C2001/3947, Transcript of Proceedings [2002] AIRCTrans 2249 (19 June 2002)

AUSCRIPT PTY LTD
ABN 76 082 664 220

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

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS


O/N VT04337

AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

COMMISSIONER EAMES

C2001/3947

NATIONAL UNION OF WORKERS

and

LYPPARD AUSTRALIA and OTHERS

Notification pursuant to section 99 of the Act
of an industrial dispute re wages and working conditions

MELBOURNE

10.19 AM, WEDNESDAY, 5 JUNE 2002

Continued from 10.9.01 Not Transcribed

PN1

MR T. KENNEDY: I appear on behalf of the National Union of Workers and appearing with me is MS S. ALLISON.

PN2

MR R. IRONMONGER: I appear on behalf of Lite N'Easy which is the trading name and the real name is Soltway Investments.

PN3

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Mr Kennedy.

PN4

MR KENNEDY: Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner, the background to this matter is as follows, that the Commission found the existence of an industrial dispute between Lite N'Easy, or Soltway Investments Pty Limited, trading as Lite N'Easy and NUW on 30 July 2001. The union requested the matter be relisted late last year for the purposes of making a roping-in award as part settlement of the dispute found. At that hearing on 10 September last year, the employer objected to the making of a roping-in award provided by the union at that stage and the outcome is that the Commission scheduled inspections of the site on 3 October 2001.

PN5

At the conclusion of those inspections, the company indicated that they were prepared to enter into negotiations for an enterprise agreement with the union and the union on that basis decided not to proceed with the roping-in award until negotiations had been completed. Negotiations have not been successful and the union is now seeking to have the dispute found part settled in the form of a making of a roping-in award and if I could, Commissioner, we have a draft roping-in award for today's hearing.

EXHIBIT #NUW1 DRAFT ROPING-IN AWARD

PN6

MR KENNEDY: Commissioner, the draft roping-in award that we seek to have made in part settlement of this dispute is standard in its form. It seeks to make an award in the terms of the Storage Services General Roping-In Number 4 Award 2002 and to be binding upon both the National Union of Workers and the employer, namely Soltway Investments Pty Limited, trading as Lite N'Easy at 4 Brady Close, Braeside, Victoria. We seek the draft award to apply the Storage Services General Award 1999 terms and conditions as varied from time to time and there is a standard savings provision contained within the draft award at clause 4 and we seek an operative date effective from the first full pay period to commence on or after today's date, 5 June.

PN7

We say that the making of this award would serve as settlement of the dispute, or part settlement of the dispute found. It would also result in the prima facie right of the award - for the union to have the award made. We would refer the Commission to the inspection of the work site last year and note that the work covered by the Storage Services General Award 1999 involves people who perform functions or callings as packers or sorters or assemblers, collectors, checkers of goods in the course of receipt and dispatch. We would say that the work performed at this site is performed by all the people at this site, either collectively or in a number of combinations.

PN8

Essentially the site is an operation where prepackaged meals are prepared, are packed, are stored and then dispatched to various clients from the facility. There is also a cold store facility on site which receives frozen meals made at the company's kitchens in Brisbane, which are stored and then collated and collected with the other prepackaged material and sent out, so on that basis we would say that this is the appropriate Federal award to set a minimum safety net of terms and conditions at the site and would seek that draft order to be made today. Subject to any questions you may have, that would be the extent of our submissions at this stage.

PN9

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Mr Ironmonger.

PN10

MR IRONMONGER: If the Commission pleases, we would also rely on the inspections that the Commission had on 3 October 2001. Commissioner, we do concede that there is a limited coverage of that Storage Services Award at that location and it would be silly for us to deny that, because you saw this yourself, that there was some storeman and packer type work. The company has given me a list of their non-salary employees and the company currently employs 48 people, of which 33 are food handling attendants at a level 3 or 4. There is eight distribution attendants/assistants.

PN11

There is two preparation persons, two supervisors, one stock co-ordinator/storeman, one internal stock co-ordinator and one team leader. Now, I can go through all the various duties, but I can hand that document up, Commissioner, and you can read it at your leisure and I will give Mr Kennedy a copy of that as well. We say that the company's primary function is in the catering area and therefore we would say the coverage of the Storage Services Award wouldn't cover all employees and that is our submissions and I would like to tender this document.

EXHIBIT #VECCI1 NON-SALARY EMPLOYEES LIST

PN12

MR IRONMONGER: Commissioner, I could probably go into other arguments about 111(1)(g), but i think because you have been on the inspections, that there are people to be covered. The company would not oppose the making of the award, but only in relation to the employees who are actually doing the storeman and packing work covered by the award. If the Commission pleases.

PN13

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Anything further you want to put, Mr Kennedy?

PN14

MR KENNEDY: Yes, Commissioner. We would say based on not having seen VECCI1, but taking quick notes, people involved in the food handling we would say would definitely be covered by the job descriptions covered by the award. People involved in distribution would be covered by the award. People involved in the preparing of the produce or preparing of the product to be distributed would be covered by the award. The award also covers supervisory levels and supervising of any form of work that involves - that is covered.

PN15

In terms of the store worker, we would say they were covered. The stock controller we would say is covered by the award as well, specifically within the competency structure and a team leader we would say would be within the supervisory stream of the award, so of all the examples given by Mr Ironmonger, we would say that those functions as described by the company and understand that they are described by the company for the purposes of their own operations would fit within the broad industry competencies covered by this award and the callings covered by this award in respect of clause 4, coverage of award, and the classification structure which is also contained within the award, so based on what Mr Ironmonger has put before you, we say all those people can be covered.

PN16

THE COMMISSIONER: All right, thank you. If there is nothing further, I intend to reserve my decision in relation to this matter, but as it has been a file that has been open for some time, I would indicate that I will get the decision out as quickly as I possibly can. The Commission adjourns on that basis.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [10.28am]

INDEX

LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs

EXHIBIT #NUW1 DRAFT ROPING-IN AWARD PN6
EXHIBIT #VECCI1 NON-SALARY EMPLOYEES LIST PN12