C2001/1488, Transcript of Proceedings [2001] AIRCTrans 1481 (11 July 2001)

AUSCRIPT PTY LTD
ABN 76 082 664 220

Level 4, 60-70 Elizabeth St SYDNEY NSW 2000
DX1344 Sydney Tel:[phone] Fax:[phone]

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

MUNRO J
MR C. LLOYD
MR B. STEWART
MR C. SHAW
MR B. FLAIBAN

C2001/1488

AUTOMOTIVE, FOOD, METALS, ENGINEERING,
PRINTING AND KINDRED INDUSTRIES UNION

and

COATES HIRE OPERATIONS PTY LIMITED

Notification pursuant to Section 99 of the Act
of a dispute re the Company's non-implementation
of the agreed competency assessment process at the
Miranda site

SYDNEY

10.13 AM, WEDNESDAY, 20 JUNE 2001

Continued from 19.6.01

Hearing continuing

PN1719

MUNRO J: The Board of Reference has resumed and I think we had reached the stage where Mr Flaiban was about to question Mr Nelson.

<FRASER YOUNG NELSON, ON FORMER AFFIRMATION [10.13am]

<EXAMINATION BY MR FLAIBAN

PN1720

MR FLAIBAN: Your Honour, I'd just like to ask the Board - I've got a document here, it's the actual resource manual for MERS ITAB registered assessors and I'll be using that as a reference.

PN1721

MUNRO J: Very well. Does Mr Nelson have one?---Not with me, no.

PN1722

Yes, go ahead. Perhaps just to identify it a bit more fully could you read the title of what it is you're referring to?

PN1723

MR FLAIBAN: The title is actually Resource Manual for Registered Industry Assessors put out by MERS ITAB, revised October 1998.

PN1724

Mr Nelson, are you aware of the existence of an implementation date?---I certainly am.

PN1725

Yesterday one of the statements made by yourself, and it was in regards to competency 11.16A which is order materials?---Mm.

PN1726

You can correct me if I'm wrong but roughly the statement was through your assessment process it was all about - that competency was all about getting what they need to do the job and we're talking about ordering materials?---A simple statement, yes, that's correct.

PN1727

Can I just go to the guide, page 72, section 5.1.

PN1728

MR O'DONNELL: I have a spare copy I could give to the witness.

PN1729

THE WITNESS: What was the page number again, sorry?

PN1730

MR FLAIBAN: 72, 5.1. It's under the topic of what is an assessment and if we could just go through the first paragraph:

PN1731

For the purposes of the competency standards assessment is the process of determining whether or not an individual employee who does not hold an appropriate recognise qualification or is working at a higher level than that specified in the award for the qualification held is competent when their skills and background are compared to the performance criteria set out in the relevant competency unit.

PN1732

That statement is all about getting what they need to do to finish the job. Is that your interpretation of the competency itself, that particular competency?---In simple terms, yes.

PN1733

So, it's in regards your opinion of that interpretation of that competency?---It would be my interpretation of the competency if I was asked to put it in one sentence.

PN1734

By saying that would you say that you were objective then?---I think I was very objective, yes.

PN1735

With every single element in the competency?---Yes.

PN1736

As it was read? Thank you. The guide also outlines that if a qualified assessor is used there's certain criteria for that qualified assessor and one of the statements in the guide is:

PN1737

The qualified assessor is one who has completed an accredited assessor's course.

PN1738

Have you, Mr Nelson?---I have.

PN1739

Can you elaborate on what course you have attended?---I've done a number of courses on assessment. TAFE teachers are recognised through their - in New South Wales through their training as having a higher qualification than the Work Place Assessor Certificate 4. I've also done a number of other assessment courses within TAFE relevant to other projects that I've worked on over the years.

PN1740

So, the question again; have you completed an accredited assessor's course? Your answer is?---Well, my answer is yes, I have a MERS ITAB assessor's registration number if that helps. That's a requirement of the assessment procedure from MERS as well.

PN1741

In addition to the fact that a qualified assessor must complete a credited assessor's course you've just verified that you are registered with MERS ITAB as a qualified assessor?---Yes. You'll find my assessor number on the front of the Assessor Guides.

PN1742

The next criteria in the guide is the fact that the qualified assessor must also be competent in the units that he's being assessed?---Yes - not necessarily. The assessor can use other sources of information.

PN1743

Do you believe you are competent or have qualifications in the following competencies that I'm about to read out. Advance customer service, which is 16.3?---I believe through my experiences I'm competent, yes.

PN1744

Have you got qualifications?---No.

PN1745

Have you been assessed as being competent in that area?---No.

PN1746

18.21 maintain system hydraulics?---Can I answer this question by saying I've written two student resource books, text books, for national modules on hydraulics. One - one's called Fluid Power which deals with both hydraulics and pneumatics. The other is a module with a national number of NM58. It used to be called Hydraulics 3, is now called Hydraulics System Maintenance 1. So, do I hold a formal qualification - - -

PN1747

To the question - - -?--- - - - can't show you a piece of paper.

PN1748

Have you been assessed to be competent in that area?---Well, no, I haven't been assessed to be competent in that area, no.

PN1749

The next one, 11.16 order materials. Again, the same question?---Same question, no, I haven't been assessed as competent.

PN1750

MUNRO J: I'm sorry, which one was that?

PN1751

MR FLAIBAN: 11.16, order materials.

PN1752

If I could just take you now back to your witness statement. Have you got a copy, Mr Nelson?---Yes, I do, sorry.

PN1753

It's actually on the first page of your witness statement you make reference to section 3:

PN1754

As part of my duties in my current job I typically do work place assessments and skills analysis for manufacturing employers. Typically I work with larger companies who have an engineering work force. Some examples are -

PN1755

and you've listed some companies there?---Yes.

PN1756

So, you agree through your statement there that they are manufacturing based type companies?---Well, Australian Water Technologies, I'm not sure that you'd call them manufacturing. That's the maintenance arm of Sydney Water. They're now back in as part of Sydney Water, they're not out on their own. Bushells make tea and coffee. Uncle Tobys make breakfast cereals and HPM make electrical fittings.

PN1757

Have you ever been engaged to do an assessment type job in a hire company before?---No.

PN1758

Do you believe that the actual skills and competencies with personnel in the manufacturing type industry would be in your opinion close to hire industry?---Yes.

PN1759

In what way, could you explain?---Apart from perhaps some of the low voltage electrical work, and even that in hydraulic systems now, I believe a good maintenance - mechanical maintenance person in one of these industries could easily walk into Coates Hire and be a good mechanical maintenance person at Coates Hire.

PN1760

So, in these companies that you've listed there are they practising using the manufacturing industry competencies?---They all are, yes.

PN1761

And in your opinion how is that working, going well?---Yes. Yes, it's - it's going all right. What more can I say than that, it's going all right.

PN1762

Do you feel that based on your knowledge and experience, including doing assessments with these other companies and then coming into Coates Hire and doing assessments there do you feel that the - some competency units of - I'll put it a different way. Do you feel that all the competency units that you assessed in Coates were appropriate?---Yes, I do. I found evidence that people were performing those functions.

PN1763

Every element, every unit of competency?---There was odd ones that weren't. There was one in the electrical - diagnose and repair low voltage electrical equipment that referred to an oscilloscope. Coates Hire don't have an oscilloscope so to say I'm sure that I felt confident that they could do it all.

PN1764

But did you feel that that was appropriate?---What do you mean by that was appropriate?

PN1765

That particular unit or element was appropriate when you were talking about the oscilloscope?---I've actually raised a question with the executive - national executive officer of MERS ITAB because it's the only specific piece of equipment that's mentioned in an element in that unit of competency. The rest of it is about a skill that would be transferable between pieces of equipment and then all of a sudden you mention a specific piece of equipment which - I'll be honest, most of the guys said they had never seen one. Having said that, I also believe that those that I found to be competent in that unit would easily pick up the skill required to operate an oscilloscope effectively.

PN1766

Would that same opinion still apply to order materials as far as the competency.....work place requirement?---We went over work place order materials a lot yesterday. Where - for those people that I said I - I believe they're competent in that skill nothing happened yesterday that changed my mind.

PN1767

I'll put the question again. Do you think that that relevant unit fits in with the work place environment?---I certainly do, yes.

PN1768

Or the fitters that you assessed?---For all the ones that I assessed on that unit, yes.

PN1769

You've made mention before of the oscilloscope and you've actually used the comment of non applicable in the assessment work books - - -?---Yes.

PN1770

- - - on a couple of occasions I think?---Yes, I - I'd imagine in the early stages I put non applicable and then as the assessments progressed I probably just put a line through it.

PN1771

Well, there was a couple of - there was that particular one that you were talking about on the oscilloscope and there was another one where you've marked non applicable. It was with Martin Oldfield's assessment and it was to do with 9.11A, point 1(2) which is page 3 of 51?---I'll have to ask. Thank you. Yes.

PN1772

In what context do you use the word non applicable or the lettering NA?---I would suggest that what Martin presented - I suppose by saying non applicable the cost of what he did didn't come into it.

PN1773

So is that based on evidence or your opinion at that time?---Based on what he presented me and the fact that he manufactured it in Coates time I guess the cost does come into it from the Coates point of view but Martin never considered what it cost to be made.

PN1774

In what other context would you have used the non applicable - back to the oscilloscope?---I don't know.

PN1775

Can I just take you to the resource manual for registered industry assessors, MERS ITAB. There's a statement in there on page 3 and it starts with the process of assessing against competency standards and it actually states that the assessment candidate must meet all criteria within an element and/or elements within a competency unit to meet the requirements of that unit?---I'll take your word for that, - - -

PN1776

So by saying non applicable?---I think also in there somewhere, either in that book or in the implementation guide, but I can't tell you where, it also states that units can be modified to suit the particular work place requirements.

PN1777

Did you take that as your own decision to do that, to apply that?---Yes.

PN1778

So there was no consultation with anyone in the regards?---No.

PN1779

So possibly this skill, it may be taken out of Coates work place and taken to a different industry, it may be construed that that person is then competent, once given that competency that you've granted?---Yes.

PN1780

Did you actually verify the identify of each candidate before the assessment?---No.

PN1781

Why not?---I was provided with a list of names and they turned up. I - it never even entered my mind.

PN1782

It's just one of the requirements in the resource manual for an assessor to ensure the identity of each candidate. Were you aware of that?---I can't say I was, no. I never really thought about it.

PN1783

Did you record start and finish times for each assessment for each candidate?---No.

PN1784

Why not?---I didn't see any point in it. I never even thought about it.

PN1785

Did you have any of the candidates sign off on the completion of the assessment?---No.

PN1786

Why not?---Because it was a requirement of the company that they didn't.

PN1787

Sorry?---Well, the company - I was told I wasn't to sign off on any assessment until there'd been some review done of it. So if I get the candidate to sign off on it - - -

PN1788

Sorry, I'll reword that. Get the candidate to sign off as it - the assessment been completed?---No, I didn't, no. Can I elaborate on that, because there was a couple of people where we didn't actually finish the assessment on the day. Scott Brown, for instance, came back to see us a couple of days later with some more information. There was Michael Choice in Tamworth was going to fax through some information so - although he didn't do that. On the day that I was in Tamworth I couldn't necessarily get him to sign off that the assessment was complete because he was going to send some more information down.

PN1789

In your witness statement again, section 15, page 3 of 4, you've stated there that:

PN1790

Moreover, I didn't make extensive notes or comments simply because that would have taken too much of my time.

PN1791

?---Yes.

PN1792

Was there a time restriction put on you?---No. However, since you've referred to the Work Place Assessors Guides I'd suggest that in there it tells you that the thing - the assessment shouldn't be over-extended. I don't know the exact words.

PN1793

Over extended?---Well, you shouldn't - shouldn't take too long. I don't know the exact words, don't take a week to assess one unit.

PN1794

Again, if I could refer to your witness statement there's an attachment of an proposal to Coates - well, to the....., sorry. Page 5?---Is this - yes, all right, yes.

PN1795

Was this proposal accepted by the committee?---Which one are you talking about, there's attachment A and B there.

PN1796

Sorry. Attachment B?---Yes, it's in the minutes of the committee - I don't know whether it was accepted. Yes, the committee accepted it but it was actually written into the minutes of one of the committee meetings that - where Garry Woods accepted it. I don't - I can't tell you exactly which meeting it was.

PN1797

Okay, page 5, we're looking at the time frame. You've got part 4, which is carrying out the assessments, it's gone up to six months. Why have you made that estimation?---It depended on availability of people, although in the end I assessed 19 there was initially, I think, 26 or 27 on the list. They were spread out, the bulk were in Miranda but from there we spread out around the state. If you - if you're going to Coffs Harbour you don't get up there and back in a day. There was too many variables and people on leave.

PN1798

So you've allowed for the maximum amount of time?---Yes.

PN1799

Again, I've just got to ask, did anyone approach you and put a time restriction on the assessments themselves?---No. Although, again, I'd say in the minutes of one of the meetings initially we were to try and complete it by December and that was impossible. It was - it was too - it just wasn't going to happen and then I actually think, again, it's in the minutes somewhere that it would be finished by the end of February.

PN1800

But, again, there was no time restriction on the assessments - - -?---There was no time restriction on how - how long each one took but there was an estimate that each one would take - each person would take approximately a day.

PN1801

Do you see any benefits in recording what the actual points that I've asked you about, a person's ID; extensive notes and comments; start and finishing times, etcetera, etcetera. Do you see any benefit in recording such information on an assessment?---No.

PN1802

Are you aware, again, with the - I'm referring back to the Resource Manual - are you required to keep records for MERS ITAB?---Yes.

PN1803

Would it be fair to say that some possible reasons of keeping records is the possibility of an audit?---Yes.

PN1804

Would you agree that being detailed in making comments and recording information may assist in resolving any disagreements or disputes in the future?---I'm not sure how there'd be a disagreement over the information of the candidates. Well, - - -

PN1805

It may be up to the auditors?---Yes.

PN1806

Would there be sufficient information for the auditor?---In my files back at Bankstown I probably have - had sufficient information because for all the candidates I looked up their training records. Again an advantage of being a member of the TAFE system.

PN1807

Would you agree that detailed reporting of information as previously mentioned would assist in the review of your assessment method for future jobs?---I don't see how. I don't see how it would help what - what we've been going through here but I - I agree under an auditing system I should have better records of who these people are, yes.

PN1808

Can I ask you this, in hindsight would you have recorded the assessments differently?---In hindsight after yesterday and today, yes, I wouldn't have put any comments down.

PN1809

None at all?---No, because the only questions I've been asked are where I've put a comment down. Where I've put no comment you haven't asked me anything. Maybe that's being a little bit - there are - there are a number of things that have changed, as do change ever time I do one of these assessments. One of them being earlier on before we got to this stage where a number of people from Coates said why didn't you collect the candidates work books. What I do now is make sure that everybody knows that the candidates work books are their study notes, they're not part of the assessment as such. They're there to allow them to prepare for the assessment. I'd also say if these guys were going for a qualification I'd take - I'd have to get all these details.

PN1810

Are you aware that some of the competency units that you've assessed have a list of prerequisite units?---Yes.

PN1811

What's your understanding of those prerequisite units in the process of assessment?---All the candidates assessed were deemed to be competent by the committee prior to my involvement in any of the prerequisite units because the prerequisite units fell into their base, therefore it was not my role to assess the prerequisites.

PN1812

In that you've said it's because they feel into the base?---Well, that - that was out of - I had nothing to do with that. The committee decided what units were in the base.

PN1813

The committee informed you of that, did they?---Yes.

PN1814

What assessment - sorry, Mr Nelson, you being a qualified assessor, what assessment method was used in the assessment process that you exercised?---You want a name applied to is, I assume?

PN1815

Well, I just - yesterday I heard the word simulation - simulated?---Yes, that was part of the assessment process. There was questioning, re-questioning. There was listening. For example, I might say, well, now we're going to move on to the hydraulics. You've had a look through the information, give me an overview of where you perform these duties.

PN1816

In your opinion as a qualified assessor, is that the best method to use in an assessment, which is what you've just stated; simulation and questioning?---What - what is a best method. I think in this situation it was a - a very effective method.

PN1817

Could you expand on that? Why do you say it was effective?---Well, it worked.

PN1818

In what sense did it work?---The candidates were able to demonstrate their knowledge and skills. Isn't that what the assessment's about?

PN1819

I'm asking you as a qualified assessor.

PN1820

MUNRO J: Well, you've got the answer, I think, Mr Flaiban. It's argumentative to add that.

PN1821

MR FLAIBAN: My apologies.

PN1822

The actual assessment methods that you talked about, was that endorsed by the committee?---The process of giving the work, their copy of the work book and then my use of the assessor's work book, yes it was, yes.

PN1823

I'm talking about the actual method; simulation, questioning?---I don't know. I don't know whether the committee ever endorsed it.

PN1824

Should you have consulted with someone about that?---Yes, and I did. Somewhere in the minutes at all there'll be a statement about a meeting to take place between John Brunskill and David Tiller and myself and we would agree with what was in the work books and the overall process of how the assessments would take place and all that.

PN1825

I understand, yes, the overall process. I'm just talking about the actual method itself?---I think - at that meeting we agreed on the method and I - no, I don't think it was - I don't think the method was ever presented to the committee, no.

PN1826

MUNRO J: While you're on the subject, Mr Nelson, Mr Tiller and Mr Brunskill on my perusal of some of the material in Mr Hogg's statement at least, I think, or of the minutes were effectively invited to be part of the assessment process that you were conducting. Is that the case?---They were.

PN1827

Mr Brunskill attended some of the assessments, Mr Tiller attended how many?---He attended one and an interview with one of the managers at Coates Hire.

PN1828

He attended on, which one?---I'd have to go back through, your Honour, I don't - - -

PN1829

Was it the first one, would you recall?---No, it wasn't the first one.

PN1830

I see. And how many did Mr Brunskill attend?---I - I may be out by one or two but 16, I think.

PN1831

16 of how many?---Of the 19.

PN1832

Of 19. And Mr Tiller's non attendance at the other ones what was that attributed to?---He didn't have the time.

PN1833

I see. So the original arrangement envisaged that you would conduct the assessments with Mr Tiller and Mr Brunskill free to attend - -?---Yes.

PN1834

- - - such of those as they wanted to?---Yes.

PN1835

And then Mr Tiller elected not to attend, in effect, because of other commitments?---Yes.

PN1836

Could I just take - because I think it may become important - the exhibit material is not yet in but it's part of Mr Hogg's evidence. Perhaps if you might glance at part of attachment B and part of attachment C to that material. I just want to - since it hasn't happened yet - confirm with you - perhaps you might just look at both those documents, more at the attachments if you could where there's longhand. Attachment B apparently is a letter that you sent to Mr Shaw, I think, and attached to it - and I'm not quite sure because I don't think there is any explanation of the attachment - there's some longhand notes, are those your writing?---That is my writing, yes.

PN1837

That represents your account, does it, of some of these - - -?---Some of the events that occurred, yes.

PN1838

Could you look at the other document. That's part of attachment C where I think it's generally described as Mr Hogg's statement as associated with correspondence that's on the file. How it came into the file I'm not entirely clear. Is that all of your writing? It purports to be an account, I think, of some meetings and some exchanges?---Yes. That is all my writing, yes.

PN1839

And does the first one reflect a meeting at which Mr Tiller was present with - I think it's Mr - the first page - Delavela, is it?---Delavale, yes.

PN1840

At which there was some discussion of, I think, ordering and customer service requirements?---Yes.

PN1841

And that's part of the background information you compiled for yourself and at various stages supplied to representatives of the company or to the competence, I'm not sure which, over some time?---Yes.

PN1842

Perhaps you might just pass them back. I wanted it to be on the record that you had identified those. I don't know that they need to be marked separately. Just for clarity I refer to the memorandum to Colin Shaw of Human Resources dated 11th April 2001, which is attachment B to the statement which I understand is to be produced by Mr Hogg and it includes a number of attachments, including e-mail letters and the like and the other document is part of attachment C which is to the same statement, seven or eight pages in Mr Nelson's hand outlining a number of meetings with particular representatives of Coates. Yes, I'm sorry, Mr Flaiban.

PN1843

MR FLAIBAN: That's all right.

PN1844

We were just on the point of assessment methods - just to summarise we were talking about the assessment method that you've chosen to use with simulation and questioning. Would it be - - -?---I think you could also add demonstration to that because in some cases there was a demonstration of skills.

PN1845

In some?---In some - well, the electrical, electronic measurement they were all required to demonstrate the use of the equipment.

PN1846

Was the simulation and questioning a large portion of the assessment method?---Yes. Questioning and simulation would have been the majority.

PN1847

Just to clarify something, I'll just refer to the proposal again that's in your witness statement and it's page 3 of attachment B. The second paragraph:

PN1848

Participants will be given a practical assessment against the units of competence listed beside their name in the aforementioned sheet in the last committee meeting. This assessment includes all relevant underpinning knowledge, theory and the practical completion of units being assessed.

PN1849

How would you interpret?---Practical assessment can take many forms. It doesn't - I would ask the question - I'll throw this back on you. Would you want me to take Mr Finlay out to the workshop and have him pull apart a perfectly good machine to practically demonstrate that he can pull the hydraulic system apart and follow the system through?

PN1850

Is it protocol to answer? In actual fact if you're asking my opinion I would certainly - the best method - the best method is certainly not one - one sole method, a combination but the best method is observation. Actually observing someone?---I'll give you an example, and I think I gave this to the work place committee, where observation becomes an impossibility.

PN1851

Why is that, Mr Nelson?---Well, not an impossibility, impractical. I use the example of the Australian Water Technology job. For those of you that don't know where Jamisontown is, for those of you that were there yesterday and heard where I live, I live at Penrith. I normally just say Penrith because people know where that is. Jamisontown they don't know. Part of the assessment with Australian Water Technology was done at Bondi sewerage treatment plant. The guys work 24 hour shifts. A breakdown occurs once every whenever. The guy's going to ring me at home to come and observe a break - a repair of a breakdown that's going to take him half an hour to repair but he's going to stand around and wait while I come all the way down. Breakdowns can't be planned, they just happen.

PN1852

Again, who determines if that's practical or not?---I don't even know if it's in the - in the minutes. It was me.

PN1853

Thank you. Would it be correct to say that judgments made on competence are based on evidence provided to you?---Yes.

PN1854

Was the authenticity of the evidence provided to you in your opinion beyond reasonable doubt?---The authenticity - can I ask you to maybe expand on that a little bit. I don't - - -

PN1855

Was it the person's material, was it factual; the references made, were they true? So was the authenticity beyond reasonable doubt?---I'm - I - yes, I believe it was, yes, based on what was presented to me.

PN1856

Unequivocally beyond reasonable doubt?---I'd almost say what is beyond reasonable doubt?

PN1857

As a qualified assessor is there anything that would have moved you to a - to an opinion that it would have been unequivocally beyond reasonable doubt?---What was unequivocally beyond reasonable doubt? The evidence presented?

PN1858

Correct. Is there anything that you as an assessor could have done to ensure that that was the case?---I don't think so, no.

PN1859

Were you satisfied that one piece of evidence was sufficient to enable you to make judgment?---Are you talking about each tick that I put in each box?

PN1860

Well, evidence in general. Was one piece of evidence - - -?---If the evidence wasn't convincing I sought more evidence and when I sought more evidence if that wasn't convincing then they didn't get a tick in the box.

PN1861

Given the product range of Coates equipment we could say there is a lot, a large product range within Coates?---I'd say that's a matter of opinion.

PN1862

Could I suggest that there is close to 100?---All right, yes, okay.

PN1863

How many did you actually use in the assessment process?---I don't know. I don't know. I never took note of it to be honest with you.

PN1864

Did you record - when you say you didn't take notes so I assume then you didn't take record of any serial numbers?---No.

PN1865

No model descriptions?---No. I'd even like to add to that. What's the difference between the hydraulics on one compaction roller to a different model of compaction roller.

PN1866

That's up to the assessor to determine?---It's all hydraulics.

PN1867

Just one last question, Mr Nelson, and it just goes back - I'm just trying to cover something I don't think I've - the question I wanted to ask. When I was asking about your qualifications as an assessor have you attended a training course on the competency standards approved?---Yes. That was brought up yesterday, although I didn't mention what it was and in my thoughts during the night I'd like to add a statement to what was said yesterday because that was where I first met John Brunskill. That was a course conducted by a combination of John Brunskill and a gentleman by the name of John Smith who was in AI Group, at that time was an AI Group. I think his card called him a training adviser. Heavily involved in the development of the MERS ITAB competency standards and I felt in some ways that it was being implied that Mr Brunskill and I are friends and in some way I'd say Mr Brunskill and I are friends.

PN1868

I wasn't leading you - - -?---No, no, no, that's all right.

PN1869

MUNRO J: Allow Mr Nelson to say what he wants.

PN1870

MR FLAIBAN: Thank you, your Honour, sorry.

PN1871

THE WITNESS: Having said that I know Mr Brunskill's wife's name is Carol but I've never met her. I know Mr Smith's name, if you consider he's from the other side of the dispute. His wife's name is Margaret. I've met her on a number of occasions and I've had a cup of tea in her house so does that mean I'm perhaps more biased towards the AI Group view than the union view? I'd say no. That involvement was to do with the standards, not with the assessment.

PN1872

MR FLAIBAN: That's all from me, your Honour.

PN1873

MUNRO J: Yes, thank you, Mr Flaiban. Mr Shaw?

PN1874

MR SHAW: Thanks, your Honour.

<EXAMINATION BY MR SHAW [11.09am]

PN1875

MR SHAW: You earlier spoke about being intimidated at a meeting - I think it was around the 19th of March?---It was the 19th. Yesterday there was dates mentioned of the 20th but having looked at that information that was there and looked at some of my notes last night it was actually the 19th, yes.

PN1876

Why did you feel intimidated?---Because there was a lot of pressure being put on me to change the results.

PN1877

Who else - you said there was John Meek, Steve Hogg, yourself, Garry Woods; who else was at that meeting?---Malcolm Davidson.

PN1878

MUNRO J: Who is Malcolm Davidson, I don't know of him?---Malcolm Davidson was the General Manager of Coates Hire at the time. Alec MacFarlane - Alec MacFarlane is effectively the manager of Skills Pro, the unit that I work for, and Gordon McLean who is - his title is Program Manager, Materials and Engineering, I think. I'm not sure of his full title. He's a TAFE employee that would be a higher level than Mr MacFarlane, I suppose.

PN1879

MR SHAW: How did you react to that feeling of being intimidated?---Well, I stayed there. I wasn't comfortable but I stayed.

PN1880

What is your understanding of your obligations to Coates Hire in this assessment process?---My obligation to Coates Hire? My obligation to the system, which part of the system I believe is Coates Hire, is to find the truth and report on that.

PN1881

How much time did you spend with John Meek in verifying your findings?

PN1882

MUNRO J: Which findings are you referring to?

PN1883

MR SHAW: From the candidates' assessments?---On which occasion?

PN1884

Well, in total?---I've got no idea. I spoke to him - when he was available after each assessment at Miranda I spoke briefly to him. He was - after the meeting where everyone was there on the 19th he and Steve Hogg - that meeting went from roughly I'd say about 10.30 to some time around 12. Most people left. Steve Hogg, John Meek and myself went and had lunch and came back and talked for another three or four hours that afternoon. Steve Hogg and John Meek came back to Bankstown the following day on the 20th. I think they arrived about 11 and maybe left around 5 but I'm - I don't have a record of the times as such.

PN1885

MUNRO J: This is March you're referring to?---This is March, yes. And then again on the - that's the 19th and the 20th and on the 21st of March Steve Hogg and John Meek came back about lunch time. John Meek left around 4.30, 5 o'clock and Steve Hogg was there till 8 o'clock that night.

PN1886

The process to which Mr Shaw has referred of verification of findings, where did that fit into the - - -?---That's what those meetings were all about, discussing the findings and - - -

PN1887

That was what the meetings were about but was that part of the assessment process? Perhaps if I could put it to you this way. My understanding is that a copy of the draft report that was scheduled for around the 26th of February was supplied by you to Mr Meek on about the 13th of March?---That was Mr Hogg on the 13th of March.

PN1888

Mr Hogg on the 13th of March. At that stage it hadn't been supplied to Mr Brunskill, although he acknowledged that that later happened - - -?---That happened.

PN1889

- - - during that week but it had not been made to the competency committee to which it was, I thought, at one stage intended to be made and the company then sought to discuss the report with you, was it?---That's correct, yes.

PN1890

Was it the draft report or the final report?---I never considered it to be draft or final. It was just these were the findings that I came up with.

PN1891

I see, yes. Yes, I'm sorry, Mr Shaw.

PN1892

MR SHAW: No, that's okay. Maybe I.....my question about spending time with John Meek. I was referring to before the report being set up so while you were doing the assessments in validating the evidence you were given or got from the candidates?---I spent a limited amount of time with him.

PN1893

Limited?---Yes, I couldn't put a time on it but it was limited.

PN1894

Did you spend time with other members of Coates management in that same - - -?---Well, Victor Delavale. That was a few hours. That was when David Tiller was there. Charlie Aitken, I'm not sure of his title, he's the stores manager. I guess you guys will know that - that title better than I.

PN1895

And when you presented the report to the consultative committee, be it draft or whatever, on the 22nd of March?---22nd, yes.

PN1896

Had either Coates or the union had a detailed examination of the report?---If you consider the time that I spent with Steve Hogg and John Meek I think we had a pretty detailed examination there. I'd had - I'd had no question from either Mr Brunskill and in fact inquired as to whether or not - Pat Johnson's the union delegate that - I don't - I hadn't met him at that time but I was told that he would be involved in it. I don't think I'd met him anyhow. And he stated that not only had he not seen it, he didn't want to see it.

PN1897

Yesterday in your evidence you said that - you may have only been referring to one half of the meeting on the 20th - if I'm getting my dates right - or the 19th - - -?---The 19th was - - -

PN1898

- - - you spent time with John Meek and Steve Hogg from 1 o'clock or 2 o'clock to 5 o'clock?---Yes, lunch time on.

PN1899

And you only spent that time on one competency, one assessment, is that right?---Yes.

PN1900

The next day you spent the majority of the day with them as well?---Yes.

PN1901

So, how many competencies or assessments did you go through on that next day?---To summarise it what we argued about was not the individual results but the validity of the units of competence, whether or not they actually applied at Coates.

PN1902

So it sounds like it wasn't a really detailed examination?---It wasn't - - -

PN1903

I'm just trying to clarify that?---No, it wasn't a detailed examination, no. There were questions asked but every time it came down to an interpretation of sentences.

PN1904

MUNRO J: Sorry, interpretation of?---Sentences.

PN1905

I'm sorry, I don't understand. What do you mean by sentences?---Well, - and this is - this is just because this page is open I'll use this one as an example. I don't know whether it actually came up on the day. There's a sentence here that says:

PN1906

Where appropriate the costs associated with the manufacture of the objects can be calculated.

PN1907

There was a tendency to say these guys never calculate the cost. My argument would then be - or my discussion would then be, look, what about the two words where appropriate. If it's not appropriate for them to calculate the costs then of course they don't calculate the costs. This design one - I've already said we spent the first day discussing that. It became - that's what it generally, in my recollection, degenerated to an argument about the meaning of a sentence.

PN1908

MR SHAW: Were you, when you started your assessments, when you were gathering evidence, were you aware of the history of the competency issue at Coates Hire that had been going on for years?---I - I had some knowledge that it was going for some time because I'd been involved back towards the end of 99, I think it was, so I - although it was only at later discussions that I learned that it had been going for a lot longer than that.

PN1909

You had some idea that there had been an issue around for a few years?---Yes.

PN1910

In light of that, knowing that little bit, wouldn't it have been prudent in your experience to undertake a thorough assessment in relation to the evidence gathering recording that information?---I have never gathered the detail that I've gathered in this project and I would welcome someone presenting me information that said that they'd gathered the information that you're asking for. I should also point out that it was Coates Hire that invited me in to do this assessment. I can only assume because they were satisfied with what I'd done 12 months earlier.

PN1911

What was it you did 12 months earlier, sorry?---All right. You - you think I didn't gather enough evidence here. I assessed 12 people in a day.

PN1912

This is 12 months earlier, sorry?---12 months earlier, 12 people in one day at Coates Hire. They were allowed half an hour each and I think I did them on four units each.

PN1913

MR LLOYD: Is it all right if I say something?

PN1914

MUNRO J: Yes.

PN1915

MR LLOYD: That section 5 of your evidence where you say.....that I reviewed - this is the incident that you're talking about, 4 and 5, working at TAFE?---Yes.

PN1916

MR SHAW: I'm learning a bit myself here as we go along.

PN1917

MUNRO J: Was that based on self assessment materials or what was referred to as the self assessment - - - ?---Yes, they were given - they were given a self assessment guide but not a week beforehand. They were given it as they walked in the door.

PN1918

I see. Was that in conjunction with MISTAS then?---No.

PN1919

So that was later, the MISTAS decision?---MISTAS came on for this project. That was - I'm not even sure how we got invited in to do that.

PN1920

I'm sorry, Mr Shaw, but I just want to get clear on this myself. The 12 you assessed for four units each, what units did that assessment relate to? Were they post trade?---Yes, it was post trade material again.

PN1921

Similar to this sort of exercise?---They were different units and I must admit I'm relying a little bit on memory but I know one of the units was unit 18.20A, which is - I don't remember the exact title but it's to do with hydraulic components. It is a prerequisite for the unit that I assessed this round. At that time it was considered to be post trade, in this round it's considered to be part of the base. So there's been changes made to the base in that 12 period. A couple of other units that were in there were to do with low voltage electrical work and they were not considered in this round at all.

PN1922

Were the individuals, some of them, the same ones or were they - - -?---Yes, some of them were the same, yes.

PN1923

Very well?---Not all, but some.

PN1924

MR SHAW: In that assessment 12 months ago were any of those 12 assessed above a C10?---I never looked at the classification, that wasn't what I was asked to do.

PN1925

MUNRO J: Your assessment was for the purpose of whether they were competent in designated modules?---That's right.

PN1926

Or designated standard items?---Yes.

PN1927

And that report went to whom? To the competency committee or to Coates?---No, there wasn't a committee involved in it at that time. I - I'm - actually I think it went to Mr Flaiban but I'm not sure.

PN1928

Was it a written report?---Yes.

PN1929

MR SHAW: Just a few more. When were the candidates given their work books in relation to when they were assessed?---The majority were given - I'd have to look up dates, I must admit, but the majority - the ones that were available in the metropolitan area or at Coates Hire were given their work books on the Tuesday and I honestly don't remember the dates.

PN1930

That's all right?---I think it was towards the end of November and then the first assessment took place the following Friday and they rolled out from there. I should add to that too that the people that were outside the metropolitan area presented another problem, although with other work that I do within TAFE providing staff development for metal trades teachers on the competency standards I managed to deliver some of these other work books in conjunction with some work I was doing for TAFE, so the guy at Lithgow who later pulled out of the process, Michael Choice at Tamworth and Dan Bailley at Coffs Harbour were given those work books at that time and they had them for a number of weeks before their assessments took - took place. It's terrible, I can't remember his name. The gentleman from Wagga he was going on holiday so I actually delivered his work book to Miranda so it went through the internal mail and got down to him on the Friday because I was actually going down there the next week but he actually wasn't going to be there. I rang him on the Friday and we had a length phone conversation over it.

PN1931

So those work books you used in your face to face assessment time you spent with the candidates?---Mm.

PN1932

And you never used it post that period? You never took the work books with you to - - -?---I never took the candidate's work books with me, no.

PN1933

In relation to Mr Forest's assessment on the welding you said that he showed you some of the work he'd actually done?---Yes.

PN1934

How did you know that he'd actually done that work?---Well, I made the assumption that he's the only boilermaker in the place, so I made an assumption. Plus I actually - not during the assessment process but probably the day before I actually saw him working on the equipment so it wasn't - it wasn't his formal assessment but he was doing the work. The timing might be out, it might not have been the day before, it might have been the day before that.

PN1935

You also made reference to a TAFE system to check Mr Forest's certificates, is that an internal TAFE system record?---Yes. When Mr Flaiban asked about keeping records TAFE is generally quite good at keeping records.

PN1936

So did you print off the history of his success attaining those certificates?---No.

PN1937

Shouldn't that be part of the evidence or in the assessment of his work book?---I considered it sufficient to see that it had been done.

PN1938

Just in relation to some of the order materials competency with other candidates, did you site the standard operating procedures that the company has?---Yes, yes, I've got a copy of them actually, yes. They bear no resemblance to what the work - I don't like to use the term workers but there's no reference to what people below branch managers do.

PN1939

Just in relation to Mr Brown's evidence we were talking about a $200 float?---Mm.

PN1940

I think you mentioned that there were some other candidates that had this $200 float, which is ex-Steins?---Yes.

PN1941

Did you inquire of management as to whether that float's actually used?---Well, - and I think I said it yesterday but I may not have - Vic Delavale the - whatever his title is - was - as a manager was the first one that made me aware of this $200 float and that these people used it.

PN1942

Is Vic an ex-Steins persons as well?---Yes, he is, yes.

PN1943

But we don't know if they actually used that float?---Well, they claim they do and they simply top it up from petty cash when they get back to the branch that they're - well, I shouldn't say when they get back to the branch. If they're doing the work out - if they're doing it down in Wagga, for instance, and a lot of them travel to Wagga when there's a lot of work down there or places down in the country they'll often top it back up at that branch but if they go out to - out Bathurst, say, and then come back to their branch in Sydney then they'll get it refunded at the branch in Sydney. That was basically confirmed by the branch managers.

PN1944

MUNRO J: Perhaps on that point - I don't want to interrupt but it might resolve this point - the document to which I referred which is dated 6th of December, this is your longhand note of the interview with Mr Delavale in the presence of Mr Tiller, item 1 reads:

PN1945

Some small suppliers don't use a delivery docket, only an invoice. Three -

PN1946

and it's crossed out four:

PN1947

.... field service guys carry a float of cash. They have to bring back receipts and fill out paper work to replenish the float. All field service guys acquire parts from local suppliers when required.

PN1948

That's probably the end of that note on that particular point. Do you confirm that basically with the - - -?---Yes.

PN1949

- - - material you're acting on?---Yes.

PN1950

MR SHAW: You mentioned yesterday in relation to Mr Morris having purchased parts from Dick Smiths, is that right?---Yes, I think that's what's in the notes.

PN1951

It might sound like a trivial question but do you know what parts he purchased from Dick Smiths?---Basically electronic connections. That's the type of work he does.

PN1952

Just a few more. In your statement you indicate - you say in your last statement at paragraph 17 talking about the work you performed is $63,000 for the work. What relevance does that have to this Board of Reference hearing? I'm not quite sure why that's in here?---That's in there because when Mr Terzic asked me I gave him the answer.

PN1953

And one final one, when Mr Flaiban was asking you some questions you started answering by - I'm not sure what the question was but you stated that you were told that the company would have a review of the final report. Is that correct, a final review?---Yes, that'd be correct. Yes, that's what I said, yes.

PN1954

Who would have told you that information?---Garry Woods.

PN1955

So all along, in your view, the company would have that final review of the report in your understanding?---Yes.

PN1956

I've nothing further, your Honour.

PN1957

MUNRO J: Mr Stewart?

PN1958

MR STEWART: Thank you, your Honour.

<EXAMINATION BY MR STEWART [11.31]

PN1959

MR STEWART: Mr Nelson, how long have you been a fitter and machinist?---I started my apprenticeship in 1969 so what's that, 44 years.

PN1960

And what was some of the organisations you were employed by prior to being employed by TAFE?---Hi-Craft Carpets; D. Roberts Engineering - they're a small tooling shop in Five Dock; Beacon Cables; I also had an interesting job for a while working for Westfield shopping centres. Who else did I work for?

PN1961

That's fine. You've previously stated that you have been employed by TAFE since 1978, is that correct?---Yes.

PN1962

In your view does TAFE hold a high standard within the community?---Yes.

PN1963

Why do you believe that?---Maybe it's a heart thing. No, it's surprising doing what I'm doing how many times private providers of the same service are involved but when it comes to certificate people will come back to TAFE and say I've been deemed competent in all these units of - out of the standards, can I get a TAFE qualification for it. So Fraser Nelson Educational Assessments is often used - and I'm only using that as an example, I don't have a private business - is often used in the process but all of a sudden when they want the qualification - TAFE goes well. That's what people are looking for.

PN1964

Do you believe that you're a competent assessor?---Yes.

PN1965

In your view does TAFE regard you competent in your current and previous roles within TAFE?---Yes.

PN1966

In the Coates Hire assessment process do you believe that you were being impartial?---I know I was being impartial.

PN1967

In regard to Australian Water Technologies, Bushells, Uncle Tobys and HPM, the work that you've done with those companies were those companies happy with your work?---Yes. I - I reserve HPM because I'm currently working there.

PN1968

Did those organisations question your competency as an assessor?---Never.

PN1969

Were you and are you satisfied with the assessment process within Coates?---Yes.

PN1970

Has anyone from the AMWU ever leaned on you to do a Hopowardi on Coates?---No. Never.

PN1971

What I mean by that, has anyone from the AMWU ever leaned on you to give false assessment processes in favour of - - -?---Never. Apart from Mr Brunskill - I was going to say I've never met anyone from the AMWU until the committee meeting where everything blew up but that's not quite true because Bruce O'Keefe was involved with the AWT exercise and I've met him a couple of times but only with that. Nothing to do with Coates.

PN1972

For the record, your Honour, Bruce O'Keefe works at the Granville office which doesn't have jurisdiction over Miranda. If an assessor supposedly mucked it up for any other organisation would you expect that assessor to be rehired for any further work, in your view?---No.

PN1973

Do you act in a professional manner, in your view, as an assessor?---Yes.

PN1974

In your view is it important as an assessor to be objective and impartial and to allow the standards process in the award and the implementation guide to occur?---It's essential.

PN1975

In relation to Coates Hire, in your view, did you follow the National Metals and Engineering Competency Standards with integrity and expertise?---Yes.

PN1976

In respect to evidence required by the National Metals and Engineering Competency Standards for welding units are you satisfied that were adhered to in relation to Coates Hire workers that you assessed?---Yes.

PN1977

Why is that?---Well, I - as a maintenance fitter I had - I have no qualifications in welding but I have extensive experience. That was just the type of work I enjoyed doing but to confirm that, (1) Mr Brunskill, who's a boilermaker by trader and therefore qualified in the welding area was present at the assessment and I also, as stated yesterday, spoke to Peter Cryer who's on the Standards Committee - I think he's the Chair of the Standards Committee at the moment - dealing with the standards that were relevant in this case. Peter Cryer's also - he's also a program manager with responsibility in TAFE for all welding and fabrication training throughout New South Wales.

PN1978

Despite not necessarily being familiar with all Australian Standards within welding in your view, Mr Nelson, provided that you follow the National Metals and Engineering Competency Standards process could you properly assess a worker at Coates against those standards?---Yes, I could.

PN1979

Do you have any qualifications in occupational health and safety?---No.

PN1980

In relation to statutory declarations by Steven Leslie Hogg, which I'm informed are dated 26 April, are you familiar with those statutory declarations?---I've been given a copy of them, yes.

PN1981

For the record I'm reading AIGBR3, Steven Leslie Hogg:

PN1982

On Tuesday the 20th of March 2001 during a meeting between John Meek, Fraser Nelson and myself to discuss the evidence gathering and evidence gathering during assessment Fraser Nelson stated about the results if he mucked it up for Coates Hire then he would probably never work for Coates Hire again but if he mucked it up for the union he probably would never work in this field again.

PN1983

Do you believe that this statement is an attack on your professional integrity?---I think the statement's been made out of context. To put one sentence paragraph in there and leave the rest of the conversation out, yes, then I guess it is an attack on my integrity, yes.

PN1984

Do you believe that statement is accurate, put in context?---No, I don't believe it's accurate. Where it says but if he mucked it up for the union that was never - I never said if I mucked it up for the union because I wasn't undertaking any assessments based on what the union wanted or what Coates wanted. I was undertaking the assessments based on finding the truth. The statement was made because I was under pressure to change what I'd found or I felt under pressure to change what I'd found.

PN1985

In relation to further statutory declaration reference BRAIG4, which I'm told is dated the 26th of April 2001, Steven Leslie Hogg:

PN1986

On Wednesday the 21st of March 2001 during a meeting between Fraser Nelson and myself to further discuss the evidence gathered during assessments Fraser Nelson stated about the results: If Coates don't get the result they wanted I won't be asked to work there again but if the union don't get the results they want I probably won't work again.

PN1987

Do you believe that statement is an attack on your - - -?---Yes.

PN1988

- - - professional integrity?---I do believe it's an attack.

PN1989

Is that statement accurate put in context?---No. I - I at that time, as I stated earlier, I'd had no contact with any union official so I'd ask the question how did I know what the union want. Sure I knew what each individual wanted. They wanted a tick for each unit but they didn't get that either. They got what I believed to be the truth.

PN1990

In regard to a further statutory declaration which I'm told is dated the 26th of April 2001, BRAIG5, John Meek, which reads as follows:

PN1991

During a meeting on the 20.3.01 at Skills Pro offices In Bankstown between myself, Steven Hogg and Fraser Nelson Mr Nelson made a statement to the following effect: If Coates Hire are upset by my report then I won't work for Coates Hire again and maybe Coates Hire will have influence with one or two other companies who won't use me but if the AMWU are upset then he may never work -

PN1992

and it's got in brackets: do assessments again. Do you believe that that statement is an attack on your professional integrity?---I believe that statement's probably closer to what was said. I did look at these last night. Again, it was taken out of context or on it's own it doesn't tell the whole story but I believe that that statement would be a pretty accurate account of that one sentence in the conversation.

PN1993

MUNRO J: Was Alec MacFarlane, who's one of your senior - - -?---He's classed as the manager of Skills Pro, yes.

PN1994

Was he present at that discussion?---No, he wasn't present at the discussion.

PN1995

At which that conversation was alleged to have occurred?---No, he wasn't there. I actually think the conversation came about because Garry Woods contacted him and he relayed comment from Garry Woods and that's, I think, how the conversation came about.

PN1996

What was the date of the meeting at which Mr MacFarlane was there, the 19th, was it?---The 19th, yes.

PN1997

I see, yes. There is an account of Mr MacFarlane's contact with you in a memorandum which is annotated this document was not sent but attached to your response to Colin Shaw's fax dated 11 April 2001. I'm not sure the fax and the response to it, letter sent is on the documents that have been put on?---I don't think the dates would have been the same. I think the reason it wasn't sent was that there was a committee meeting the next day so I never actually sent it.

PN1998

I see. But that was part of the attachment to the letter of 11 April, was it?---Yes.

PN1999

MR STEWART: Mr Nelson, in relation to the statutory declarations that were read out have you ever been subjected to those types of references before in your professional career?---Never.

PN2000

In relation to assessment processes within Coates Hire in identifying the candidates when you first met the candidates did they identify themselves to you?---The distribution of the work books at the meeting at Miranda where I discussed what was going on I actually handed the work books individually out so it gave me an idea of who the people were. Did they identify themselves, I - I don't know. In some cases Mr Forest came in with them and said this is whoever it is and in other cases maybe not, no. For instance, in the first project at Miranda I had dealings with Graham Finlay so I don't think he did identify himself. I just knew who he was. I don't know how you answer that one.

PN2001

Did the candidates have their names on their overalls?---Some would have their first name on, that was all, yes. Overalls or work shirts or whatever.

PN2002

Did the company ever introduce you to the candidates?---No.

PN2003

Was there any reason for you to doubt the identity of the candidates?---No.

PN2004

Moving on in terms of time for assessment - assessment process. In relation to time for assessment would you make professional judgment as to how long it may take to assess people, professional judgement.....?---Professional judgment, I made an assessment that on average, based on the number of units on average again for each candidate, that it would take around about a day to do each - to cover each candidate, given that they were given the work books and they could do some preparation. Like I said some went rather - some went quicker than others. Some were there all day and then provided information later on. I didn't put any time restraint on it as such. If there was a need to come back the next day we would have - I would have.

PN2005

In relation to live assessments, on the job assessments to the best of your knowledge does the National Metals and Engineering Competency Implementation Guide state that you must write down serial numbers from machines that you're assessing workers on?---I've never read it anywhere.

PN2006

In the meeting you state you felt intimidated where, to the best of your knowledge, were there any AMWU members present at that meeting; to the best of your knowledge?---No.

PN2007

In all the assessments you were involved in in regard to workers on the job did any worker identify themselves as an AMWU member?---No.

PN2008

No further questions, your Honour.

PN2009

MUNRO J: Mr Lloyd?

PN2010

MR LLOYD: Mr Nelson, you've mentioned that you were a maintenance fitter, a fitter machinist in various capacities, how did you become a TAFE teacher?---I applied for the job and got it. In - to relate the story I had gone back to where I served my time at Hi-Craft Carpets and we were installing a machine that was being brought up from Melbourne. I was working 13 day fortnights and 12 hour days. That really meant a 13 hour day because we had two half hour breaks that weren't included in that 12 hours. My wife saw the add in a Sunday paper one day. When I got home she said why don't you apply for that and I said, no, they wouldn't - no, no, I'm happy doing what I'm doing, I'm making plenty of money. About three weeks later the add was in again. She said I would really appreciate you being home a bit more often, how about you apply for this job. I applied and got the job.

PN2011

You applied for TAFE - I mean, you're a fitter/machinist, you've got no capacity whatsoever to talk to students, I presume. The most you would have addressed is a mass meeting, maybe not even that?---Not even that, no. TAFE training or teacher training at that time - and I believe it still is, although there hasn't been many new teachers in fitting machining in the last 15 years - was done in service. You in fact - to become a teacher you did a - an eight hour trade test. It was conducted at Sydney Technical College on a Saturday. You went down there and it was four hours of practical, four hours of theory related subjects. Based on those results you were called into an interview panel. If you gave all the right answers at the interview panel you got a job.

PN2012

Having got the job, how did you learn to train and assess?---Well, I was an unusual one. I actually started on the 3rd of the 4th. Teacher training only ever started at the beginning of the year or mid year. How did I learn to train and assess? Those first few months until teacher training started were extremely difficult. I arrived at Penrith Tech Monday afternoon 4.30 to be informed that I was on class the next morning. How did I learn to train and assess, I think every tradesman does it every day on the job.

PN2013

But eventually, of course, you finished teacher training and became qualified as a trainer assessor - - -?---Eventually yes.

PN2014

So you are a qualified trainer assessor as we call them?---Yes.

PN2015

Which is above a work place assessor 4, yes?---I have a Diploma of Teaching Technical issued by UTS.

PN2016

Issued by UTS?---Mm.

PN2017

Have you trained apprentices?---Before or after TAFE? Before or during TAFE?

PN2018

Both if you like, preferably during your TAFE period?---During the TAFE period, yes.

PN2019

How many?---Thousands. I don't know.

PN2020

Was it your job to actually assess their competency in the areas you trained them in?---Yes.

PN2021

Was it your job to mark, for instance, examination of trade papers?---Not only mark them but part of my duties back when we had state wide examinations I've set two state wide exams.

PN2022

And in the course of apprenticeship training what was the dominant method of assessment of the apprentices' ability in all areas, not just, for instance, operation of a machine. Did you primarily assess them on the tool or off the tool?---A combination of both.

PN2023

Combination of both. Not one or the other?---No.

PN2024

I'm interested in whether you believe knowledge can be assessed by practical demonstration. Can I just give you an example that might help to illustrate what I'm trying to get at. Can you demonstrate why a thrust washer in a clutch has to be either one way or the other? Not how or whether it is but why? Can you demonstrate that practically or are you able to describe that?---You could - you'd have to give a description with the demonstration otherwise - - -

PN2025

Perhaps to carry it a bit further, does TAFE or any other organisation have clear plastic clutch housing so that they can actually see the thrust washer going backwards and forwards or do you have to describe that when it's in action?---I've never seen one.

PN2026

The point I'm trying to put to you is that some knowledge has to be demonstrated by description and interview, doesn't it?---Yes.

PN2027

It's not possible to do it any other way?---No.

PN2028

There's plenty of capacity for people to do a money see, monkey do operation on something, they don't necessarily know what they're doing unless you interview them?---That's correct.

PN2029

Have you ever trained people in post trade qualifications such as the old PTC certificates in hydraulics and pneumatics?---Extensively.

PN2030

A large number?---Mm.

PN2031

How did you assess those people?---Simulated demonstration. Mt Druitt, the college where I spent my later years of teaching, we have a very good - on college terms a very good set up for hydraulics and pneumatics. We would set tasks of - explain how this circuit functions so in essence it wasn't a practical demonstration but you'd have a circuit set up on a demonstration board and explain how it functions, explain what happens if the sequence valve's in around the wrong way and doesn't match - you're given a circuit diagram; does the circuit that's set up actually match the diagram that you've been given and of course it never did. It was always meant to be - find if they could do both.

PN2032

Would it be fair to say then that you're responsible for hundreds, if not thousands, of trade persons operating out there in the real life, responsible for their assessment and - - -?---Yes.

PN2033

- - - allowing them to be qualified?---Yes.

PN2034

Perhaps hundreds of post trades qualified people?---Yes.

PN2035

That would be a reasonable assumption. When you carry out an assessment of an apprentice or a post trades person, for the want of a better term, do you use extensive work books such as those you've used at Coates?---Never.

PN2036

Would it be reasonable to say that given the length of experience; 1978 you started as a teacher - when did you finish teaching, sorry?---Technically I'm still a teacher but I haven't taught for five years.

PN2037

So it would be reasonable to say we're looking at a period of up to 20 years?---Mm.

PN2038

During that 20 years it has not been your practice to put extensive notes on the work books of students?---No.

PN2039

Is it an assumption made generally within the TAFE system that teachers are there because of their expertise and therefore their judgment is accepted - - -?---Yes.

PN2040

- - - when it comes to the competence of the students?---Yes.

PN2041

As a side have you ever trained a Coates apprentice?---No.

PN2042

Bit of luck. You've also mentioned that you're the author of some national training materials in the area of hydraulics?---Mm.

PN2043

Any other areas of expertise aside from hydraulics?---Where I've been the author of materials?

PN2044

Or one of the.....?---There's a - some resource material running around on measurement which deals with mechanical production type measurement and basic electronic measurement. I was the author of that. I've - I've been the technical editor on a number of publications. There's also one that I was author of on machinery care and installation and I've also been a technical editor on a number of other publications to do with fitting and machining.

PN2045

Have you ever had any involvement or made contribution to the drafting of standards for the Manufacturing, Engineering or Related Services Industry Training Advisory Board?---I have - I produced a rather large report that didn't seem to go anywhere but direct involvement, yes, metal spinning standards. I nearly forgot about them. I was a member of the committee for those two units of competence.

PN2046

I wonder if you'd describe for us where exactly Skills Pro is located? I don't mean necessarily the physical location in a building in Bankstown but you are not a unit by yourself, are you?---No.

PN2047

Would you describe for us who else works on the floor and has a constant interaction with the staff at Skills Pro?---In general terms the people on the floor that I work on have responsibility for the curriculum and production of resource materials for all engineering and a large part of manufacturing in New South Wales.

PN2048

Including electrical engineering?---Including electrical engineering.

PN2049

Including fabrication?---Including fabrication.

PN2050

Is it true that Peter Cryer in fact works on the same floor as you?---He does.

PN2051

And Peter Cryer is considered to be one of the experts in trade curriculum for fabrication?---Most certainly.

PN2052

Is it also true tha the curriculum developed within ESD in your building on your floor is also the curriculum that now forms the basis of most of Queensland and Victoria's TAFE systems?---The student resource books that we produce or the unit produces - - -

PN2053

I'm sorry, I'm still using the word curriculum, of course we don't have that any more?---No, you're not allowed to use the word curriculum.

PN2054

Student resource books, yes?---The student resource books, which includes the curriculum, but the resource books are more than that, they are in essence a text book for that particular unit. We in fact sell - or the unit that I work for sells more of those inter state than they do within the state, so if they're not using it as the basis for their curriculum I don't know what they're doing.

PN2055

In your experience, both as a teacher and an assessor, as a consultant and also working within the curriculum development - sorry, student resource development process do the terms beyond reasonable doubt come up in the course of an assessment of an individual?---No, I've never used them.

PN2056

I'm not asking this frivolously because in an assessment sense it's rather difficult, isn't it, to determine someone's competence in an area beyond reasonable doubt? This is not an exact science is what I'm putting to you?---That's right, it is not an exact science.

PN2057

Perhaps in the case of fabrication the ability to apply a weld would be an example of how difficult it is to say that someone could like do a vertical up beyond reasonable doubt under all circumstances? I mean, if they'd had too much to drink the night before and had a shaky hand, for example?---I - I know welding teachers do it on a regular basis but no.

PN2058

In your experience as a consultant and also as a teacher - I assume that as a teacher you would also have gone into some work sites to look at the apprentices - - -?---A number.

PN2059

- - - on the job practice?---Mm.

PN2060

In your experience as a teacher and an assessor, companies like AWT, Bushells, would there be more than 10 different technologies in a place like Bushells or AWT? 50, 100?---What do you mean by different technologies.

PN2061

Mr Flaiban put to you earlier that there over 100 different machines, pieces of equipment. These could range from ladders right through to rollers, I imagine, in the Coates Plant Hire system. Would you come across 100 different technologies in your course of work as an assessor, as trainer?---I have difficulty with saying that all - even though there's 100 different pieces of equipment with brand names on them they're actually different equipment.

PN2062

You don't accept that a ladder and a piece of scaffolding is a different piece of equipment?---I - yes, they are different pieces of equipment.

PN2063

You can see what I'm getting at?---Yes, but a six foot ladder and a 12 foot ladder are still ladders.

PN2064

Are there substantial differences, in your opinion, between the machinery that you saw at Coates such that that machinery would be as different as say a smelting plant versus a car manufacturing plant?---I don't think there's that difference there, no.

PN2065

Is TAFE a registered training organisation?---It is.

PN2066

Is it subject to the audit procedures of the relevant state training authority?---Yes.

PN2067

Who else other than TAFE carries out assessments such as those that are under discussion here at Coates Plant Hire?---There are a number of private providers but I don't know - I couldn't give you names.

PN2068

Are they also subject to audit procedures?---Yes.

PN2069

Has Skills Pro ever been audited by the state training authority?---No.

PN2070

But it would not have to be, would it, because it works under TAFE who is the registered training organisation?---Well, actually TAFE New South Wales is divided into 11 institutes and the open training education network and each one of those individually is a registered training organisation, so - but, yes, the institute I - we're based in is Southern Sydney and it's subject to the audit process, yes.

PN2071

Is it correct that other registered training organisations train employees internal to companies in work place assessor for qualifications?---Yes.

PN2072

Have you carried out such a training program?---No.

PN2073

Has TAFE New South Wales carried out such a program?---I'm sure they do, yes.

PN2074

How long does it take you to train a person internal to a plant to become a work place assessor?---I believe the training is about two and a half days.

PN2075

So in two and a half days a person is trained to be making assessments that you've made in this particular instance similar to the ones you've made in Coates Plant Hire, yes?---That's what I believe, yes.

PN2076

Do work place assessors that you - have you met a work place assessor 4 in a company; have you come across such people that have been trained in such a program?---Have I come across people that - in the work place that have been trained - yes, yes.

PN2077

Bushells or AWT?---HPM.

PN2078

HPM?---Yes.

PN2079

Do such people use similar procedures as you use in order to carry out an assessment as to a person's competence?---I have never seen anyone go to the depth that I've gone to on this project, never. Seeing as how I used HPM as the example, why am I in there? Because they wanted the independent. They have their registered - their trained work place assessors.

PN2080

You were shown a document earlier, a MERS ITAB document, resource manual. Is that the - that one, yes. Is that document still current to your knowledge?---I - I honestly don't know. I can't tell you the last time I looked at it. I don't think it's on their web site.

PN2081

So you're not aware whether that document is current or not current?---No, I'm not aware, no.

PN2082

Are you familiar with the industry training advisory board that governs work place assessments?---Not with the board, no.

PN2083

You're not aware that in fact the standards set for work place assessments are actually conducted by someone other than MERS ITAB, is set by someone other than - - -?---Yes, I've got a copy of that sitting on my desk, yes.

PN2084

Is that documents commonly used in Skills Pro?---When you become a MERS ITAB registered assessor you get a copy of that document.

PN2085

Could I just get that clear; when you became or when anyone becomes?---I believe when anyone becomes.

PN2086

Who hired you to work at Coates Plant Hire in the second instance that you went there?---The phone call came from Steve Hogg.

PN2087

Who is?---Their training manager.

PN2088

Their training manager?---I attended a committee meeting, that's what I was invited to. I was asked to submit a proposal.

PN2089

Asked by whom?---I'd suggest Garry Woods but I'm not - I couldn't be 100 per cent sure on that. Garry seemed to chair the meetings when I was invited along.

PN2090

You're a consultant?---Mm.

PN2091

Who was your contract with?---We don't have a contract. The proposal was put. There were some amendments made. That's if you - it was an attached - the two attachments on my witness statement. There was a draft proposal put then there was an amended proposal submitted so the draft was presented to the committee on the 11th of the 9th or thereabouts. The amended proposal was presented to the committee on the 3rd of the 10th. I believe at that same meeting or perhaps the one after because AI Group MISTAS joint proposal was also in at the same time but it was put that it be read into the minutes of the meeting that these proposals be accepted but there was never any contract signed.

PN2092

So as far as you were aware who was to pay the bill of the cost you specified on the second last page of your - - -?---I - I sent the bill to Steve Hogg. He was my initial contact with the company.

PN2093

Did you bill on a monthly basis, a weekly basis or at the end of your contract?---At the end of the project.

PN2094

Have you been paid?---I'm not sure.

PN2095

You don't handle the account side?---I don't handle the account side. I - I was asked to make contact because the bill had been sent and it had been some time - I don't know what the period is but it had been some time and payment hadn't been made. I contacted Steve Hogg trying to be - keep it friendly and he was quite friendly and he said no, he was aware of it and it was being processed. He'd got a reminder and it was being processed, so - but I haven't checked since then.

PN2096

So you were phoned, ask to attend a committee meeting. The committee was composed of?---....., Graham Finlay, Graham Forest, Martin Oldfield, Robert George - - -

PN2097

These are all maintenance employees of Coates?---All - they're four employees of - maintenance employees of Coates. John Meek, Steve Hogg, Garry Woods. Also in attendance would have been John Brunskill and David Tiller.

PN2098

And at that meeting you took it to be the case that you had been given a verbal contract to carry out the work you proposed in this document or did - - -?---Well, it's in the minutes of the meeting that I would meet with John Meek and - after the proposal being accepted I would meet with John Meek and we'd work out a timetable and I think that was done the same day.

PN2099

Why did they hire you, given that you had already been able to identify Tiller and Brunskill, people you knew to be in a similar area of work to you; did you know they were in a similar area of work?---I did, yes.

PN2100

In fact it would be fair to say that Brunskill's organisation MISTAS, and the AIG organisation that's equivalent to MISTAS, that are specified, I think still specified within the Federal Metal Industry Award were direct competitors with Skills Pro, weren't they?---Yes.

PN2101

In fact they've beaten you to get many contracts, haven't they?---Yes.

PN2102

So why, given those two gentlemen were there, were you brought into this?---I - I - I was brought in as an independent. I can only then assume that they brought into question what those two gentlemen done.

PN2103

What had they done, to your knowledge, Mr Brunskill and Mr Tiller, the AIG and MISTAS employees?---They'd conducted what I basically call a self evaluation process. They'd gone through a self evaluation process and if my memory serves me correctly they'd, in conjunction with the committee, carried or made decisions on people's competence.

PN2104

Had they created what is known in the business as a job model?---Yes.

PN2105

So they had done job models for the maintenance activity at Coates Miranda?---Yes.

PN2106

Any other Coates branches?---I'm not sure. I don't know whether they went outside of Miranda.

PN2107

Is it your understanding that Mr Tiller and Mr Brunskill had been hired by Coates to carry out that kind of work?---Mr Brunskill, I'm not sure of Mr Tiller. As an AI Group representative I'm not sure that he got paid for some of his work. I don't know.

PN2108

So, you understood that your job was to independently assess competency units against individuals that were a product of a process that Brunskill and Tiller had been involved in?---Yes.

PN2109

Why do you think you'd been asked to assess the work of Brunskill and Tiller, had you ever been asked to assess their work before?---No.

PN2110

You had come across the names Brunskill and Tiller in the course of this kind of work though?---Not so much Tiller because - - -

PN2111

Perhaps John Smith, he's predecessor?---John Smith, yes. I did some assessments out at Baxter's Pharmaceuticals, I think they're called, where the two Johns had been in, done their job model and for - I never really got the reasoning behind it but for some reason the works manager wanted someone else to come in and do these assessments.

PN2112

Did you see any of the job models created by Brunskill and Tiller of the work carried out?---I've been - yes, I've had - I've got a copy of them, yes.

PN2113

Could you explain what a job model is?---In simple terms a list of competency that would be expected of a person at various levels.

PN2114

So the job models that Tiller and Brunskill had created would be a base job model for a base trade person?---Yes, that's how I would look at them, yes.

PN2115

And job models for grades higher than a base trade?---Well, being - my approach to it would be you'd go in there and you'd have a look at all the skills that are used in the company and I believe this is more or less the process they went through - you then reach agreement on which one of those units - which of those units of competence make up the base trade. Anything that's left over becomes an additional unit.

PN2116

Was there ever any explanation to you as to why you - I don't mean you personally - why you, Skills Pro, had been employed to do this job? Had someone ever suggested to you, for instance, that you were recommended by another organisation or another company or a trade union?---No. I'm not even sure how we got the first contact but - but the suggestion was that - for this project was that you'd been out there and done it before, come back.

PN2117

Did the committee or any member of management or the union representatives on that committee ask you about your qualifications and expertise to carry out the work they were asking?---Not initially, no.

PN2118

Not initially. Did they ask later on?---Actually no. I - I supplied qualifications at some point.

PN2119

You supplied some evidence of Skills Pro and your capacity to carry out the work?---I wouldn't say evidence. It was more or less a statement to say this is my qualification.

PN2120

With other clients are you hired for your expertise or are you hired for your work books?---I'd say I'm hired for my expertise and my independence.

PN2121

Or are you hired also possibly by pressure from individual industrial parties? Are you aware of an instance where, perhaps AWT, where you've been hired by industrial pressure by a particular industrial party?---AWT was - I was actually almost the third party on that, that was - you had to tender for that job.

PN2122

Isn't it the case that at AWT you won that contract against the AMWUs preferred client - preferred candidate?---Yes. Yes.

PN2123

Are people in Coates that are qualified to carry out work place assessments that you're aware of?---I'm - never been made aware of it, no.

PN2124

Just taking you to the meeting of the 19th of March. I think you mentioned that Mr Meek, Mr Woods, Mr Shaw; were there others in the room on that day?---Mr Hogg, Mr Davidson.

PN2125

Are any of these people qualified as tradespeople, assessors, teachers, trainers?---I've never been made aware of what their qualifications are, no.

PN2126

You have no knowledge as to their qualifications to carry out assessments?--- No.

PN2127

Why didn't you finish going through the units on the occasion mentioned; you said you started off, you got through what I think was half a day on one unit and didn't get too far there. The following day you got through a few more units. Why did you not finish working through the units with this group of people?---I don't quite remember what happened. All hell broke loose but I can't remember why it broke loose.

PN2128

I think that's what I'm trying to get you to remember?---I - I - I suspect that Pat Johnson became aware of what was happening but I'm not sure.

PN2129

Pat Johnson became aware of what was happening?---Yes.

PN2130

What was happening that Pat Johnson needed to become aware of, I guess?---That - that the meeting was taking place. I think that's all. There was a meeting taking place between me and Coates Hire representatives, management representatives without any involvement and without the knowledge of anyone else.

PN2131

To your understanding did this breach some agreement between the parties or the committee?---My understanding was that I would present the report to the committee and then they'd draw swords and fight the battle.

PN2132

MUNRO J: I think you said earlier in this context - I just ask you to compare the statements to Mr Shaw that - something to the effect that it was always understood that the company would review, I thought, the assessments. How does that understanding, if I've reported it accurately, square with what you've just put?---My understanding was that the review of the assessments - the company by all means had a right, they reserved the right to review the assessment outcomes right throughout committee meetings but my understanding was and I think it's laid down in either the - I think it's in the implementation guide that the results would be presented to the committee and then there'd be a review take place after that.

PN2133

I see, yes?---Because it actually goes two ways. The company, by all means has the right to review any results that they're not happy with but - but under the guidelines so do the individuals.

PN2134

Yes, well, the proposal attached to your statement appears to be based upon an assessment being provided to the committee, is that the - - -?---That was my understanding of it, yes.

PN2135

I'm sorry, Mr Lloyd.

PN2136

MR LLOYD: Thank you, your Honour.

PN2137

I wonder if you'd go to attachment A of your witness statement. Would you read the first sentence for me?---

PN2138

Skills Pro's involvement in this project is dependent on consensus being reached between the parties on the process details and the involvement of Skills Pro.

PN2139

Would you interpret the process to be the process specified in Competency Standards Implementation Guide?---Yes.

PN2140

November 99 edition?---Yes.

PN2141

This is a publication of who?---MERS ITAB.

PN2142

So your understanding would be that the process which you have identified as being taking your results back to the committee for initial review, that's correct, yes?---Yes.

PN2143

You would interpret that as being a condition of you getting involved in this whole project, yes?---Yes.

PN2144

That was accepted by the committee or a member of management or both when you actually submitted this letter?---Yes.

PN2145

So the company's accepted that you would carry out the process as is understood in the implementation guide which in fact is actually published on behalf of the industrial party by MERS ITAB. It's not a MERS ITAB, a trick question?---Okay.

PN2146

So your understanding was the next thing you would have to do is take a series of the results of your professional assessments of individuals in Coates Plant Hire to a committee, yes?---That's correct. I'm reasonably sure that's how it's laid down in the implementation guide.

PN2147

So would that be an explanation for why you felt somewhat intimidated on the meeting of the 19th and something out of the 20th that something out of the usual was happening?---That's part of the explanation but you have - I - I qualify that by saying you had to have been there.

PN2148

It's a bit like a lot of other things in life actually. Is it also an explanation for why you never finished working your way through the units with Mr Meek, Mr Woods and others?---Yes.

PN2149

How long were you at Coates doing this particular job?---What, how many?

PN2150

Months, whatever, weeks?---Months, well, we started November and finished March.

PN2151

How did the committee and/or management monitor your performance during that time and your activities - were you asked, for instance, to attend committee meetings on a regular basis?---Whenever there was a committee meeting I was invited. After I'd done, I think, the first five assessments I was asked by management for a report on how it was going.

PN2152

Was the atmosphere in which you conducted your work similar to those of other clients, was the industrial atmosphere, the relationship between management and labour the same as those in other clients you'd work: Bushells, AWT, anyone else in your experience?---I'm not getting into - into libel here, am I? I've never worked in a place with the same industrial relations or lack of.

PN2153

By that you meant it was not - - -?---Was not pleasant at all.

PN2154

There was conflict between the two parties; labour and management?---Regularly.

PN2155

Is it fair to say that in fact this issue had come up because of conflict between labour and management?---I would suspect so, yes.

PN2156

Is it fair to say that you'd been brought in in some ways to try and provide expert opinion to break the log jam between labour and management?---I would hope that's what I'm in there for, yes.

PN2157

And the basis on which you'd been brought in was 1. your expertise, the fact that you had background as TAFE teacher and Skills Pro as a credible organisation and that you had perhaps done work satisfactorily within Coates previously?---Yes.

PN2158

You made a statement yesterday, you said it didn't surprise me that there were no maintenance records. What did you mean by that statement?---What was the context of the - - -

PN2159

The context was where a particular object had been constructed by one of the - I think it was Graham Finlay - it may have been one of the others, I'll have to correct my memory here - was constructed and it was not recorded in any document that this object had been constructed. I think the thing at the time was some sort of a controlling mechanism or - I may have the wrong individual. It was in the context that design changes were not recorded?---From my - during the evidence gathering and from my observation the procedure of recording things is not necessarily adhered to very well.

PN2160

A witness yesterday, Scott Brown from memory, mentioned that, for example, Caterpillar engines were used in some of the equipment. Are you aware that Caterpillar prescribes that assemblies and sub assemblies of Caterpillar equipment should be numbered and should be kept through life histories of?---No, I'm not aware of that.

PN2161

Did the company make you aware that that was the case?---No.

PN2162

Was there evidence the company was aware that Caterpillar prescribed this sort of activity?---I've never come across any.

PN2163

Was there evidence in your interviews with candidates that they were supplied with documents such as purchasing and procedures manuals? Was it your understanding that every employee of Coates has such documents in their possession?---No.

PN2164

Was it your understanding that Coates employees are trained in purchasing and procedures?---No, I would say no.

PN2165

In your professional opinion, a person carrying out the unit under question here, which is - - -?---Order materials?

PN2166

- - - order materials, 11.16A?---16A, yes.

PN2167

That 11.16A is work below or above a purchasing officer's activity?---Below.

PN2168

Is it considered in fact the lowest level of work, the lowest level of competency in terms of ordering materials?---I would say so, it doesn't have any pre-requisites.

PN2169

It has zero pre-requisites?---Mm.

PN2170

But in fact that unit relies largely on standard operating procedures if they exist within a company?---Yes.

PN2171

That is pretty much how you have to assess that unit in any particular plant you go into?---Yes.

PN2172

Is it or is it not the case that there are not often standard operating procedures?---In the maintenance area it's the case that there are often not standard operating procedures.

PN2173

You also made a comment that 11.16A was worth two points. What did you mean, you were implying two points was low, what did you mean by that?---I wasn't implying it was low but I - people kept saying to me there's all this involved in it, there's all that involved in it. I've been given a copy of the order procedures for Coates Hire which was addressed to managers and - branch managers and people that you'd consider to be in management and my point was that every task that they were attaching - that was being attached to the unit of competence was being related to the purchasing officer's role; Charlie Aitken, therefore he's in management, he is an ex tradesman - I think he was a spray painter or something along those lines. I assumed to go into a management role he's on more money and yet his function, based on what I was being asked to consider, meant that he was worth two points in the overall process. I was trying to make the point that people were looking at the unit as if it was a high level and it wasn't, it was just another skill that trades people often use.

PN2174

MUNRO J: Sorry, Mr Lloyd, could I just interrupt you. The two points in the overall process, what does that mean? Are there two points for AQF purposes or - I haven't used the right words but - - - ?---They're two points for the Metals Award process where you have to accumulate 96 points or thereabouts to become a C10 or trade level of pay, another 12 points on top of that to become C9 and so forth. The points are - - -

PN2175

Where does one pick up that point accumulation from?---Each unit of competence has points allocated to it.

PN2176

Yes, and I can see those in the book, the National Competency Standards, and for instance the two points compares with ability to handle - or to use hand tools, I think that's also a two pointer?---Yes.

PN2177

But where does one get to the 96 points or the additional number of points to which you're referring for C8 and C10?

PN2178

MR LLOYD: That's an industrial agreement between the parties between 1988 and 91 which created the Federal Metal Industry Award.

PN2179

MUNRO J: I see.

PN2180

MR O'DONNELL: It's also contained in the guide, set out at page 95.....the point two identified there.

PN2181

MUNRO J: So the MERS ITAB standards nominate the number of points?---Yes.

PN2182

And those are relevantly consistently attached to particular competencies. Those points are then translated through this other agreement and guide for the purposes of classifications?---Yes.

PN2183

That's a separate exercise?---Yes.

PN2184

Thank you.

PN2185

MR STEWART: Your Honour, if I could also add, that in the Metals Engineering Associated Industries Award 1998 at clause 5.1.3F the point system was also allocated in the award.

PN2186

MUNRO J: Is that where it is? We've got it in the description, yes, thanks. 5.1.3. Yes, thanks. Sorry, I interrupted you, Mr Lloyd.

PN2187

MR LLOYD: So, in fact, whether it's two points, in the case of 11.16A or 20 points in the case of electroplating this doesn't reflect any waiting at all, does it? What actually affects the waiting is the number of pre-requisites that lie behind a unit as to its difficulty?---Yes.

PN2188

So if you have a unit that's two points and it concerns the adjustment of programmable logic controllers it's not a low unit?---No.

PN2189

It's actually a high unit because that has a long string of pre-requisites behind it?---Mm.

PN2190

So in judging people you often have to take into account the length of the pre-requisite string?---Yes.

PN2191

The pathway they must follow to get to that qualification or to that competency?---Most definitely.

PN2192

Would it be your estimation that the situation we've just discussed in 11.16 is similar for a lot of the units that you dealt with at this particular place?---Yes. There - I'll give an example of 9.11A, which is also one that was under a lot of scrutiny: Apply basic engineering design concepts. The fact that the word design is in there people interpret it as being a high level unit. It actually has one pre-requisite; interpret technical drawings.

PN2193

There is no drafting or technical drawing units as pre-requisites?---Just interpret technical drawing.

PN2194

So it's not necessary that a candidate understand how to draw a black base line and begin the process of lofting and construction?---Just be able to interpret a drawing, read a drawing.

PN2195

Just be able to read a drawing?---Yes.

PN2196

And then it is possible that they could carry out design innovation?---Yes.

PN2197

To the extent that putting a bend in a tube would be considered a reasonable design innovation if it actually solved the problem in the work place?---Yes. I approach it if it makes a significant difference, a noticeable difference to what's happening then there's a possibility they've got that unit based on whether or not I put a tick in the boxes.

PN2198

We're not here discussing cloning the Prime Minister, are we? Yes, sorry. The point is it is a unit with only one pre-requisite and that is a basic pre-requisite in the trade, is it not?---Yes.

PN2199

Interpret a technical drawing?---Yes, you can't do anything in the trade without interpret technical drawing.

PN2200

Could you go to tab 2. I think you've got it in front of you. It's an unnumbered page, B5 it's called and it's titled Policies and Procedures Manual?---Yes.

PN2201

Now, I assume this to be a component of a document given that it's marked 5.7, a component of a larger document called Policies and Procedures Manual. Have you seen such a document?---No. This is not - this is to do with purchase orders, this is not the document that was given to me. I can - I've got it in my bag if you want to have a look at what I was given but not this document.

PN2202

Would it be your understanding that this document would be commonly in the possession of most of the maintenance personnel at Coates Plant Hire?---I - I've never asked them but I wonder if they even know that it exists, let alone have a copy of it.

PN2203

In the document you were given - could you describe it, sorry, I'm not aware of the document - what were you given by Coates Plant Hire?---Do you want to have a look at it?

PN2204

Can we pull it out and look at it?---Sorry, it's only - I know it's there because it's there.

PN2205

This is an internal memo?---Mm.

PN2206

Why were you given this internal memo?---That was in one of my discussions with John Meek after one of the assessments where he said, well, - - -

PN2207

MUNRO J: Do you want that marked and put in? It can be.

PN2208

THE WITNESS: He said this is our new internal - our purchasing procedures.

PN2209

MUNRO J: Sorry, who said that, John Meek?---John Meek.

PN2210

When was that?---It was one - it was a meeting that I had with him, just a casual meeting after one of the assessments. I don't recall the date.

PN2211

MR LLOYD: Is there specific mention of maintenance in that document?---I don't think maintenance is mentioned.

PN2212

Did you notice any distinction in any documents provided to you between maintenance and those personnel involved in sales, management?---I never saw any documentation relating to purchasing where maintenance was mentioned. It always seemed to be to do with branch managers and sales people.

PN2213

I've only got a couple of more questions, so don't panic. I'm just about finished. You made another comment yesterday: The general consensus from management is that they are not supposed to do this. You meant that in - the context in which you put that was the design and certain of the other competencies which you were assessing the work force for. What would happen if they did not do those things in your opinion. If, for instance, 18.30A, which is one of the units you're talking about, the entire work force was deemed incompetent - sorry, correct me - not competent in the unit what would happen on the work shop floor?---Coates Hire would slowly - especially their road plant will slowly stop.

PN2214

Could you be more specific than that? 18.30 refers to certain low voltage electrical wiring activity, yes?---Yes.

PN2215

And if that activity ceased what equipment would not be repaired?---All their equipment, it's all got - all their road plant access equipment's all got low voltage electrical work. By all - there may be some that doesn't but the vast majority.

PN2216

So it's reasonable to say that during the Commission's inspections where you were not present we looked at various pieces of equipment, much of which involved electrical wiring, would we have been looking at workers who were qualified or competent or not competent in 18.30 in your opinion?---If they're doing the work I suggest they're competent. If they're not competent then the plant mustn't ever leave the work shop.

PN2217

In your experience when assessing fabrication skills is it the employer's responsibility to ensure that statutory requirements have been met? By that I mean that an employee has been tested for a 15.54 welding ticket?---I would think it would be the employer's responsibility.

PN2218

In your experience has it been your responsibility to check that as a work place assessor?---No.

PN2219

Would it be fair to say when examining work done under 15.54SP, for example booms, that you would assume that that work as it had been directed by the manager to the employee to be carried out that the employer had carried out reasonable actions to ensure the employee was licensed to do so?---I would have thought so, yes.

PN2220

That's a reasonable assumption in your normal course of work as consultant?---Yes. If he's not qualified to do it then who's liable? I'm not a legal person, I don't know.

PN2221

You state in your evidence that you consulted with Peter Cryer who we've established worked on the same floor as you and works in the curriculum development - sorry, learning materials development area?---No, we still call it curriculum in New South Wales.

PN2222

Do you, okay?---Yes. But there's a distinction between the two.

PN2223

Did you consult him in relation to the welding standards that you were to assess?---My consultation with Peter was after I'd done the assessment on Graham. I went back and said this is the standard - at that time I didn't know that he was the Chairman on the committee - but this is the standard, this is how it's going, this is what I observed, this is what the bloke's doing, does that conform? Yes.

PN2224

Peter Cryer is a member of the Standards Australia's committee in relation to 15.54, is he not?---I think he's the chair.

PN2225

He's the chair of the standard's committee?---I think so.

PN2226

So it was a reasonable assumption on your part that when you handed over information in relation to your assessments that Peter Cryer would alert you to the fact that you may have made an error by not observing 15.54?---Yes.

PN2227

I've always wanted to say this - no further questions, your Honour.

PN2228

MUNRO J: Very well, we'll have lunch, I think, and then Mr Terzic you'll have a go.

LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT [12.47pm]

RESUMED [2.02pm]

PN2229

MUNRO J: The Commission has resumed. I note before the adjournment Mr Nelson provided from his dossier a copy of the Coates Hire Eastern Region internal memo dated 27 November 2000 new purchase order procedure. If it's sought to have a copy of that made and included in the Board of Reference's record then we can run that off and I'll mark it. I don't think it matters whose exhibit it is. Simply for finding it we'll mark it as an AMWU exhibit. No objections?

PN2230

MR TERZIC: Yes, your Honour, no objections.

PN2231

MUNRO J: Very well, I'll mark it in due course as AMWU 8. That doesn't have any binding upon you, Mr Terzic, it's simply to have a copy of it.

EXHIBIT #AMWU8 COATES HIRE EASTERN REGION INTERNAL MEMO DATED 27/11/2000 NEW PURCHASE ORDER PROCEDURE

PN2232

MR TERZIC: While we're on the subject of marking exhibits, your Honour, I don't think Mr Nelson's statement has been marked yet.

PN2233

MUNRO J: I thought it had, BRAMWU7. Maybe I just did it for my own purposes. Very well, it is BRAMWU7.

EXHIBIT #BRAMWU7 STATEMENT OF F.Y. NELSON

PN2234

MUNRO J: Mr Terzic, I think it's your opportunity to re-examine.

PN2235

MR TERZIC: Yes, thank you, your Honour.

<RE-EXAMINATION BY MR TERZIC [2.04pm]

PN2236

MR TERZIC: Firstly, Mr Nelson, you were asked a question by Mr Flaiban about whether you had been assessed in various hydraulics unions, do you recall that?---Yes.

PN2237

And your answer ultimately was no, correct?---Correct.

PN2238

But you did say that you had extensive experience in hydraulics, in particular teaching hydraulics?---Yes.

PN2239

So, would that be tantamount to the proposition that Mr Flaiban's question was a bit like asking a teacher whether the teacher had passed an exam that the teacher had set?---Yes.

PN2240

Over material that the teacher had taught?---Yes.

PN2241

So it would be a waste of time for you to sit a test on material that you teach and examine on?---I would - I couldn't see any benefit in it, no.

PN2242

At another point in reply to a question from Mr Flaiban you made a comment to the effect of if these guys were going for qualifications I would have to get that information. Do you recall making a comment along those lines?---I recall making some comment - I don't remember the context.....

PN2243

I'm asking for an explanation and an expansion on that comment. I've inferred that you would apply different standards in assessing employees for competency assessment purposes or for handing out qualifications, is that the case?---I wouldn't apply different standards. I'm recalling where that statement was made. I would just gather the extra information to issue a qualification as an overall qualification certificate for - diploma or whatever. I would make sure I had the correct information about that person.

PN2244

And in relation to the competency standards that you were assessing in this exercise is that a qualifications based assessment or is it based on other factors?---I would consider it's based on other factors. I'm looking at individual units. I wasn't considering what the overall outcome might be and I wasn't asked to do that.

PN2245

What quality does an assessed person have to have to pass the required competency standard if it's not a qualification?---A demonstration of the skills and knowledge within the unit being assessed.

PN2246

And on each occasion that you signed off on a person having that quality or competency you personally were satisfied that they did have it?---Yes.

PN2247

You were asked questions about, by Mr Flaiban again, differences in equipment and technology in different firms and some of the first referred to were HPM, Bushells, etcetera, are the principal techniques and fundamentals of the units you assessed at Coates applicable outside of Coates?---Yes.

PN2248

Where generally are they applicable?---In a general term anywhere where mechanical maintenance is undertaken.

PN2249

You stated that you'd never been formally trained in advance customer service?---Correct.

PN2250

When you examined the required skills and competencies that fell in the advanced customer service unit did you feel that you understood the concepts and what was required in that unit?---Yes.

PN2251

Was it particularly difficult or complicated?---No. I don't think it was, no.

PN2252

And I want to transpose that question to the order materials unit. Again, did you find the concepts involved difficult?---No.

PN2253

Would they be of a lesser standard in terms of complexity than say some of the other units; low voltage hydraulics?---I - I would say they're not as complex as the low voltage electrical unit or the hydraulics.

PN2254

And that would apply to advanced customer service as well?---Yes.

PN2255

Mr Shaw asked you a question about intimidation. Do you recall that question?---Not the specific one, no.

PN2256

Have you ever felt intimidated in doing your work outside of Coates Hire?---Never.

PN2257

That finishes re-examination, your Honour.

PN2258

MUNRO J: Thank you, Mr Nelson. You're excused from further attendance.

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [2.10pm]

PN2259

MUNRO J: Yes, Mr Terzic?

PN2260

MR TERZIC: Your Honour, as has been made clear to the members of the Board and the AIG the AMWU is not in a position to call Mr Brunskill before this Board to give evidence, even though he has deposed a statement. There have been discussions with Mr O'Donnell on how his statement will be dealt with and I can now report to this Board that agreement has been reached that Mr Brunskill's statement be admitted. It hasn't been sworn. We'd ask that it just be admitted as uncontested evidence on all matters covered in paragraphs 1 to 14 inclusive.

PN2261

MR O'DONNELL: Your Honour, we would seek that that be 1 to 13, 14 we would also object to.

PN2262

MR TERZIC: The objection is conceded to; 1 to 13 inclusive and that would then include attachment A, which is a list of where Mr Brunskill has conducted skills assessment work, handwritten page, and attachment B and C as well, which is an example of where Mr Brunskill has applied his skills at another firm in the metal industry, that firm being Boyd Mining and Machinery in Moss Vale and the comments in regard to that are found in Mr Brunskill's statement. That being so that ends the evidentiary leg of the AMWs case in this matter.

PN2263

MUNRO J: Yes, thank you. Where's attachment B, what's that?

PN2264

MR TERZIC: It wasn't there anyway. I think there might have been some problems with copying.

PN2265

MUNRO J: It's out anyhow.

PN2266

MR TERZIC: Yes, it's out anyway.

PN2267

MUNRO J: Yes, I'm just trying to find it really to get rid of it but it's not in the document.

PN2268

MR TERZIC: Yes, it's not to be admitted.

PN2269

MUNRO J: Yes, thank you, Mr Terzic. Mr O'Donnell?

PN2270

MR O'DONNELL: Thank you, your Honour. We would like to call Mr Steven Hogg.

PN2271

MUNRO J: Just before we do that I'll mark the witness statement of John Brunskill as AMWU9.

EXHIBIT #AMWU9 STATEMENT OF JOHN BRUNSKILL

<STEVEN LESLIE HOGG, SWORN [2.15pm]

<EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR O'DONNELL

PN2272

MR O'DONNELL: Thank you, Mr Hogg, could you state your name and address for the record?---Certainly, yes. Steven Leslie Hogg, 7A Carabella Road, Caringbah.

PN2273

And your position with Coates Hire?---Training Manager for Eastern Region.

PN2274

Could I hand you a statement. Could I ask you to look at that statement and identify if that's a statement you've prepared in relation to this matter?---Yes, that is correct.

PN2275

Are you able to confirm that the contents of that statement to the best of your knowledge are an accurate record of your statement?---After reviewing some of the minutes there are some minor changes to dates that are on that statement if you wish me to go through those.

PN2276

Would you take us to those?---In paragraph 6 where it mentions a review meeting held in early October in fact the date for that review meeting was the 17th of July 2000.

PN2277

So, on 17 July 2000?---Correct. In paragraph 23 where I've stated there between the 22nd and the 27th of February 2001 and on the 4th line the 27th and the 5th line once again the 27th of the 2nd. The dates, to start with are the 20 - sorry, are the 19th through to the 23rd of February 2001. On the 4th line there it should be corrected to state the 22nd.

PN2278

MUNRO J: Sorry, the top line is 19th to 23rd of February, is that right?---Correct, yes.

PN2279

The 4th line?---The 4th line down in the middle of it there is a date there that says the 27th, it should read the 22nd and the end of the next line down reads the 27th, it should read the 22nd. That's all the changes I have.

PN2280

MR O'DONNELL: With those changes is this a true and correct statement?---Yes, it is.

PN2281

Could I ask you to describe the training procedures and the training carried out by Coates Hire with respect to employees of Coates Hire?---Okay. Our training starts with an induction training. It normally happens within the first day or so of an employee starting. That induction training is done on a computer; sometimes a desk top computer, sometimes a lap top computer. That training - induction training runs our - our new people through information about the company; a bit of history; a bit of present stance of where we're at; our policies and procedures and an introduction to our policies and procedures manual. It - it runs through our OH and S policies; some work procedures that we may have. It then moves on to an introduction into the individual's actual work - work place or work site, whether that be a branch or at Miranda or somewhere around there. I introduce our new people into their environment and to their - their supervisor, etcetera, etcetera; the people who they work with that is. From there the induction part of the training moves on to what we would classify as on the job training and further procedures, you get introduced by the - the supervisor or the delegated person at the job site to do that. As far as other - other training goes we investigate on a need to know - a need to - like on a needs basis, if you like, where the company has a requirement to train some people. We'll look at the training that is needed to keep up with the technology, whatever that is that we've identified and we will then move - move on that training from then.

PN2282

What sort of training might that involve?---For our - our trade based people we offer produce knowledge training and that is from people like the manufacturers of our access equipment, JLG, the manufacturers of our compaction equipment, Dynapak. If our employees feel that they want to better themselves in any way they can come to us and say that they've identified a particular course, whether that be with TAFE or university, either way, we will then consider that and make the appropriate moves on that.

PN2283

You mentioned in respect of the induction training, policies and procedures, is there anything documented provided to employees in respect of that?---Yes, there is. We give every new employee a - a welcome - what we call a welcome to Coates handbook. Within that welcome to Coates handbook is a - on printed matter is what gets covered in the induction computer course. It does have references to the policies and procedures manual that is located in every - every branch and in every location. It also covers some of the training side of the company, plus the history and all of the other bits that we go through.

PN2284

You mentioned in every branch and other locations, what other locations would the policies and procedures manual be located?---Okay. One of the other locations would be Miranda. I don't call Miranda a branch because it is actually our head office. We don't hire gear, you know, directly from them. There is a - a set of the manuals in with our financial controller, there is a set of manuals with myself, there is a set of manuals in the general office area for our office staff, there is a set of manuals in the workshop for workshop staff, there is a set of manuals with John Meek, the service manager, there is a set of manuals with what we call our central control office; these are our asset controller who look after the movements of our assets, also located at Miranda just attached to the workshop. These are some of the areas that the manuals are located in.

PN2285

In paragraph 2 of your statement you make reference to qualifications there, could you expand on what you've detailed there?---Yes, certainly. My qualification as an assessor came from when I completed a University of Technology course, which is the one in Sydney of course, UTS. Coates put me through a course with them and at the end of that course I was assessed on my knowledge or the knowledge that I was picked up by having to complete and plan and present a work place assessment. If my memory serves me correctly, it took me about 40 hours to build the assessment tool that I used and it was only a very simple assessment tool and that was assessed by the people at the university and from there I was granted my qualification as an assessor of demonstrated work place competencies. The other part of paragraph 2 there it says I'm an accredited assessor for Work Cover. Work Cover commission, I guess, for want of a better word, people like myself who have got a qualification in assessing and who also have product knowledge, if you like, or expert knowledge in certain areas to - to conduct assessments for them in certificates of competency. I'm a - I have a forklift licence from Work Cover and also a boom lift operator's licence from Work Cover and according to Work Cover's rules along with my assessing qualification that enables me to apply to them, fill out all the documentation and send in quite a lot of information to them about experience and the like to then become an assessor for them.

PN2286

Thank you. I've no further questions.

PN2287

MUNRO J: Mr Hogg, is there available an organisation structure particularly as it affects the general areas of which we are concerned in this matter?---Sorry, an organisation structure, you mean a chart or something or - - -

PN2288

Yes, could we have a chart that indicates the positions, I suppose we're broadly looking at trades personnel engaged in maintenance and in remote service units, aren't we?---Yes, correct, correct.

PN2289

I would be interested if you could obtain for us - provide essentially an organisation chart - - -?---That's fine.

PN2290

- - - which shows the classification of the personnel. I think it would need probably to be broken down by name and for my part I would like also something that indicates against the existing classification levels; the length of service in the maintenance area and the date of appointment to that classification?---Okay, yes.

PN2291

If that's not too much trouble. I myself have some difficulty in just understanding what the total picture is within which these 19 or so - I'm not even sure of the 19, there seem to be a smaller number who were actually assessed by Mr Nelson - just how they fit in and what are the comparable other classifications within the same broad area?---Fine.

PN2292

Perhaps though as a preliminary to that, there are or are not classifications above C10 in the maintenance area?---Currently there are.

PN2293

How many, roughly, do you know?---I - I don't know exactly but I guess there would be about five across the region.

PN2294

I see. Across New South Wales region?---Eastern Region is New South Wales and ACT.

PN2295

I see, thank you. And that could fairly readily be presented, could it, the information - - -?---Yes. Yes, that's fine, yes.

PN2296

Thank you. Yes, Mr Flaiban, will we follow the same road? I think we might as well.

PN2297

MR FLAIBAN: Or should it be the other way around?

PN2298

MR TERZIC: Your Honour, would it not fall to me to cross-examine the witness at this stage?

PN2299

MUNRO J: I had forgotten you entirely, Mr Terzic.

<CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR TERZIC [2.29pm]

PN2300

MR TERZIC: Mr Hogg, I've heard it referred to a little earlier but it's not quite clear in your statement as to what your position is. Could you start with your title?---Yes, my title is Training Manager, Eastern Region, Coates Hire.

PN2301

What does that involve?---For - for Coates Hire Eastern Region, apart from the obvious, looking after the training side of things, I also look after quality assurance within the region; I look after the Workers Compensation within the region; I look after OH and S within the region.

PN2302

When you say training, is that training directed to trades staff, maintenance staff, etcetera, or is it across the organisation?---It's across the organisation, it's all staff.

PN2303

You say you have an assessor qualification from UTS, what exactly is that qualification?---The course was a course that was called assessing demonstrated competencies. The course entailed planning of an assessment, deciding on what was the best method of assessment, all - all about purely the assessment of the demonstrated competency itself.

PN2304

How long did that course last for?---It was one of their short courses, what they classify as a short course. It was three days of approximately eight or nine hours a day. I can't recall exactly. And from there there was a - a - I think it was a six or an eight week period after that by which you were given to prepare your paper work to submit for - for assessment on that training, if you like, of qualification.

PN2305

So, is it your understanding that that qualification would allow you to carry out assessments against competency standards in the metal industry, those competencies?---Whilst it wasn't tailored directly to that it was the founding basis for all assessments.

PN2306

So, would your qualifications allow you to become an accredited assessor for the purposes of the metal industry standards?---Yes.

PN2307

How do you know that?---MERS ITAB put out a - a - paper work, if you like, an application form. Two of the criteria on there, which are the only two getting registered with MERS ITAB, I think you must have completed an assessor's course and they do list several different courses, one being the course from UTS and passed of course. The other criteria is that you must have completed the competency standards implementation course provided by either MISTAS or AIG or one of the - the few other firms. I can't recall any others but a few other firms that do.

PN2308

Yes, and when you did this course that would have put you then in good stead, in your opinion, to conduct an exercise of a similar nature to what Mr Nelson conducted at Coates?---True.

PN2309

If you were to go about the exercise that Mr Nelson had conducted would you have done it in a similar fashion to Mr Nelson?---Similar is a very - very general term. I think I'd have to go back to the very beginning and do all of the planning, probably liaise with management and find out what the whole set up would be. There's a - a lot of things in that similar word that you mentioned.

PN2310

Well, would you do it in different fashion?---I think I've answered that, yes.

PN2311

You'd do it differently to what Mr Nelson had done it then - well, in what respects, what would you do differently?---It seems from the paper work I've looked at that the practical side of the demonstrated competency hasn't been displayed in many cases and being a very technical nature in a lot of these competencies I think a demonstration of - of that in as far as a very in depth practical type of testing, a combination of maybe a getting your hands dirty type of approach and theoretical testing, questions on a question sheet whereby short answers are there and other - other in depth sort of evidence gathering type of assessment techniques.

PN2312

So can I infer from that that you'd be far more thorough than Mr Nelson?---Yes, I believe I would be.

PN2313

Of course that would have required spending far more time per unit per employee?---Correct.

PN2314

How long would you suggest that a full assessment on a unit would take one of the employees assessed at Coates?---At this stage of the game I - I'd have to really go back and have a look at the very finite detail of every single criteria involved with a specific one. I couldn't answer that.

PN2315

Are you aware of Mr Nelson's background, Mr Hogg?---I'm aware of brief - some brief details of it, not in depth details.

PN2316

Are you aware that he was the head teacher of fitting machining at Mt Druitt College of TAFE?---Yes

PN2317

Are you aware that he's probably trained in the order of hundreds of apprentices in fitting and machining?---Yes.

PN2318

And that he's trained in the order of hundreds of mechanical fitters and post trade qualifications?---Yes.

PN2319

You would do things differently to Mr Nelson nonetheless, that's your evidence?---Correct.

PN2320

Do you think Mr Nelson's work was deficient?---In which way?

PN2321

In the way he carried out the assessments?---I believe that his evidence gathering techniques were deficient.

PN2322

And you would rather substitute your techniques for his, is that your evidence?---I believe that the techniques that I stated to you just a minute ago would have enabled a decision on competence to be made in a lot clearer manner than what has been made.

PN2323

And you're basing this on your three day qualification, is that right?---Correct.

PN2324

What was your job before you were a Training Manager at Coates Hire, Mr Hogg?---Directly before Training Manager?

PN2325

Yes?---I was an asset controller with Coates.

PN2326

And before that?---I was an assistant manager at Alexandria branch.

PN2327

What did you do there?---All of the - the general paper work and associated sales type functions and that type of thing. I also looked after transport fro time to time out that particular branch.

PN2328

Prior to that?---Prior to that I was the workshop manager at Miranda.

PN2329

And prior to that?---I was a mechanic.

PN2330

A mechanic doing what?---Repairing Coates Hire equipment.

PN2331

So essentially the same work as many of the assessed employees?---Correct.

PN2332

And what were you graded at, what level were you graded at?---Pay scale, are you talking - - -

PN2333

Yes?---C8.

PN2334

C8. So you were doing the same work as many of the employees but you were at C8, that's your evidence?---My pay scale was C8 when I was on the field service truck.

PN2335

Were you qualified to work at C8?---I don't know, I was never assessed.

PN2336

You say you know how to assess, assess yourself; were you qualified to work at C8?---I don't believe I was.

PN2337

So in your case you were paid at a rate higher than your skills?---Correct.

PN2338

Why was that?---From memory there was a clause or something came through about tradesmen special class. That I don't know the depth of but that came through, something in the award and it was the decision of our service manager at the time to review some of his staff and change their pay scale.

PN2339

So through some sort of administrative procedure you were graded at C8 but you are not qualified at C8, is that your evidence?---Well, as I said, I was never assessed so it is - it is hard to say whether I was qualified to that level or not. I cannot answer that directly yes or no.

PN2340

Would you be qualified to assess an employee as to whether they are C10 or C8?---I believe so.

PN2341

But you can't assess - - -?---With an assessing background and a trade background and a set of competences in front of me.

PN2342

But you're not qualified or confident to assess yourself?---Well, as I said, we can - we can apply the current competency standards to my situation then but it is hardly current evidence. What's the purpose of the questioning, if I'm allowed to ask.

PN2343

No, you're not, I'm afraid?---I'm sorry.

PN2344

So you believe that you would be competent to determine whether a field service technician was performing work at C10 level or C8 level?---Using the competency standards are you saying?

PN2345

Yes?---I believe so.

PN2346

So Mr Nelson was called in to do the assessments, wasn't he?---Correct.

PN2347

Whose idea was it to bring Mr Nelson in?---It was the committee's idea from what I recall.

PN2348

But did they all spring up with the idea simultaneously or - - -?---No.

PN2349

- - - did somebody prompt?---No.

PN2350

Who originated the idea?---The company.

PN2351

Do you know who in particular?---Skills Pro themselves or the idea of bringing in the third party?

PN2352

No, who within the company suggested Mr Nelson?---Okay, Mr Nelson specifically?

PN2353

Yes?---Probably me.

PN2354

Probably. Well, why did you suggest Mr Nelson?---Because we had past contact with Skills Pro.

PN2355

Yes and did you find Mr Nelson's work earlier to be satisfactory?---I hadn't really been involved with any of his earlier work.

PN2356

Why did you choose Skills Pro, was it part of the reputation of the organisation?---I guess it was probably an ease of contact; someone that we had used before.

PN2357

Ease of contact?---Mm.

PN2358

Do you know that Skills Pro is connected to TAFE in New South Wales?---Yes, I did know that yes.

PN2359

And what's your opinion of TAFE?---In what regard?

PN2360

Do you regard it highly as a competent organisation or do you think it's a bit shoddy or what? Is it reputable?---My - my personal opinion of TAFE?

PN2361

Yes?---Okay. I've done a lot of courses through TAFE myself and haven't found that there's been too many deficiencies in the way they teach.

PN2362

So you regard TAFE highly?---I guess so, yes.

PN2363

So it was your idea to engage Mr Nelson, yes?---Yes.

PN2364

And the committee endorsed that suggestion?---Yes, although if memory serves me correctly, initially they didn't. There was some concerns about bringing another person into the scheme of things and creating, you know, this sort of growing monster of people on the committee and onwards from there, if you like. So there was some concerns purely from a size perspective, I believe, and some questions about why these further assessments were required.

PN2365

Just taking the tenor of what you're saying, there were concerns about this reclassification process dragging on, weren't there?---Yes, correct.

PN2366

Because they'd been dragging on for a long time, hadn't they?---Correct.

PN2367

How many years?---I don't know when it actually first started. I really don't know. I think I've been involved probably since about 1996. I don't know when it first started.

PN2368

Would you have any idea of how many attempts there have been to assess Coates' maintenance work force?---I - as I said, I can't recall back over all those - all those years but most recently, I guess, within the last couple of years there have been several attempts to - to call in people and do some assessing.

PN2369

And every time that an employee's been assessed over C10 has Coates rejected that notion?---No, not at all.

PN2370

When have they accepted it?---We've never been in a position where it's got to a final decision, if you like, of what you're saying - saying there, accept or deny or whatever. It never got to a point where we've said this is the final step and - and that all parties have been happy.

PN2371

So it's just been dragging along without any conclusion for a long time?---Correct.

PN2372

Why do you think that's so?---I don't know. I really don't know. I guess over - over the period of time - and once again I don't know a whole lot about the history of sort of prior to 18 months ago or something like that but it certainly would seem as thought it's been a - a very bumpy ride. At some stages the competency standards were being applied to the way the company thought they should be and in other ways at other times it was being applied to the way the union thought they should be and so it was a rocky road going both ways.

PN2373

So you thought there was competing views on where the assessments would finish up?---No, I think interpretation along the way.

PN2374

So that was why you got Mr Nelson in, isn't it, to bring an independent eye to all of this?---Correct.

PN2375

And he cast his so called independent eye on the situation?---Correct, yes. Yes, sorry.

PN2376

And then Coates rejected his findings out of hand?---No, I don't - I don't think - I don't see that as being exactly what happened.

PN2377

Well, you accept them?---What I - what I see has happened is that Mr Nelson has come in and - and he was to apply a process to all of this and I think through the way some of the bits of that process either haven't happened yet or haven't happened correctly and this is what, I guess, brings us to where we are today.

PN2378

Well, you said that you don't reject them out of hand, what do you accept of Mr Nelson's work; do you accept any of it or part of it or?---I - I couldn't - couldn't comment on that right now. I'd have to go back and review, sort of, everything that he put to us again to come up with a - a decision that you're asking me to come up with.

PN2379

You've looked at it quite closely, haven't you?---I have.

PN2380

Do you think you got it right with any of the employees?---I - I don't think so. Not looking - not looking at what he gave us to review, okay? Now purely what we were looking for was - was a - a chance to review the evidence that he had collected, that he had based his decisions on.

PN2381

So you said that you don't think he got it right with any of the employees so out of the how many employees, was it 11 that he assessed?---Think so, yes.

PN2382

11 out of 11 wrong is your view?---11 out of 11 not completed, yes.

PN2383

Not completed. Do you think if they were completed his findings might be vindicated as correct?---It's a bit hard to say.

PN2384

So you think there's not even enough to draw a preliminary conclusion with any of the employees?---No, I - I honestly think that there is no evidence for me to base any decision on at all that I've seen so I couldn't even base a preliminary judgment on anything because I just haven't seen anything that I could do that with.

PN2385

Is it Coates' view that Mr Nelson, who has presented evidence in this Commission, that is an experienced assessor teacher in mechanical trades has come into Coates, he's looked at whether the employees should be at C10 or C8 and he has not done anywhere near enough to answer that question in Coates' view?---Correct.

PN2386

And that's your view?---Correct.

PN2387

And it's the view of Coates' management generally?---It's my view.

PN2388

Is there an ulterior motive in this, is the company trying to resist paying these employees at a higher rate?---No, not at all.

PN2389

You've got no objection to paying them at the higher rate if they do that work?---In fact I think a level of skill required throughout a company is something that could be beneficial to the company.

PN2390

Well, let's try this from another way, Mr Hogg. Do you think any of your employees who were assessed, any of the 11 who were assessed are at a level too low at this moment. Do you think they do warrant reclassification in any instances?---As far as their pay classification level goes or something?

PN2391

Yes?---Once again in regard to - to our work place and the sorts of tasks that we do there and all of the - all the - the bits and pieces that are included within that, you know, I've got to say no, I think that it suits fairly well.

PN2392

So you think that the appropriate classification for all of those assessed, all of those employees assessed is at the level they currently are?---I'd have to go back and have a look at what currently level they are. See, I haven't focused on - on pay rates and pay levels and C classifications, if you like, and points and all these other things. I know they are all linked to all of this on the side. The main focus was let's have a look at competence, let's have a look at the skills held and the skills used in the work place. That was the main focus and that's why I'm having difficulty answering some of your questions about directly linked to pay rates and things like that.

PN2393

You're an accredited assessor, yes?---Yes.

PN2394

You're a training manager, yes?---Yes.

PN2395

You've been a field service worker and a mechanic?---Correct.

PN2396

You've been the work shop manager?---Correct.

PN2397

And you're still not sure about how things would pan out with respect to the work carried out - - -?---As I say, we're here to talk about application of competency standards and the assessments therein. I'm not going to make any comment about where people should lie.

PN2398

Why not?---Because I don't want to.

PN2399

You don't know or you - you don't know - - -?---No, the - - -

PN2400

- - - you don't have enough information, what? What's the real story here?---Okay, the real - the real story, as you put it now, is that within the application of the competency standards and the whole purpose for doing all of that will give us the answers that you're looking for. I don't believe that's been done correctly yet.

PN2401

Mr Nelson has performed this task in many other companies before?---Mm.

PN2402

And if he would have done this task and been allowed to have his conclusions stand his answers are quite clear; you've got them, haven't you?---Yes.

PN2403

And that would suggest that the levels that they're currently being paid at is too low. That's his view, isn't it? They're not C10s in many instances, they're C8s?---The skill level held by the people is what's in question and what he's - what he's assessed.

PN2404

It's interesting that Mr Nelson has given evidence that he's never had his work called into question before, it's only happened at Coates, why do you think that is?---I don't know.

PN2405

Do you think you need far more evidence than the rest of the Australian industry requires?---It would seem that way, yes.

PN2406

It does, doesn't it?---We, I believe in - in some of the minutes in there agreed that we wouldn't take part in - in the assessments - - -

PN2407

Why is Coates special in this regard, Mr Hogg?--- - - - because of - - -

PN2408

Why are you special?---In which - in which regard?

PN2409

Why do you need a whole lot more evidence than any other firm that Mr Nelson's worked at?---I don't know. I really don't know.

PN2410

The work books, how were they formulated?---The assessor's work book or the - the candidate's work book?

PN2411

Well, both?---I haven't really looked at the candidates work books.

PN2412

You don't know?---.....

PN2413

How were the candidates work books formulated?---As I said, I haven't really looked at the candidates work book. I've only had a look at the assessor's work books.

PN2414

How were they formulated, how were they put together?---We left that to - to Mr Nelson to - to decide how they were put together.

PN2415

Did you tell him which units were to be assessed?---We did.

PN2416

How did you derive which units were to be assessed for each individual?---Right. How did we derive - - -

PN2417

How did you come up with whatever units were in each work book?---Through the - through the committee and the meetings that we had. There was an appeals sheet or process, if you like, that happened at - sorry, after the initial AIG and MISTAS self assessment that came out at a certain level that Coates then sort of went back and said no, we appeal all of these and had a sheet full of - full of the appeals. Those were the identified units in appeal that needed to be assessed.

PN2418

So when you decided to put in as a unit to be assessed customer service for your field service technicians you had a suspicion that that would be a skill that they might hold?---The original plan - - -

PN2419

MUNRO J: I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you, Mr Terzic, a skill that they might hold?

PN2420

MR TERZIC: Yes, when it was decided that the field service technicians would be assessed against the customer service unit did Coates management have a suspicion that the field service technicians might fulfil that particular competency?---Well, I don't know about a suspicion as such.

PN2421

Well, how did it arrive there?---The - the - - -

PN2422

Why was it put in, by magic?---Mr Tiller and Mr Brunskill built some job profiles when they came into the committee early in the piece, probably through April I believe, April 2000, somewhere around there - April or May. Within their job profiles was a list of base skills and then additional skills or competencies, if you like.

PN2423

MUNRO J: Could you differentiate for me the base skills, that process through MISTAS and whatever the AIG organisation was?---Yes.

PN2424

Identified, did it, the competencies that were within your base trades level; is that what you mean by base skills?---Yes. Yes, that's right. That's correct.

PN2425

So they identified what constituted C10?---Yes, correct.

PN2426

Where is that identification made in any of the material you have put forward and how was it crystallised or was it not ever crystallised an consolidated?---Yes, I - I believe that it was never formally agreed or crystallised, never finalised, if you like.

PN2427

So, very well, they identified that?---Yes.

PN2428

With Coates approval you then moved to a stage where the employees were invited, as I understand it, to self identify the competences that they had over and beyond that model?---Correct.

PN2429

MISTAS and the AIG, through Mr Tiller, then completed that assessment process based on the self assessment evidence?---Correct.

PN2430

That report of MISTAS or let's say out of Mr Brunskill and Mr Tiller went to the competency committee and Coates appealed - -?---Yes.

PN2431

- - - against the recommendations or the assessments made by Brunskill and Tiller?---Yes, correct.

PN2432

And is it the case to even this day the base competencies have not yet been consolidated for C10?---Correct.

PN2433

You don't know what they are?---No, I don't, no. I know a few - a few of the competencies that are in there but I don't really know what they are in detail, no.

PN2434

How can anybody find out if you don't know. Has the whole process been that circular?---It has.

PN2435

Where did Mr Nelson fit into the first process then, with the set of assessments that he produced? He told us he assessed 12 people and his assessments were accepted. In what context did that happen and for what purpose?---I believe through the end of 99. I'm - I'm going back - - -

PN2436

So at the end of 99 he provided some assessments of 12 people?---Yes, it may have been as early as October - somewhere in October, November in 99 he was contacted by the then training manager, Ben Flaiban, as part of the competency standards issues back then and was brought in to - to give us an indication of - of the competency of these people and - - -

PN2437

Very well, he gave you an indication and - - -?---I believe then - - -

PN2438

- - - for what purpose?---Sorry?

PN2439

For what purpose was that indication given though?---I don't know. I wasn't - - -

PN2440

Was anything done - - -?---I wasn't involved directly in it back - back then.

PN2441

I see. That report or its aftermath is not covered in the documentation you have produced for this purpose?---Yes, I believe it be - the report is - it is - the particular report is in here, I think.

PN2442

Can you put your hand on it? I'm sorry, Mr Terzic, but I want to perhaps follow through this.

PN2443

THE WITNESS: In annexure B.

PN2444

MUNRO J: I see, it's the one of 11 September, is it? No, that's the proposal. 28 October 99, is that it; preliminary report?---Yes, that's the one.

PN2445

What happened with that report then, in terms of any aftermath?---That - that report, from memory, was the subject of - of some meetings early in the year 2000 and got carried nowhere, from memory.

PN2446

Well, in the chronology and I'm a little bit concerned with this at this stage, if you go to the document which appears twice, I'm not sure with what difference under - I think the second version of it is annexure C and it's toward the back. It's a report from you to Mr Woods?---Yes.

PN2447

The report requested as at 20 July 2000. That commences at July 2000?---Yes.

PN2448

Is it a fair inference that the report from Mr Nelson about competences beyond the C10 level proved inconclusive and the next move was the decision handed down from the EBA agreement that Coates Hire would commission David Tiller and John Brunskill to implement competency standards?---Correct.

PN2449

They then went to the MISTAS - - -?---Correct, yes.

PN2450

Tiller axis?---That's right, that was - - -

PN2451

From March 2000 through till - - -?---To now.

PN2452

About October 2000?---That's right.

PN2453

When you then went back to Nelson?---With - with the decision - - -

PN2454

Well, perhaps if you can just answer the question. I think you might have nodded?---Yes, with the signing of the EBA, which happened around - around March in 2000 Mr Tiller and Mr Brunskill were invited in to conduct the process from there. Everything - everything - - -

PN2455

Well, perhaps because it's convenience in that context that the meeting with Mr Tiller on 28 March 2000 that you report upon - - -?---That's right.

PN2456

- - - occurred at which you discussed your position that there was to be nobody above C10?---But we - we believe that there'd be nobody above C10, that's right.

PN2457

I think this would be common ground, the enterprise agreement provides, does it not, that there is to be some such process - I'm looking at clause 14.3:

PN2458

MISTAS and the AIG to jointly carry out assessments to be completed by September 2000.

PN2459

?---Correct.

PN2460

And 14.4:

PN2461

When the above competency standard implementation is concluded C9 and C8 relativities shall be applied to adjust the shop rates applicable to any employee assessed a C9 or C8 classifications.

PN2462

?---Correct.

PN2463

So that's broadly the context of the process?---Yes.

PN2464

That has been operating since somewhere back in 99 in relation to competency - - -?---Yes, with that - - -

PN2465

- - - and linkages to classification?---Yes, with the signing of that particular EBA when Mr Brunskill and Mr Tiller came on board everything prior to that was - was basically forgotten and a new process was started from that point. So over the - over the period of years there had been lots of discussion about what the base would be and changes in the base and all of those sorts of things. So all of that - all of that was - was basically forgotten, if you like, and the process then started again from that point.

PN2466

I think you may not have responded to my question that the outline that I've just given commencing from the initiation of the report of Skills Pro through Mr Nelson in 99 through to the March 2000 proposal recapped in your report of July and the associated EBA which was entered into in August 2000?---Yes.

PN2467

Or executed in August 2000 indicates the articulation, if I can call it that, between the competency standard assessment and the award classifications?---Yes.

PN2468

Thank you. Mr Terzic, I did interrupt you but I think it's just convenient to get at least that part of the material. Thanks.

PN2469

MR TERZIC: I was asking you questions on the assessor's work, Mr Hogg, and I wanted evidence before this Board to indicate how the assessor's work book was compiled. There has been some evidence led by other witnesses, notably Mr Brunskill and Mr Nelson. I want your view on this?

PN2470

..........: Evidence led by Mr Brunskill?

PN2471

MR TERZIC: I withdraw that. Evidence led by Mr Nelson. Say, for example, I take the work book of Mr Brown, Scott Brown, you know Mr Brown?---Yes, I know Mr Brown, yes.

PN2472

And he was assessed against various units. Shall I refer to the whole unit or is a number enough for you to identify it by?---It depends which number it is, which unit are you talking about?

PN2473

9.11A?---Apply basic design and.....concepts, yes.

PN2474

11.16A?---That's order materials, I believe.

PN2475

Yes. 12.2A, electrical electronic measurement?---Measurement, yes.

PN2476

18.30A, diagnose and repair low voltage electrical systems?---Yes.

PN2477

16.3B advance customer service; 18.11A shut down, isolate machines, equipment?---Yes.

PN2478

18.21A maintain and repair hydraulic systems. Okay. Why was Mr Brown assessed against those units, who determined that?---That once again came from the committee and through the appeals from the company.

PN2479

Why were those units chosen, do you know?---They were, I believe, the units by which the self assessment results resulted in him being assessed under that self assessment criteria as being competent.

PN2480

I'm not sure if I quite follow you. Mr Brown assessed himself and said I want to be tested against these units, is that what you're alluding to?---No. No, not at all.

PN2481

Who decided which units Mr Brown would be assessed on?---From - from the self assessments there was a result.

PN2482

Yes?---Those results came out as a set of facts and figures, if you like, from - from the self assessments. It was from the results of the self assessment that Coates then put together a list of units to appeal. That's - that's where - sorry?

PN2483

Can you explain where these self assessments fit into the broader picture. When were they conducted?---Okay, they were conducted on the - the 19th of June 2001 by MISTAS and AIG.

PN2484

19th of June?---Sorry, 2000, sorry.

PN2485

As a result of those self assessments it was decided that it was - there was at least a case to answer in respect of each of those units, so to speak?---Correct.

PN2486

So a suspicion that Mr Brown might be applying advance customer services skills?---Correct.

PN2487

And that was signed off by the work place committee?---Which was signed off, which bit?

PN2488

Well, that Mr Brown would be assessed against the units that I've read out. The committee decided those were the units?---Yes, I guess so. There's probably not a direct answer to that. They came from a list of appeals that the company put in and then assessments were then organised from that point through, so - - -

PN2489

So who made the decision ultimately that these were the units that Mr Brown would be assessed against?---The committee would have.

PN2490

The committee did?---Yes.

PN2491

And that would be the same for all of the employees?---Correct.

PN2492

It was based on the relevant employee saying that they exercised those sort of skills?---Yes.

PN2493

So it's likely that Mr Brown would have to carry out, for example, customer service?---Yes.

PN2494

You'd been in the field yourself. You'd expect Mr Brown to carry out customer service in a good and professional manner, wouldn't you?---You'd hope so from the company's point of view.

PN2495

You'd desire him to have those skills, wouldn't you?---The - the skill that we ask our field service people to have and that I myself used was a skill of empathy, I guess, if nothing else.

PN2496

You don't want them to be rude to the customers, do you?---No, that's correct.

PN2497

You want them to deal with the customers in a professional manner?---Correct.

PN2498

Meet their needs?---Correct.

PN2499

Promote a good image for Coates?---Correct.

PN2500

Promote a situation where the customer would say Coates delivers good service, we'll go back to Coates again and again?---Yes.

PN2501

So it's quite desirable that Mr Brown have advanced customer service skills, isn't it?---Advanced customer service has a competency standards unit and criteria inside there is a different skill than what we ask our field service people to have. There are components of the advance customer service unit that we require them to have, sure.

PN2502

What ones don't you require?---I'd have to see that full list to - to drill down and have a look but, see - sorry, go on?

PN2503

Carry on, you were answering a question; I don't want to cut you off?---Okay. No, no, you're right, go ahead.

PN2504

So there would be some advanced customer service skills you'd expect Mr Brown to have and perform and others you say we don't want him to perform?---Correct.

PN2505

So if he was in a situation dealing with a customer and it was a skill you didn't want him to act on he just would fall blank and not exercise that skill. Is that what you require of him?---In the context of what the role is where - let's say we have a machine break down which is, I guess is a good demonstration of - of this, the skill or one of the skills within that calls for follow up of the customer, make sure a - let's say a new machine got delivered and - and all of these other bits and pieces. Now, it's all of that end of things that we don't require our guys to do. They do the preliminary turn up, talk to the customer, try and sort the issue out, okay. From there they then pass it on to one of our sales guys or our branch managers or someone at head office at Miranda or so on and so forth from there.

PN2506

You're aware that the unit, the competency here is a general unit that is to be applied across industry in a multitude of situations, aren't you?---Yes.

PN2507

So, wouldn't it be the case that in some instances with some workers there would be far greater emphasis on a collection of some of the skills and it's probable that some wouldn't be exercised much at all because the job doesn't require it. That would be the case, wouldn't it?---Correct.

PN2508

And in some instances the employee would exercise some of those skills at a far higher level than just a perfunctory level that would probably meet the requirements of the assessments, isn't that the case?---Could be.

PN2509

Yes. And is it your view that if one or two of those skills aren't exercised by the Coates employee they shouldn't be assessed - they shouldn't be deemed to have fulfilled that skill requirement?---Sorry?

PN2510

Well, we've just reached agreement, I think, that in some instances some of the relevant skills in a particular unit - and we're using customer service as an example, will be fulfilled not just at a minimal level but at a high level; you agreed with that?---Yes, yes. We have a set level that we expect customer service to be at.

PN2511

But in some instances if one was to go through this omnibus universal type skills benchmark competency standard there would be some skills that in a customer service role - in a field service technician's role that element of customer service wouldn't really be a requirement of their job?---No, I think quite contrary to that we have a set standard in which we like to - a customer service standard which we like to meet and - - -

PN2512

No, no, I'm talking about the competency standard, the universal - not your standard, the competency standard? Some of those units would not be called upon by Coates, would they; some of the - - -?---Some of the criteria within the unit?

PN2513

Some of the criteria, yes?---Yes, that's correct.

PN2514

So is it your view that if some of the criteria aren't called upon by Coates that should be enough to say the person is not competent in that whole unit; is that the way things work?---My belief is the way of the competency standards within their implementation is that each of the - the criteria within that unit should be met.

PN2515

Every single one?---Yes, every single one. For someone to be found competent within that skill. Yes, it's sort of - if I could parallel to driving a car.

PN2516

So your view is that unless in a particular unit every single skill called on is used and held the person should not be deemed to have been qualified in that particular competency unit?---Unless each and every single criteria is (a) required by the company and (b) actually used by the - the staff member or something like that. If - if in each and every case those aren't fully met that you can't determine competence of that skill. Bits and pieces of it don't allow you to deem someone competent.

PN2517

In a situation where an employee not just meets some of the criteria but goes a long way beyond them and would fulfil that criteria at a very high level and perhaps a very small number, one or two criteria are not met because it's just not called upon to use that job would you say fail that person for that unit?---There is no fail or - - -

PN2518

Well, not pass them, assess them as not competent?---It goes back to - to what I just said, yes.

PN2519

So there's no latitude in it?---I don't believe there is.

PN2520

No give and take?---I don't believe there is any latitude in the application of the competency standards.

PN2521

So that's Coates' view, there is zero scope for latitude, every single criteria must be met or not at all?---If you were going to an old - it's not as question but - sorry, I - yes.

PN2522

Yes, okay. For the most part, Mr Hogg, are the skills that are found in the units that were assessed desirable from a Coates perspective, do you want your workers to have those skills?---This is the - just the ones that we're talking about, the additionals?

PN2523

No, any one of the skills that was assessed, for example design concepts, low voltage, hydraulics, is it desirable that the employees have those skills?---It's desirable that we have a coverage of all of the skills.

PN2524

Yes?---Okay. If you like, focused in different areas. So we'll have people with different skills in different areas.

PN2525

Say, for example, the hydraulics units that were assessed, are you aware of them?---Yes.

PN2526

Is it desirable that your employees have those skills?---The - the hydraulic unit assessed, I believe, is - is all about our system type requirement and the way that - that our - our work shop is set up or our maintenance system, if you like, is set up is that we don't actually work on the system. We purely change components. We remove components from a system and fit a new one....from there.

PN2527

So is it your evidence that the hydraulic units that were assessed are not really needed by Coates? For example, maintain and repair hydraulic systems at the level required of Mr Brown, 18.21A; work at that level is not needed by Coates?---I - I believe all of the work that is covered by Mr Brown - once again I haven't been involved directly with his work in the recent time and I say recent as being 12 months or so - but I believe that all of the work that we require our people to do is covered in the base of 18.30.

PN2528

18.30A diagnose and repair low voltage electrical systems?---Sorry, sorry, got it wrong. Which is the hydraulic - what was the - what was the unit number of that hydraulics one?

PN2529

18.21A?---18.20, then, sorry, it's 18.20.

PN2530

18.20?---I believe.

PN2531

So is it your view that the work in 18.21A is superfluous to what Mr Brown needs to carry out his job?---I believe so.

PN2532

And if Mr Brown was faced with the situation where he would required to exercise skills of 18.21A level in the field would it be your advice to him don't do it?---I believe that if - - -

PN2533

Call in an expert, for example?---If we had a - a problem which required the utilisation of those skills we wouldn't be doing anything with the machine on site, we'd say it's a breakdown situation again, we will be putting a change over machine in there and then we would decide from there what we would do with that machine.

PN2534

Say for example - I want to put a proposition to you. Mr Brown is repairing a piece of equipment at - I think he went to Coonamble and the customer wants this piece of equipment up and running, he's paying a lot of money for this equipment, the hydraulics have blown and Mr Brown assesses the situation and he comes to the view that for him to properly service this piece of equipment he must use skills in unit 18.21A would it be your advice to him don't touch it, call in an expert who can do that work at that level?---It would be my advice to him to contact the local branch manager who - who looks after the area.

PN2535

Yes?---And get a decision from him as to what the best way for the customer would be. Now, in our - in our current system that would be to get a change over machine up there. Coonamble's a long way away from nowhere. I realise that.

PN2536

Mr Brown has been assessed by Mr Nelson as being capable and competent to perform that work?---Yes.

PN2537

Mr Brown would undoubtedly be confident that he can perform work at that level?---Yes.

PN2538

Him doing so could effect a repair on a piece of machinery in a tight spot to the satisfaction of the client but it would be Coates' view we don't want to pay him for that skill, we don't recognise him having that skill, don't do it. Is that the way Coates would approach the situation?---No, within our - our maintenance system we would look at that and say that - that a short term repair or whatever on site is - is not, you know, any good for the longevity of the machine - service of the machine, so we wouldn't be conducting that sort of repair.

PN2539

So despite Mr Brown bringing his own professional expertise to the job, despite him being assessed as competent to perform that job by Mr Nelson it would be your view, sitting in your office in Miranda, that the best way to deal with the situation is not repair it, get another machine out, obviously at great cost?---That could be our - our better option, that's correct.

PN2540

If Mr Brown is capable of doing the work, if he can do the work, if that option would be a far cheaper, more expedient course and would increase customer satisfaction to a far greater extent than shipping in another machine from maybe Miranda wouldn't it make sense just to have Mr Brown do the job?---Once again, our system is that we would get a change over machine up there. We - we have other ways through our sales team of addressing the direct customer service side of things and customer satisfaction.

PN2541

So Coates' view is the system must prevail, despite common sense?---It may not be a common sensory thing that you're talking about, it's difficult to apply that in this situation.

PN2542

MUNRO J: But is it true though?---I beg your pardon?

PN2543

Are you're really asking the Board of Reference to accept that in those circumstances the service - I've forgotten your term - the service repair person wouldn't just go and do the job?---No.

PN2544

The impression I have - and perhaps you can correct me if I'm wrong - is that that's what people are doing. If they see the thing and can fix it - even if it means getting a part - - -?---I think that's in a different light - - -

PN2545

- - - from the local shop they do that?---Yes, in a different light to this particular unit that we're talking about. The work that we do or the - - -

PN2546

Well, no, repairing - the difference that you're relying on, as I understand it, is between maintaining hydraulic system components, 18.20A and 18.21A maintain and repair hydraulic system components?---Yes, one of them is - is at component level where we - where we purely change a component and that's the sort of thing that we will do out on site where we will change a component. That's the level of work that we do. We don't strip down components out on site as far as a hydraulic pump or motor or modify a - a system or something like that. We may strip down a hydraulic ram, for instance, on the odd occasion. Purely changing a component, from removing one to fitting another one.

PN2547

MR TERZIC: Did you just say that you don't maintain and repair hydraulic systems?---Sorry?

PN2548

At what level is hydraulics service and repair carried out at Coates Hire to your knowledge?---To my knowledge?

PN2549

Yes?---We are purely a - a changer of components, if you like, a changer of components. We do on occasions and I've seen rams and things like that being rebuilt but as far as my knowledge goes that's to - to the extent.

PN2550

Is knowledge of hydraulic systems required for this job?---For which job?

PN2551

For maintenance work in Coates Hire?---Sorry, the?

PN2552

Is a good knowledge of hydraulic systems and principles essential for the maintenance staff at Coates Hire?---Yes, trade level knowledge is fine.

PN2553

What about advance trade level knowledge?---As far as post trade or something like that?

PN2554

Yes?---A higher level skill, I guess, would be complementary to any company.

PN2555

Do you recognise that it exists in Coates?---What a high level skill?

PN2556

Yes, post trade level skills?---We were hoping to get that determination from this whole implementation process.

PN2557

Do you suspect it exists now?---Do we suspect that it exists?

PN2558

Yes?---I guess so.

PN2559

Did you ever use higher level hydraulic skills when you were - - -?---I - I did my trade as a plant mechanic which is honed directly in on this - this field and we spent eight or nine months learning about hydraulics and learning about the systems and - and, you know, I don't think that I ever used a skill higher than what I learned in my trade. The same would go for auto-electrical in my particular learning of doing plant mechanics trade course in Sydney TAFE.

PN2560

Do you know what's in unit 18.21A?---Each of the criteria or each of the - - -

PN2561

Yes, have you had a look at it recently, are you familiar with it?---I'm not 100 per cent familiar with it, no.

PN2562

So you're not quite sure what's in it?---I have the basis of what's in it.

PN2563

But do you think - - -?---I - I don't know infinitely what is in it.

PN2564

Do you think it's being used in Coates Hire at the moment by Coates workers?---I can't answer that.

PN2565

You just don't know?---Yes, that's correct.

PN2566

It could be used?---It could be used anywhere.

PN2567

Another unit that's been controversial in these proceedings is the order materials unit. Are you aware of that unit?---Yes. Once again, I don't know infinitely what is inside that unit.

PN2568

Sure. There are company policies on ordering materials, aren't there?---There are.

PN2569

Do you train your maintenance workers in these policies?---We don't.

PN2570

How are they expected to learn them?---They're not expected to use them.

PN2571

They're not expected to use them?---Mm.

PN2572

So if Mr Brown or Mr Finlay needs some parts what are they expected to do?---They would ring up and get an order number.

PN2573

From whom?---From probably John Meek or Mick Delavale, maybe Charlie Aitken, another one - he's our store manager. They would then go down and get the part.

PN2574

What about if a field service fitter was out in the bush somewhere is he expected to follow those procedures?---Yes, wherever possible.

PN2575

What if he knows he can pick up a bearing to fix a piece of equipment at the local farm machinery shop for five dollars and he could do that in 20 minutes; hop in his ute, pick it up, bring it back, fix the machine quickly?---Yes. Yes.

PN2576

Would you recommend that he do that or go through the standard operating procedure of ringing up?---If he was in an area where we didn't have an account with a customer - with a supplier for instance and that was the only option, yes, that's what I'd recommend.

PN2577

And they do that don't they?---I believe so. Once again, I don't know what our current work practices are exactly in that area because I don't look after that area. You know, I'm - you know, John Meek, for instance, would be far more qualified to answer that question.

PN2578

You were in field service, weren't you?---I was.

PN2579

Did you go out bush?---All the time.

PN2580

Would you do that, would you go and pick up a part at a local garage or machinery supplier?---Yes.

PN2581

Did you have a float or something?---No, I used my own money.

PN2582

And you reimbursed it?---Yes.

PN2583

That, in many cases, is the most expedient course, isn't it?---The quickest way of going about things, yes.

PN2584

It brings customer satisfaction?---For sure.

PN2585

It's a great benefit to Coates, isn't it?---Yes.

PN2586

Because if somebody was to say, well, I'm just going to go through the procedure that could take some time, couldn't it?---No, not really, one phone call and a drive to the supplier. It takes the same amount of time as going there yourself.

PN2587

Then why didn't you follow the procedure then?---Because where I was - most of the time I was - I was sort of our in Bourke and Brewarrina and Wanaaring and those sorts of areas.

PN2588

The phone doesn't work there, does it?---It does, yes. It does.

PN2589

Okay?---Yes, I had a phone.

PN2590

Excuse my ignorance?---Yes, sorry, no, I had a phone that worked out there; a three watt phone. It worked, sure.

PN2591

Do all of your technicians - - -?---But suppliers - - -

PN2592

- - - have these phones?---Suppliers weren't in the area, that's why - that's why I could use that.

PN2593

Okay. So that's a good desirable course from Coates' perspective to use this sort of initiative?---For sure.

PN2594

And you think that's a skill that should be recognised?---What is the skill involved with that. I don't ask a question, I - I - I think I allow it, I guess, in saying that purely by - by taking the initiative and going and getting a part and fixing the machine - getting back to what you were asking about, this order materials skill is - they're not aligned. Now, once again, in some ways, yes, but as a full skill they're not aligned.

PN2595

Well, it requires some skill to do this, doesn't it, because firstly you have to identify which sort of components can substitute for the broken component, don't you?---Not really. I mean, most of the stuff - if you've got a bearing that's broken you're not going to get a substitute. You have to get that bearing.

PN2596

But there can be other sorts of bearings, different brands of bearings with different codes that are - - -?---Brand-wise, yes, correct.

PN2597

So you have to get the same dimensions and same load qualities?---Correct.

PN2598

But it might require checking with various manuals as to which bearing could do the job if the brand name of the original - - -?---None of that - that type of information is in our - in our manuals. What we would do is take it to a supplier and say here you go, this is a broken bearing, give me something to replace it.

PN2599

Yes, but the field service technician would have to have some knowledge of bearing and ordering?---Not at all.

PN2600

Not at all?---You would take that bearing to a supplier and just say here you go, give me one of these.

PN2601

One of your criticisms of Mr Nelson's approach is that he didn't validate his findings, do you recall that?---Yes.

PN2602

You put in a fair bit of evidence to that, I think, in paragraphs 18 to 21 of your statement?---Yes.

PN2603

Critical of Mr Nelson for not checking out what your side of the story is, your version of events with management, aren't you?---Yes.

PN2604

Have you checked out with your employees whether Mr Nelson's assessment is correct?---Meaning what, sorry?

PN2605

Well, have you validated with the employees whether Mr Nelson's assessments are correct?---Meaning what? I don't understand what you're trying to ask.

PN2606

Well, I'm using your term validation. You're saying Mr Nelson should have validated or cross-referenced what the employee said with management; is that what you mean?---Yes, yes.

PN2607

Have you then checked Mr Nelson's results with your employees?---We haven't, no. Might I just - might I just add to that. There was nothing for us to check. The assessor's work books had very very little writing or evidence in them for us to check and so what could we check?

PN2608

Well, your employees at Miranda are nearby located?---Yes, yes.

PN2609

Wouldn't it just have taken you to walk from your office to the work shop and asked Mr Forest, for example, can you do AS15.54 welding?---Yes.

PN2610

That's not a big thing, is it?---No, not at all. Not at all.

PN2611

You could have done that?---Correct.

PN2612

How long would it take?---Not long at all.

PN2613

But you didn't do it?---No.

PN2614

Why not?---We - we were going through this process that was asking those questions.

PN2615

Well, you could have asked yourself and found out, why didn't you do it?---I don't know.

PN2616

It would have been a simple thing to do, wouldn't it?---Yes.

PN2617

It could have cleared up a lot of doubt, couldn't it?---Doubt on what though?

PN2618

Well, it could have cleared up doubt whether Mr Forest could do the work he claimed to Mr Nelson, couldn't it?---No, not really.

PN2619

Not really?---Not purely by asking a question.

PN2620

You could have asked him - you could have said to him show me some AS15.54 welding?---A demonstration of seeing the weld actually performed and then carrying out the tests, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

PN2621

Why didn't you ask Mr Forest to do that work?---Well.....done that - because we were asked to go through this process and so we were going through this process.

PN2622

But if you had so much doubt as to whether Mr Forest could do the work why didn't you just check with him?

PN2623

MR O'DONNELL: I think we've had this question three times now, your Honour.

PN2624

MUNRO J: I think you've made the point, Mr Terzic.

PN2625

MR TERZIC: Yes. Another course, if you weren't quite sure by just, for example, walking down and asking Mr Forest whether he could do AS15.54 welding, are you aware that Mr Nelson in respect to that work consulted experts in the field of welding?---Yes, I am. He has mentioned that he consulted some experts. In fact on one of the work books I think he wrote down that he consulted Mr Brunskill on - on one of them.

PN2626

Do you know whether he consulted anyone else?---From conversations I've had I think he did consult someone but I don't know who it was or - or anything about them.

PN2627

And what did Mr Nelson say? Did he say something like the experts have checked this and they said it's okay?---Well, we asked - once again, - from memory I think this is from those meetings on the 19th and 20th, what evidence was presented to the - to the expert and was it the level that was written in the work book, which is in here somewhere and Mr Nelson said yes, the level of information that was presented to him is recorded in the work book, in the assessor's work book, to which we had a look at and there was very very little in there. So there were some concerns that the level of material presented to a subject expert wasn't there for him to determine what the actual job was itself.

PN2628

But did you think to perhaps ask Mr Nelson to identify this expert and perhaps provide to you this expert's telephone number so you could call him up and ask him?---Yes we did and he wouldn't do that.

PN2629

He wouldn't give you the telephone number of whom?---Yes - of the welding expert that he so-called consulted.

PN2630

Did he give a reason why he didn't give it to you?---He said he didn't want to bring them into this - this - I forget the word he used but he didn't want to bring them into this whole, sort of, whole scenario of what's going on.

PN2631

Because it was pretty messy by that stage, wasn't it?---It's fairly clear, I think, isn't it.

PN2632

Yes, okay. Did you think perhaps to get your own expert in in welding to check things out?---We didn't.

PN2633

There was evidence before this Commission that when any AS15.54 welding is used you bring in a contractor now, is that the case?---Once again, I don't control that area of work. I'm sorry, I don't know.

PN2634

That's fine, we'll ask somebody who knows. Since doing all of this work what's your opinion now of Mr Nelson?---In as far as what?

PN2635

His professional competence?---Okay. I think in this particular job that he hasn't completed the assessments in a correct way really by not gaining enough evidence and carrying out the practical side of the assessments correctly, etcetera, etcetera.

PN2636

Do you think he's qualified to do the job?---From his list of - of qualifications, if you like, or that it - it appears as though he is.

PN2637

But you think he hasn't done the job thoroughly enough?---Correct.

PN2638

Just not quite thoroughly enough or do you think it's a total slipshod superficial glance over?---I - I think in a lot of cases with the assessments he's done he hasn't done them thoroughly enough.

PN2639

Far to superficial if you're - - -?---Yes.

PN2640

He said he spent about a day per employee?---Yes.

PN2641

How long would you say a full assessment would take?---I'd say breaking down each of the - each of the criteria and testing each one of those to a level of competence as indicated in these units and onwards from there it would take, particularly where we had, say, four or five or even six units, a substantial time longer than what it did. Without actually going in there and conducting the - the assessment myself as I haven't up to this point it's a little bit hard to - to calculate that time but I would say upwards of four days.

PN2642

Per employee?---Yes.

PN2643

Have you thought of taking this approach. Taking perhaps five or six units at random per employee - you say you're a qualified assessor - and just sampling, as a control or test whether Mr Nelson's results would satisfy your own investigations. Have you thought of doing that?---We haven't considered any further steps at this stage of the game.

PN2644

Why not?---Obviously we're waiting for the outcome of this.

PN2645

Okay. So we're here because you looked at Mr Nelson's work, you rejected it and so we're simply not going to comply with it because it's too superficial?---We rejected it on the grounds that the committee had - had a decision that Coates was going to review the evidence gathered before any final decisions were made or anything like that. That - - -

PN2646

Em - sorry?---Go on, no, go on.

PN2647

I want to approach this from a slightly different way, Mr Hogg, after a long tortured period of several years of trying to do this process it was finally agreed that an independent expert would be assigned the task. That's what happened, isn't it?---Correct.

PN2648

That was Mr Nelson?---Correct.

PN2649

And in good faith - in good faith each of the assessed employees went for a test with Mr Nelson?---Correct.

PN2650

They applied themselves for a whole day, yes? Or more perhaps?---I believe so.

PN2651

And each of them who's appeared in this Commission have said the thing was draining and thorough?---Yes.

PN2652

They said it made them tired, it was an exhausting thing for them to do and they've gone through this process in good faith after agreement was reached that this was what would fix it once and for all, do you agree, that's what the expectation was?---We always reserve the right to review the evidence right through the process.

PN2653

I see. And now that they've gone through this whole process they would have had an expectation that if Nelson marked me up or down I would be bound by the results. That would have been a reasonable expectation for the assessed employees to have?---Yes.

PN2654

The results come in and in some cases they're told they deserve a higher classification, that's what happened, isn't it? Yes?---I don't know who's been told what, I really don't. As far as - - -

PN2655

Well, it's in the book that they've passed the units and they've been provided with these results, so they've been assessed at a higher level, haven't they?---Have the workers actually received the assessor's work book, have they? I - I - I don't know, I'm sorry, I really don't know what - - -

PN2656

So you don't even know what they've been told?---Correct, I don't know.

PN2657

Well, okay, say they have been told that they've been assessed at a higher level and they've passed particular units?---Yes, yes.

PN2658

Don't you think that they would be mightily disappointed if the company just says not good enough again?---They would be.

PN2659

Don't you think they think it's just unfair?---Yes, I'm sure they would.

PN2660

They did all that was expected of them and again the company says no, not acceptable?---The company feels that it's got valid reason for saying no.

PN2661

But don't you feel any moral obligation to accept the independent expert's advice?---Provided he completes his job satisfactorily to us.

PN2662

Are you going to keep moving the goal posts in this?---All we're doing is we're asking him to complete his job satisfactorily and part of that - - -

PN2663

To Coates' satisfaction?---Part of that was to - to - for Coates to review the evidence that - that the assessor used in determining the competence of these people.

PN2664

So is Coates going to keep - are you going to try and keep a right of veto on this all the way through?---I don't understand what you're asking.

PN2665

Well, if they had to be assessed again and the result came down in favour of the employees would you veto it again?---I don't - I don't know.

PN2666

Have you got it minuted somewhere that Coates reserved their rights to reject Mr Nelson's findings?---To reject the findings?

PN2667

Yes?---Not - not from my memory. Not those exact terms or words.

PN2668

Can you remember what the exact terms or words were?---No, I can't.

PN2669

Is it written down anywhere?---I can't recall.

PN2670

You don't know?---Mm.

PN2671

So you've just said we've always kept the right to review the evidence but you don't know where that was made plain or clear to anyone?---No, that was minuted. That's a different question to what you asked. That - I believe - - -

PN2672

Can you show me where that exists in the minutes?---28th of the 3rd in the minutes.

PN2673

MUNRO J: 28 March 2001 or 2000?---It was first - sorry, first minuted on the 4th of the 12th 2000.

PN2674

Can you take us to it?

PN2675

MR TERZIC: Can you find that in your statement, please?---It's in attachment A and it will be - yes, 4.12.

PN2676

MUNRO J: Annexure A to AIG6 at about attachment A.....competency standards meeting, 4th of December.

PN2677

MR TERZIC: I've found the minutes. Yes, are you referring to the second page?---Yes, second page and the - I guess the 4th last paragraph starting with G. Woods.

PN2678

Yes, where it says - - -?---He was answered.

PN2679

Where it says further review may be required to test the validity or reliability of the evidence gathered during the assessments?---That's correct.

PN2680

So what exactly does that mean, you just want to leave the words as they are?---Just as they are.

PN2681

What do you mean by validity there, what do you think would be meant by validity there?---Validity of - of the evidence?

PN2682

Yes?---You mention?

PN2683

Yes?---Whether that - the evidence that was being submitted and collected by - by Mr Nelson was actually valid for the - for the unit or - or criteria in question.

PN2684

What do you mean by - well, you haven't really explained?---The validity - the validity of language is - is whether the evidence collected is actually in direct relation to the assessment, the criteria being assessed.

PN2685

What does reliability mean?---Reliability is the - how do you explain reliability? I - I guess reliability in the sense is where you have one piece of evidence and no further evidence the question of reliability would come up. Reliability of evidence is where you have multiple sources of - of evidence pointing to that - that particular skill, so reliability of the evidence is structured around the source of the evidence and the variety of the evidence and that sort of thing bring it to that unit.

PN2686

You've attempted to assess the validity and the reliability of the evidence?---Correct.

PN2687

But that's your evidence - you haven't asked any of the employees?---Correct.

PN2688

So you haven't tried to validate it against the employees?---All - all I was doing was having a look at the assessor's work books and from those assessor's work books I was to have a look at the evidence that was in those work books and then I could have used that evidence to go further but there was very little evidence and nothing to use.

PN2689

Did you make it plain to Mr Nelson that he would have to collect extensive evidence in this process?---As part of - of being an assessor you have to - to collect enough evidence and information to make a judgment on someone's competence.

PN2690

MUNRO J: Just before you leave that topic, could I take you, Mr Hogg, to the meeting of 21 December. This is the page before the one on the 4th of December?---Yes.

PN2691

Perhaps if you just read the second paragraph there of the part of the minutes. That appears to be a reference to the passage you have just quoted from the minutes of 4 December, does it not?---Yes, it does - does refer to that.

PN2692

Well, how do you put that in the context, that appears to be a clarification that the further review would not impact any assessments conducted?---I believe Mr Woods - - -

PN2693

What should one make of that?---I believe Mr Woods was referring to the fact that - where he's saying here no way impact any assessments conducted is that the course of assessments - and I'm only surmising this, these are obviously Mr Woods' thought and words - the course of assessments wouldn't be - wouldn't be interrupted and he finishes off there by saying we must ensure that we dot the Is and cross the Ts and I can - I can only surmise from that that he's meaning that we do review all of the evidence and make sure that the assessments have been conducted thoroughly.

PN2694

MR TERZIC: Later Mr Woods qualified what he'd said earlier by saying that the fundamentals of the assessments wouldn't be altered, it's just - just a double check to make sure there'd been no slip ups here or there?---It's difficult to know exactly what Mr Woods was saying by reading a small - a couple of paragraphs.

PN2695

But essentially the result is that the company has decided that the whole thing is so bad it can't be accepted in any shape or form, isn't it?---Correct.

PN2696

Do you call that dotting the Is and crossing the Ts?---I - I really don't know. I mean, as I said, I don't know in what context this - this exactly - - -

PN2697

You've heard the expression dot the Is and cross the Ts, what does it mean in your view?---I have, be very thorough.

PN2698

Be very thorough. In this context what do you think it means?---The same. Once again, I'm only.....surmising. In my interpretation of that - - -

PN2699

And you don't really know what he means when he says no way impact any assessments conducted?---I don't.

PN2700

He's your boss, isn't it?---He's - yes, group financial controller or something like that.

PN2701

In this big process, in the whole scheme of things did you ever ask Mr Woods what he meant by that?---I didn't feel I had to.

PN2702

Okay. Your Honour, I've got another appointment, might we - - -

PN2703

MUNRO J: Yes, I notice we're at the time. Mr Hogg, I'm afraid you're going to have to come back tomorrow, perhaps for more of the same. 9.30 am we will resume. Perhaps if we are going to get into serious grips if somebody could agree on what documents we should have. We'll either acquire our own or you can provide us with them. The other little documents you're looking at I'm just not sure what they are yet. Some of you are very familiar with them and I'm, I think as my questioning discloses, not all that familiar.

PN2704

MR O'DONNELL: We haven't marked Mr Hogg's statement, I don't think, your Honour.

PN2705

MUNRO J: I thought I had marked it BRAIG6.

EXHIBIT #BRAIG6 STATEMENT OF MR HOGG

PN2706

MUNRO J: Very well, we will resume tomorrow at 9.30.

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [4.00pm]

ADJOURNED UNTIL THURSDAY, 21 JUNE 2001

INDEX

LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs

FRASER YOUNG NELSON, ON FORMER AFFIRMATION PN1720
EXAMINATION BY MR FLAIBAN PN1720
EXAMINATION BY MR SHAW PN1875
EXAMINATION BY MR STEWART PN1959
EXHIBIT #AMWU8 COATES HIRE EASTERN REGION INTERNAL MEMO DATED 27/11/2000 NEW PURCHASE ORDER PROCEDURE PN2232
EXHIBIT #BRAMWU7 STATEMENT OF F.Y. NELSON PN2234
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR TERZIC PN2236
WITNESS WITHDREW PN2259
EXHIBIT #AMWU9 STATEMENT OF JOHN BRUNSKILL TC
STEVEN LESLIE HOGG, SWORN PN2272
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR O'DONNELL PN2272
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR TERZIC PN2300
EXHIBIT #BRAIG6 STATEMENT OF MR HOGG PN2706
WITNESS WITHDREW PN2706