C2001/4598, Transcript of Proceedings [2001] AIRCTrans 2984 (1 November 2001)

AUSCRIPT PTY LTD
ABN 76 082 664 220

Level 4, 179 Queen St MELBOURNE Vic 3000
(GPO Box 1114J MELBOURNE Vic 3001)
DX 305 Melbourne Tel:[phone] Fax:[phone]

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS


O/N 0788

AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

COMMISSIONER LEWIN

C2001/4598
C2001/4599

APPLICATIONS FOR AN ORDER TO STOP
OR PREVENT INDUSTRIAL ACTION

Application under section 127(2) of the
Act by Mobil Refining Australia Pty Ltd
and Another for an order to stop or prevent
industrial action

MELBOURNE

4.04 PM, THURSDAY, 18 OCTOBER 2001

THIS HEARING WAS CONDUCTED BY VIDEO CONFERENCE IN MELBOURNE

PN221

THE COMMISSIONER: Good afternoon. I thought it was appropriate to actually list this matter again because I understand from letters that I have received that the parties have actually reached an accommodation in relation to the issue of asbestos hazards at the Port Stanvac refinery and more particularly the manner with which the concerns of the employees will be addressed. But I think it is useful and I was formally requested to have these terms of agreement transcribed as a part of the record in this matter and that is the reason why it has been listed today.

PN222

So I am in the parties' hands. I understand both of them have an interest in recording the arrangements between them?

PN223

MR BAKEWELL: If I may, Commissioner.

PN224

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Bakewell?

PN225

MR BAKEWELL: Yes, you are correct. There has been an accommodation reached between the parties. That has been done by way of a written agreement between the company and the AMWU. I understand that a - perhaps an unsigned copy of that agreement has indeed been forwarded to the Commission. Can I just confirm that that copy has been received?

PN226

THE COMMISSIONER: That is the one headed, "Current dispute?"

PN227

MR BAKEWELL: That is correct, Commissioner.

PN228

THE COMMISSIONER: Well, I can tell you, not only have I received the draft, I believe I have actually received a copy of it signed by Mr Cameron as well.

PN229

MR BAKEWELL: Terrific, well, that answers my question. The company is also in receipt now of the fully signed copy by both the company and Mr Cameron. If the Commission doesn't have that signed copy we will forward that to your office for completeness. In terms of the desirability, Commissioner, to have that agreement noted for the record - that is Mobil's wish - they don't understand that there is any concern with that wish from the AMWU. But I will hear from Mr Plant I am sure in a moment. Suffice to say, Commissioner, that the company would like it noted that that agreement as received by the Commission has been reached and formed the basis of a return to work.

PN230

And upon that occurring, may I say, Commissioner, the plant is now in the process of resuming its start-up mode and in the process of returning to full and normal operation. Just one or two other matters, if I may, Commissioner. The first is that there is, in accordance with that agreement, there will be a further site inspection between Mrs Deborah Valence who is the union's nominated occupational, health and safety hygienist and with DAIS being the regulator here in South Australia and a company representative.

PN231

And the purpose of that inspection which is due to take place in accordance with the terms reached in the agreement dated 16 October - that will occur on approximately Tuesday or Wednesday of next week. The exact date at this stage is uncertain due to timing between the parties and their availability and their ability to get together at an agreed time. But at this stage it will be Tuesday or Wednesday. That is a very important meeting of course, Commissioner, because as a result of that meeting there will be reports written, no doubt, regarding findings from that site inspection together with any recommendations that might be made.

PN232

Commissioner, it is the company's suggestion, that as an abundance of caution, that a report back to this Commission, subject to your availability of course, may be timetabled to fit soon after the completion of that report back in the event if there are any unresolved issues and to circumvent the resurfacing, as it were, of any potential dispute which would be unfortunate. So on the basis that this audit or inspection will take place on Tuesday or Wednesday it is the company's request they report back to the Commission, possibly Wednesday afternoon, or indeed, Thursday, might occur subject to your availability to update the Commission as to where that inspection got to.

PN233

Given that that inspection is yet to take place, and given that the return to work has only been recent, I think it is also fair to say that relationships between the parties still remain a little strained. That of course is very natural and we expect those to return to normal, of course, as soon as Mobil expect that Tuesday or Wednesday inspection is completed and the matters have been fully dealt with. But in that environment as I have said, Commissioner, we think it is desirable for a report back to occur.

PN234

One final thing, Commissioner, unless you have any other questions of me and that is that the company has been notified by DAIS that they are expecting to send a report to both the AMWU and to the company some time this afternoon, if not this afternoon no later than tomorrow morning. And that report is expected to confirm that the Mobil Port Stanvac refinery is a safe working environment. That report is expected to confirm that the company has adequate and appropriate systems of work in place and that report is also expected to confirm that the testing in relation to fibre asbestos material has not returned any negative or undesirable results.

PN235

That report, as I said, is due to be released and for a matter of completeness if it is deemed desirable we will forward a copy of that report to the Commission so that your file may be completed. Unless you have any further questions of me, Commissioner, that is the information we wish to relay to you this afternoon.

PN236

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, well yes, I would like to see a copy of the report and I would also - just wanted to ask you, Mr Bakewell, the 166A application.

PN237

MR BAKEWELL: Yes, Commissioner.

PN238

THE COMMISSIONER: What should I do about that?

PN239

MR BAKEWELL: At this stage, Commissioner, my instructions are to adjourn the 166A application, I think, on the last occasion where Ms Nguyen was representing the company, you raised questions regarding submissions, I believe the rim submissions that the company may put to you as to how your jurisdiction may be invoked. My instructions are is that the company representatives have attempted to make inquiries of their registry regarding the original dispute finding in relation to the award that binds the parties and it has been unable to date to get a hold of the relevant file or copies and is still seeking a copy of the original C number and file so that they may put a position to you. I think we will be able to more fully report that matter back to you perhaps in the next report back to you.

PN240

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Good.

PN241

MR BAKEWELL: But apart from that, Commissioner, I just wish to make it clear at this stage that in terms of the company's concern about any future industrial disputation or the necessary use of that 166A, the company at this stage does not see that as necessary. This is simply added in abundance of caution. If the Commission pleases.

PN242

THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Bakewell, I have got two section 166A notices.

PN243

MR BAKEWELL: Yes, Commissioner.

PN244

THE COMMISSIONER: Is there any distinction to be made between them or is it just a duplication?

PN245

MR BAKEWELL: No, I believe there is some distinction to be made between them. Unfortunately I was not the author of either and I will need to seek some clarifications from my client if you wish to have that distinction.

PN246

THE COMMISSIONER: Could somebody just explain to me what the distinction between the two files actually is.

PN247

MR BAKEWELL: One moment, Commissioner.

PN248

THE COMMISSIONER: I notice that on the front there are different names appearing.

PN249

MR BAKEWELL: Yes, I believe that perhaps the first 166A didn't cover all of the relevant parties being all of the employees and perhaps the second one completes all of the employees to whom the original 166A was intended to capture.

PN250

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Very well. Mr Plant.

PN251

MR PLANT: Yes, sir. We have no problem with the current disputes letter now been signed by Mr Cameron being formally recorded by the Commission, sir. I have got a comment in relation to the report from the DAIS, I am not sure - I don't believe Deborah Valence has signed that report. Wasn't able to do so before leaving South Australia on Tuesday, when she was involved in a meeting to review the policies and procedures at the refinery in relation to asbestos and I believe there are a few outstanding issues to that report which I think Deborah Valence is dealing with, with the company.

PN252

THE COMMISSIONER: Well when you receive that information from her would you forward a copy of it to me too please, Mr Plant.

PN253

MR PLANT: Certainly, sir. I have got one other issue, sir, and it is in relation to the block, I am not sure the best way to term it, the block cutting people's wages, and not having taken into account the start and stop nature of what has actually occurred through the process in return to work, different stages in time and performing different functions and work in different areas and I am not completely clear at this stage, sir, on how much has been deducted, how much ..... are but it doesn't seem to equate to the periods of time and pattern of work. I haven't been - I think I need to further investigate that, sir.

PN254

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Well look, we will just take note of that for the moment and if you want to elaborate that issue further at the time we have a report back, I will hear you then.

PN255

MR PLANT: Okay. If it pleases the Commission, that is all I have, sir.

PN256

THE COMMISSIONER: Very well. Well, look I will arrange for a report back. I will let the parties know when that will be but obviously it will be on Wednesday or Thursday of next week sometime. I will file the accommodation reached between the parties which is in the form of the letter sent by Mr Lagonic to the AMWU and countersigned by Mr Cameron under the heading "Current dispute" and I will look forward to receiving information about the way in which the asbestos hazards are being addressed, both copies of the reports from the South Australian department and from the union's consultant, Deborah Valence and I will further await submissions from the company in relation to the applications for the section 166A certificate or certificates which should include an explanation as to what the difference between the two proceedings are.

PN257

It just seems to me that they can probably be joined and heard together if necessary in due course. So I will adjourn to a time and date to be fixed accordingly. Thank you.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [4.17pm]