C0033/899, Transcript of Proceedings [2001] AIRCTrans 1773 (1 August 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

COMMISSIONER RAFFAELLI

C No 338 of 1999

APPLICATION FOR A REVIEW PURSUANT TO
ITEM 51 SCHEDULE 5 TRANSITION WROLA
ACT 1996 OF THE MUSICIANS HOTELS AWARD 1982

SYDNEY

9.30 MONDAY, 2 JULY 2001

THIS MATTER WAS CONDUCTED BY TELSTRA CONFERLINK IN SYDNEY

PN1

COMMISSIONER: Yes, thanks gents, we seem to have lost the employer. Rather than re-schedule it or spend half the day chasing him, I just thought both of you or one of you would know where we are up to. We sent you a draft from the simplification unit but I think, Mr Pinch, you had said last time there was going to be some negotiations in Darwin on the major - not in Darwin necessarily, in Nullimbi on the major Nabalco award earlier this month and therefore that would be a convenient - might influence of - - -

PN2

TELSTRA: Excuse me, Mr Raffaelli, Mr Barton has now joined the conference.

PN3

THE COMMISSIONER: I see, hello.

PN4

MR BARTON: Hello, Commissioner.

PN5

THE COMMISSIONER: How are you, Mr Barton?

PN6

THE COMMISSIONER: Good thanks, and my apologies through my tardiness - the conference was news to me this morning.

PN7

THE COMMISSIONER: Anyway, I will start again. Your haven't missed anything. I was just indicating that on the last occasion this was before me, we did it by phone, I think Mr Watts represented you. The parties sought an adjournment because the major Nabalco award was being negotiated or there was going to be a meeting of unions on it - actually it was a certified agreement, I'm not quite sure, perhaps I've got it wrong. Either way, there would be further discussions and the progressing of this matter would be better effected by some kind of a delay so, with that in mind, what has happened, Mr Pinch?

PN8

MR PINCH: Thank you, sir. Sir, we did meet. It was an enterprise agreement discussion and, however, we didn't touch base a great deal on the award. I have managed to speak to Mr Giddins this morning. Perhaps if we go to Mr Giddins, one of the things is Bill actually sent me some information this morning, sir, I think it is a second draft award and this second draft award there appeared in the first draft and in the second draft and it was pointed out by Mr Giddins as well that it's just the Maritime Union and the guild has disappeared.

PN9

THE COMMISSIONER: How very convenient for him.

PN10

MR PINCH: In all fairness, Mr Giddins pointed that out this morning, sir. Actually we've got majority of members at Nabalco.

PN11

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, okay. There is no - I am just looking at the classifications. There is no ...... in this award in this award.

PN12

MR PINCH: No, that is correct, sir, it has been strictly MUA and AMOU since its inception.

PN13

THE COMMISSIONER: Okay, Mr Giddins, you did a second draft, did you?

PN14

MR GIDDINS: Yes, look, when we knew this matter was coming on Mr Fibdaup from Nabalco emailed me a draft - a second draft from the award simplification unit. It is in electronic form and I sent it to Mr Pinch this morning. I have gone through the award. It is only a very short award. This is what I was going to propose. I tried to contact Mr Barton this morning. I did contact Mr Billing. I believe I could provide both the parties and the Commission with a final draft with 14 days. There are some changes that need to be made including the omissions from the respondent the AMOU and there are some other suggested changes that I would propose to the parties in relation to salient clauses in the supersession and we need to do the minimum rates adjustment provision. I have already done that provisionally and provide the calculations within my file of amending the pay rates of clause 11 so there is not a lot of work required.

PN15

I would need to speak to Mr Barton and Mr Pinch about how the service increments may be dealt with because the paid rate decision basically said that unless they were based on work value or was part of a structural efficiency treatment of awards then they could not be kept in the same manner that they currently are so I am more than happy to hear what the other parties say and I don't lightly want to take on additional work that's unnecessary but given the fact that this could be bowled over basically in a couple of hours work that was what I as going to propose. I don't know if that timetable suits yourself or the other parties.

PN16

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Barton?

PN17

MR BARTON: The proposal sounds fine, sir. I'm sorry, not knowing that the conference was on this morning, I am at a loss for instructions but the proposed timetable sounds fine to me.

PN18

THE COMMISSIONER: What strikes me, Mr Giddins, that at the end of that draft award - I don't know if it is in the second draft but in the draft that I had there are references back for a number of conditions to the Nabalco parent award 1998.

PN19

MR GIDDINS: That's correct.

PN20

THE COMMISSIONER: Given the date - we can assume that is a restructured award, can we?

PN21

MR GIDDINS: It is.

PN22

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, it would be simplified, okay, so there is no problem in making reference to that simplified award for a number of conditions.

PN23

MR GIDDINS: I can't see any reason that it could not be. So subject to your views, Commissioner, the proposal would be that I would provide to the parties what the MUA and the AMAU might say is a final draft and then we would forward it to your office unless you wanted to hear the parties in respect of submissions in respect to the draft that we propose to you, my view would be that if this was forwarded by consent of the two union parties and the one employer respondent party that you might issue an order out of chambers.

PN24

THE COMMISSIONER: Exactly, that sounds very convenient. Why don't we make it that I'd like to hear from you about by Friday, the 22nd - is a bit more than two weeks I think and the other thing is - I would not have thought there would be any great problems save the service increment question. I mean if that is to be persisted with then obviously there needs to be more careful consideration. I might have some problems or some further need to look at it but anyway no use worrying about that right now. Okay?

PN25

MR GIDDINS: We would hope that if we forwarded to you a draft if you had a problem with it you might speak to the parties.

PN26

THE COMMISSIONER: Of course, okay, what we will do is we will adjourn these proceedings and I will await the agreed document, hopefully, and if it not okay, I will communicate with you further but if it is okay we will probably just satisfy myself and then you will be notified of a date from which I will propose to sign the order and if I don't hear from you again it will be signed, so we will do it that way.

PN27

MR PINCH: The AMAU is quite happy - - -

PN28

THE COMMISSIONER: Sorry, Mr Pinch, I assumed that - okay. That's the end of the conference, thank you.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [9.37am]

PN29