C0033/199, Transcript of Proceedings [2002] AIRCTrans 2490 (3 July 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 VT04560
AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

COMMISSIONER GAY

C No 00331 of 1999
C No 00684 of 1998

CLERKS' (OIL COMPANIES)
AWARD 1988

MOBIL OIL CLERICAL
EMPLOYEES' AWARD 1994

Review under Item 51, Schedule 5, Transitional
WROLA Act 1996 re conditions of employment

MELBOURNE

3.30 PM, WEDNESDAY, 19 JUNE 2002

Continued from 30.5.02

PN14

MR K. HARVEY: I appear on behalf of the Australian Services Union.

PN15

MR W. VICKERS: I appear on behalf of Mobil Oil Australia Pty Limited.

PN16

MR B. DIXON: I appear for BP Australia.

PN17

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Yes, Mr Harvey.

PN18

MR HARVEY: Yes, thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner, in regard to this matter, as you would be aware, Commissioner, I haven't been involved in these proceedings and Mr Nucifora is on two weeks' study leave at the present time, but I am instructed that, of course, the ASU always does what it says it will undertake to do, Commissioner, notwithstanding any comments to the contrary that might have been expressed earlier and I think we did lay down a challenge to the employers on the last time this matter was before you, Commissioner, and we were directed I think perhaps to go away and formulate in detail this proposition and to put it to the companies and we did that, Commissioner, by way of correspondence dated 5 June of 2002 to all the respondents to these awards. I won't read out the whole of the letter, Commissioner, just to indicate that we said that:

PN19

We refer to the above matters and directions on transcript issued by Commissioner Gay following a conference with the parties on Thursday, 30 May 2002 and that the ASU has committed to putting a without prejudice proposal at least with respect to the Clerks' (Oil Companies) Award 1988 to remove the deadlock on the areas of fundamental difference between the parties, i.e. properly set minimum rates of pay and award coverage.

PN20

And we did that. The letter goes on at some length, Commissioner, and it is probably not appropriate to canvass the extent of the proposition that we put without prejudice, but we did attach a proposal to that to amend the draft simplified award that we had before us on the last occasion with regard to a number of matters, that is with regard to the exemption rate, but also the classification structure in which we proposed a comprehensive way of resolving these issues in our view.

PN21

Commissioner, we also noted in that correspondence that on our initial consideration that there appeared to few other major concerns with the draft or the working that the Commission as presently constituted had sent to the parties dated 8 May 2002, so if we could break through on these issues, then we were breaking through well and truly and we noticed that the Commission had listed this matter for further hearing today and we proposed a meeting to be organised for we call it next week - that is last week now - to discuss the proposal further, but unfortunately that meeting wasn't able to take place.

PN22

The parties weren't able to get together at any time convenient to them last week. The employers did propose that we meet this week, but since Mr Nucifora is interstate on study leave this week and next week, unfortunately that meeting hasn't taken place to consider the union's proposal and I expect it won't be possible to do that until the week after next at this point, Commissioner, but I do think we have responded to the challenge laid down by the Commission on the last occasion and put our bona fides in writing and through no fault of the parties present at the table today, we haven't been able to work on that proposal as much as we would have liked to.

PN23

I think Mr Dixon, who has been involved in some of the discussions with Mr Nucifora in the last week or two, may be able to add to those submissions, but I understand that is where we are at and perhaps if the matter was relisted within a relatively short period of time, that is weeks rather than months, Commissioner, we may be able to make some further progress on this. If the Commission pleases.

PN24

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Harvey. Mr Dixon.

PN25

MR DIXON: Thank you, Commissioner. If it pleases the Commission, yes, we would essentially agree with the submissions of the ASU. Since we received the ASUs proposal which was essentially a new classification structure and removal of the exemption rate or some other compromise regarding that, we have met, or, rather, the four oil companies have met to discuss it. We met late last week. I did forget that Mr Nucifora was on leave, so I did propose a meeting with the union for earlier this week between the oil companies and the union, but as was previously said, Mr Nucifora is away, so we weren't able to make that happen, but essentially that is where the matter is at.

PN26

I have had a number of phone discussions with Mr Nucifora last week just surrounding if there is any scope to compromise on the exemption rate. That seems to be the key point and that hasn't changed from the last time we were before you, so, really, it is a case of if we could have the time to simply meet and discuss the issue and see if there is any common ground that we can reach on the exemption rate. If it pleases the Commission.

PN27

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thanks, Mr Dixon. Mr Vickers, do you have something to add?

PN28

MR VICKERS: I have nothing to add to that, other than to support the submissions that have been put, Commissioner.

PN29

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, all right. Well, this seems like, without creating any expectations, but it does seem to be positive progress at almost breakneck speed and that is very good and as an exhibition of that faith, I won't list the matter again and I, rather, propose the responsibility for asking for the matter to come back on with you, Mr Harvey, and in conjunction with Mr Dixon who seems to have taken a leading role with Mr Nucifora and they can have their discussions with Mr Vickers and other interested participants and then when you have got somewhere or perhaps not got somewhere, the matter can then come back on.

PN30

If you get somewhere, obviously it is really the draft that one is interested in, because that can then go through the sieve here and it might be that the matter could even be called on. If there is an issue that requires argument, naturally that can happen. The exemption issue might require dealing and I seem to recall on the last occasion that Mr Nucifora dealt with an exemption case which went to a Full Bench of which I was a member and so on, so these are all issues that can be dealt with, even in the event that you don't do any good, but I do hope that you will, so on that basis I will stand the matter over and hear from you in due course. We will now adjourn sine die.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [3.39pm]