C2001/1301, Transcript of Proceedings [2001] AIRCTrans 1686 (24 July 2001)

AUSCRIPT PTY LTD
ABN 76 082 664 220

Level 2, 16 St George's Tce, PERTH WA 6000
Tel:[phone] Fax:[phone]

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

COMMISSIONER WHELAN

C2001/1301

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

and

A & A PRINT and OTHERS

Notification pursuant to section 99 of the Act
of a dispute re wages and conditions in the
graphic arts industry

PERTH

10.15 AM, MONDAY, 9 JULY 2001

Continued from 25.6.01 in Melbourne

PN231

MR T. KUCERA: I seek leave to appear for the AMWU.

PN232

Mr J. UPHILL: I appear on behalf of those members of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry. And I have handed your Associate a list which indicates those members that I appear on behalf of.

PN233

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Kucera?

PN234

MR KUCERA: This matter is an application for a finding of dispute under section 99 of the Workplace Relations Act. Obviously this matter flows on from the issuance of a duly authorised log of claims on some 680 employees in the printing industry on 20 February 2001. I understand that the matter has already been the subject of a number of hearings elsewhere and that this matter is essentially only in relation to those employees in Western Australia and the dispute finding there. The matter was listed for some 3 or so days, Commissioner, and I am quite pleased to report that you are not going to be here as long as that, because we have - - -

PN235

THE COMMISSIONER: It is all right. I have got to go to Port Hedland, Mr Kucera, so - - -

PN236

MR KUCERA: It is a wonderful place to go, Commissioner. A wonderful place. But in any event, we are happy to report that the exercise will be reasonably simplified this morning, simply because there are a number of employees that have not objected to the finding of dispute and I have a number of letters which I will seek to tender in relation to that. There is also advice that we have given your office last week about a number of employers that we no longer wish to proceed against. And depending on what happens this morning, there is possibly a further employer that we no longer wish to proceed against.

PN237

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN238

MR KUCERA: That is a company called Westpac Supplies. And they are actually listed for a revocation - - -

PN239

THE COMMISSIONER: For hearing of an application to revoke, yes.

PN240

MR KUCERA: - - - on Wednesday. The position is, we would like to add them to the list of employers that the AMWU no longer wishes to proceed against.

PN241

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN242

MR KUCERA: That leaves us with three companies. One company by the name of Hand Made Prints. Another company by the name of the Brand Agency and Solution Plus Advertising and Marketing. The Brand Agency actually notified you by way of correspondence that they wanted to be heard on these matters. But I am not aware that there is anyone from the Brand Agency here.

PN243

THE COMMISSIONER: No.

PN244

MR KUCERA: And, equally, I am also not aware of anyone that is here from Hand Made Print or Solution Plus Advertising and Marketing.

PN245

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN246

MR KUCERA: In relation to Hand Made Print, they sent correspondence on 3 May 2001 to the AMWU. I am not sure if you have a copy on your file. But I am happy to present it.

PN247

THE COMMISSIONER: I certainly have correspondence that they sent to the Commission. I don't know whether it simply reflects exactly the same correspondence that was sent to the AMWU.

PN248

MR KUCERA: It might be the same letter but I will just provide it to you, Commissioner. It is a letter dated - - -

PN249

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, this is actually the letter to the Commission, yes.

PN250

MR KUCERA: Okay.

PN251

THE COMMISSIONER: I think which we provided to you. I don't know that it was cc'd to you but we did provide it.

PN252

MR KUCERA: All right. Commissioner, in relation to that matter, into the second paragraph. The second paragraph reads as follows:

PN253

Please be advised that Fair Haven Enterprises Pty Ltd who trades as Hand Made Prints denies any coverages claimed by the applicant ...(reads)... printing it carries out is merely incidental to its manufacturing activities.

PN254

Our position in relation to that is that we would simply say is that though they might not be screen printing currently, we would say that there is obviously some scope for them to screen print in the future. It might be desirable for reasons of efficiency or whatever for them to do that work in-house again. And the employer need not actually be performing that work to be roped into an award or to be the subject of a dispute finding. So our position in relation to Hand Made Prints is that it falls well within the scope of the award, well within the scope of the industry clause, which appears at 1.6 of the AMW Printing Division Graphic Arts General Award 2000. The description what constitutes printing is defined in that award at 1.4.11 of the award.

PN255

And at paragraph 1.4.11(g) screen printing is defined as printing within the definition of the award. So we would respectfully submit, Commissioner, that they ought to be bound by a finding of dispute with this Commission. In relation to the other two employers that I mentioned, the Brand Agency and Solution Plus. It is our respectful submission that a duly authorised log of claims was served upon them together with a letter of demand. They failed to accede to the demands contained in that letter of demand, the claim. And as a result, we would say that a dispute exists between the AMWU and that company. And those two companies actually, Commissioner, and there ought to be a dispute finding in relation to those companies.

PN256

THE COMMISSIONER: Do you have the correspondence that the Commission has received in relation to those two companies, Mr Kucera?

PN257

MR KUCERA: I think I do.

PN258

THE COMMISSIONER: The letter from - - -

PN259

MR KUCERA: I don't have anything from Solution Plus but I do have something from the Brand Agency.

PN260

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. The correspondence from the Brand Agency was actually correspondence from a firm of solicitors by the name of Jackson McDonald.

PN261

MR KUCERA: Yes.

PN262

THE COMMISSIONER: Who indicated that they acted for the Brand Agency. And also indicated that they wished to be heard. They have been notified of these proceedings. We have confirmation that they received the facsimile transmission. But we have heard nothing from them.

PN263

MR UPHILL: Commissioner, perhaps if I can assist. I have spoken to both Jackson McDonald and the Brand Agency, the Brand Agency are now members of the Chamber.

PN264

THE COMMISSIONER: Right.

PN265

MR UPHILL: And after discussion with them late last week, they will not be opposing the finding of a dispute.

PN266

THE COMMISSIONER: Thanks, Mr Uphill, thank you.

PN267

MR KUCERA: Well, that helps considerably, Commissioner.

PN268

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN269

MR KUCERA: In relation to Solutions Plus, which is the only other - - -

PN270

THE COMMISSIONER: I do have correspondence from Solutions Plus. It is two sentences:

PN271

Please be advised that I do not believe this matter to be relevant to me. I, therefore, believe that I am not a party to this dispute.

PN272

MR KUCERA: Yes, Commissioner, I have a copy of that correspondence as well.

PN273

THE COMMISSIONER: Signed Mr Stocko. Yes, I have got no - I have received nothing further, apart from that. Have you had any other contact with Mr Stocko?

PN274

MR KUCERA: I attempted to contact him by telephone last week and was unsuccessful but that is the only attempt at contact with Mr Stocko.

PN275

THE COMMISSIONER: Right, thank you. Thanks very much, Mr Kucera. Mr Kucera, can I take it that, therefore, the correspondence which I received from you dated 4 July and that indicated a number of companies against whom the union no longer wished to proceed, should have added to that - I think that - it is quoted in your letter as Westpac Supplies but I think the actual name is Kirri Creek. Is that right?

PN276

THE ASSOCIATE: Karri Creek.

PN277

THE COMMISSIONER: Karri Creek. And that I think there was one other company that was notified of these proceedings and it doesn't appear on any of your lists. And that is the Copyright Copy Centre. I think that copies of their correspondence was sent to you.

PN278

MR UPHILL: Commissioner, if I can be of some assistance. Copyright Copy Centre are members of the Chamber.

PN279

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN280

MR UPHILL: I notice that in your dispute finding, a record of finding, dated 25 May, they appear in schedule A.

PN281

THE COMMISSIONER: Right.

PN282

MR UPHILL: On page 6. Copyright Plan Printing, 716 Murray Street, West Perth.

PN283

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. So the dispute finding has actually been made against them?

PN284

MR UPHILL: Yes, that is correct.

PN285

THE COMMISSIONER: Okay. Right, thank you. Right. Well, I will hear from you, Mr Uphill, then.

PN286

MR UPHILL: Thank you, Commissioner. Can I indicate that on behalf of the members of the Chamber that we do not object to the finding of dispute. We notice an observe that the union does not wish to proceed against a number of members of the Chamber as those are companies that have been crossed out from the document that was handed up to you.

PN287

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN288

MR UPHILL: Having said that, we would hasten to add that we would request that all of our rights under the legislation be reserved. While we acknowledge that the log of claims creates a dispute, we stop at acknowledging the next stage and we would foreshadow some argument.

PN289

THE COMMISSIONER: Clearly there is many a step that this may go through before any rights of your members are impinged by a decision of this Commission, Mr Uphill.

PN290

MR UPHILL: Yes, thank you.

PN291

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes?

PN292

MR UPHILL: And, Commissioner, we would also like to perhaps invite you back to Perth at some later stage because we do believe that there would be a need for substantive argument and witnesses and that we would request that any hearings of a substantive nature occur in Perth.

PN293

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Well, that would appear to be sensible, Mr Uphill, given that all the parties are here. All right then. Can I take it, Mr Uphill, then if I can just go to the correspondence that I have, that the parties that you appear for that no longer object to a dispute finding are the following?

PN294

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN295

THE COMMISSIONER: I just want to check with you that I have got those.

PN296

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN297

THE COMMISSIONER: J.W. Signs? It actually appears as JY Signs.

PN298

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN299

THE COMMISSIONER: I am not quite sure which is correct there but we will check that. AD Impact Advertising?

PN300

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN301

THE COMMISSIONER: The Weekend Examiner?

PN302

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN303

THE COMMISSIONER: Allmark and Associates?

PN304

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN305

THE COMMISSIONER: Bouquet Productions House?

PN306

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN307

THE COMMISSIONER: Churchill Prints?

PN308

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN309

THE COMMISSIONER: Cities Printing Service?

PN310

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN311

THE COMMISSIONER: Co-ordinated Drafting?

PN312

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN313

THE COMMISSIONER: Cut Out Art?

PN314

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN315

THE COMMISSIONER: Midway Signs Company?

PN316

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN317

THE COMMISSIONER: Nichols Silk Screen Arts?

PN318

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN319

THE COMMISSIONER: Plaster Fab?

PN320

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN321

THE COMMISSIONER: Professional Printers Pty Ltd?

PN322

MR UPHILL: Yes.

PN323

THE COMMISSIONER: And the Brand Agency?

PN324

MR UPHILL: That is correct.

PN325

THE COMMISSIONER: That is the complete list?

PN326

MR UPHILL: That is right, yes, that is correct.

PN327

THE COMMISSIONER: All right then. Thank you. Now, is that the list that you have, Mr Kucera, as being the - with the addition to that list, as I understand it, of Hand Made Prints and Solution Plus Advertising and Marketing. They are now the parties that you wish to have a dispute finding made against?

PN328

MR KUCERA: Yes, Commissioner.

PN329

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Thanks, Mr Kucera. Okay. Well, thank you both for your assistance in this matter and I am glad that a number of - the preliminaries at least have been resolved in relation to the dispute finding stage of these proceedings. What I intend to do now is to proceed to make a finding of dispute against the companies that I have just outlined. To remove from the reserve list the companies who the parties now agree should no longer be on the reserve list as it is not the intention of the union to seek a finding of dispute against those companies. And to issue a record of findings in relation to the companies who I have indicated.

PN330

I am satisfied that on what the union has put to me that there are no reasons why I shouldn't proceed to make a dispute finding against Hand Made Prints and Solutions Plus. And in relation to the others, I understand there is now no longer any objection. So all those companies who appeared on the original reserve list against whom the union has now decided not to proceed, will no longer appear either on the reserve list or on a dispute finding list. And I will indicate who those are, just for the record. Fuji Xerox Australia Pty Ltd, Good Samaritan Industries, Integrity Copy and Document Centre, Kalamazoo Australia Pty Ltd, Paper Tools, Pride in Type, Rival Western Australia Pty Ltd, Stratagem, Work Space, Street Design, Shorter and Partners, the Shorter Group, TMP Worldwide, Reynolds Graphics 1995 Pty Ltd, Calcahoun's Fremantle Baggage Company, Dyson's Packaging Pty Ltd, Posie's, Reprotype Graphics Australia, Slicker Stickers, Worldwide On-line Printing, and Westpac Supplies.

PN331

On the basis that we have got all those matters correct, I think that we do not require any further proceedings this morning. Thanks everybody for their attention.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [10.29am]