A VicHealth paper of several years ago stated that ‘‘lack of time, or time pressure’’ affected health. Time was a ‘‘finite resource’’ that had become ‘‘more precious because of changes in the nature of work, where people live and how they spend their leisure time’’.

Having said that, it must be a condition of the extra week being granted that it is indeed used, and not banked. The union argues this is to offset unpaid overtime and allow for the demands of the four-term school year. Surely, the flexitime arrangements in the public service would cover some of these concerns. Three years ago, the Victorian Secretaries Board, an umbrella grouping of department secretaries, began an initiative ‘‘All Roles Flex’’ to implement flexible working arrangements across the public service.

Factoring in the four-term school year would seem on face value less compelling. The present structure has existed for more than 30 years. The working group that suggested the move from three to four argued it would benefit students, teachers and the community. Notwithstanding the obvious change in the workforce, of a vast increase in both parents now working, one extra week for that reason seems flimsy.

The public servants are more likely to find a bigger fight on their hands over the money components of their demands. Hard bargaining is likely, given the government can argue that its land tax revenue is shrinking because of the anchors on the real estate market. In May 2018, expectations were of a $7 billion harvest, six months later the forecast had been downgraded, and is still going south. Into this environment, government departments are also looking for $1.8 billion in savings.

As to the superannuation demand, most firms are set at the super guarantee rate of 9.5 per cent. This will rise to 12 per cent by 2025. The public servants would appear to be wanting to get in early.