C2001/329, Transcript of Proceedings [2001] AIRCTrans 3404 (5 December 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 JONES

C2001/329

AUSTRALIAN WORKERS UNION

and

THE SYDNEY AQUARIUM AND OTHERS

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

SYDNEY

2.20 PM, WEDNESDAY, 21 NOVEMBER 2001

Continued from 20/03/01

Adjourned sine die

PN15

THE COMMISSIONER: Can I take the appearance, please?

PN16

MR G. BEARD: If it please the Commission, I continue my appearance on behalf of the Australian Workers Union. Commissioner, when this matter was last before you, and that was on 20 March this year, you found a dispute to exist between the union and parties involved in the theme park industry. Since that time the union has had substantial discussions basically in Queensland with the Queensland Confederation of Industry, and I'm pleased to be able to report that an agreement regarding a new award has been reached between the parties.

PN17

Once agreement had been reached, I contacted your office and asked for the matter to be relisted for the purpose of having an award made, and on 22 October this year the union forwarded to each of the proposed respondents a letter explaining the background to the matter and a copy of the notice of hearing and copy of the proposed award. The correspondence was forwarded by registered post and a statement to that effect together with a copy of the covering letter and the receipt for registered post have been prepared for your file.

PN18

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Yes?

PN19

MR BEARD: Commissioner, one of the parties who was involved in the dispute finding was an organisation known as the Big Pineapple, Sunshine Plantation, and they have responded to the letter that was forwarded on 22 October. Unfortunately they forwarded their letter through to the national office of the union in Melbourne rather than Sydney and therefore I was only able to receive a copy of the correspondence from your associate just prior to the hearing.

PN20

Essentially, the company is seeking to have the finding of dispute revoked on the basis that they are covered by a Queensland state award. Unfortunately the correspondence isn't very clear in regard to exactly which award would be appropriate and under the circumstances, I would ask that the matter concerning this particular company regarding the making of a new award be left in abeyance, however, the union would seek to have the dispute finding remain at this stage so that further discussions can occur between the union and the company.

PN21

THE COMMISSIONER: I'm in receipt of that correspondence, of my office is rather, and I concur that the attached Queensland Government Industrial Gazette and the area it's pointed out is confusing in terms of what would appear to be the business or the type of business that the Big Pineapple is operating under. It covers a wide scope of that particular award as far as I can see it, mainly clerks and switch board operators, engineers, engine drivers, pastry cooks, fruit and vegetable growing industry. Maybe that's an area that they would see themselves under, I don't know, so really that needs to be explored further. The fact they also say at the time they received the original award, unsure if any action required. Well, that's not enough for me to revoke an award because it's their responsibility to find out what the difficulty is.

PN22

MR BEARD: The company has had certainly quite a few opportunities to do that, Commissioner.

PN23

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, and they've had opportunity to do it, and no person has emerged who was authorised to deal with the matter. If they didn't authorise anyone, they should have attended themselves at the hearing. So some of the reasons they're stating there are really not reasons sufficient enough for me to revoke the dispute finding at this stage, and I believe the situation you're putting in, in that you will have further conversations directly with them after today may elucidate the problem further and may solve it for you, so I concur with what you're saying, Mr Beard.

PN24

MR BEARD: Thank you. On that basis, Commissioner, I hand up to you a copy of the draft award that has been agreed between the parties.

PN25

THE COMMISSIONER: Is there a notice on the chamber or confederation up there to that effect?

PN26

MR BEARD: Yes, I have received a copy.

PN27

THE COMMISSIONER: We've got it, have we? I see, yes, thank you.

PN28

MR BEARD: In fact, Mr Palowksi from the Confederation refers to two amendments, Commissioner. They are very minor amendments in that one was a spelling error in regard to A.J. Hackett Bungy where there was an M instead of an H, and also there was further discussion between the parties in Queensland in regard to a company that was known as Mangali Falls Rainforest Village, and there has been agreement between the parties that they have been deleted.

PN29

Also in regard to the schedule of respondents, Commissioner, I believe that it would be appropriate at this stage to delete reference to the Sunshine Securities Pty Limited (the Big Pineapple).

PN30

THE COMMISSIONER: Right.

PN31

MR BEARD: The award, Commissioner, we believe conforms with requirements of section 89A of the Act, and also the safety net review wage fixing principles of May 2001. I can advise you that the award contains test case provisions in regard to anti-discrimination, enterprise flexibility, supported wage system, redundancy, termination, personal leave, parental leave and public holidays. The classification structure and the wage rates we believe are properly fixed. At page 13 of the document the rates are set out, and you'll note that at level 4 the weekly rate of $507.20 does in fact represent the C10 of the Metals Engineering and Associated Industries Award be the key classification.

PN32

I also draw your attention to level 4 classification description, it is on the top of page 19 of the award, that the indicative tasks for work performed at this level relate to the trade qualified cooking food production, also green keeping, gardening, trade qualified maintenance. We believe that level 4, job descriptions, do in fact relate to the C10 of the Metals Award and therefore constitutes the key classification in regard to properly fixed minimum rates. You will note from the classification structure that at each level the appropriate percentage of the trade rates has been specified in order to show that they have been properly fixed.

PN33

The award, we believe, has been set out in plain English that even industrial officers can understand, and it does also provide for regular part time employment. The parties believe that, I say in summary, Commissioner, that the award does represent a proper safety net award for this industry and ask that the award be ratified from the first pay period commencing on or after today's date and to remain in force for a period of 12 months. If there are any questions, Commissioner, I would be only too happy to try and answer them for you.

PN34

THE COMMISSIONER: Not at this stage, Mr Beard. I would like time to review the award proposed, which I would like to do, but subject to the position that there are no further questions I wanted to ask the parties, then I would make it effective from today's date and it will be known as the AMWU Theme Park Amusements Award 2001. So subject to my review of it, I'll advise the parties accordingly and issue an order to that effect.

PN35

I adjourn these proceedings. Thank you.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [2.37pm]