office of Sheriff itself should, therefore, remain within the Courts Administration Authority, whatever employment arrangements are made for those who are engaged in the basement cells, at the entrance to courthouses and in managing courtrooms.
Enquiries: Media and Communications Office
Phone: 82040403 or 0467795291
Email: media@courts.sa.gov.au