C2002/710, Transcript of Proceedings [2002] AIRCTrans 2502 (5 July 2002)

AUSCRIPT PTY LTD
ABN 76 082 664 220

Unit 13-14, Westlane Arcade, Darwin City Mall DARWIN NT 0800
(GPO Box 3544 DARWIN NT 0801) Tel:[phone] Fax:[phone]

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT DUNCAN

C2002/710

AUSTRALIAN MUNICIPAL, ADMINISTRATIVE,
CLERICAL AND SERVICES UNION

and

ARMAGUARD

Notification pursuant to section 99
of the Act of a dispute re alleged
employment issues and harassment
of ASU member Dianne Oborski

DARWIN

2.00 PM, THURSDAY, 20 JUNE 2002

PN1

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Could I have appearances please.

PN2

MR L MATARAZZO: May it please the Commission. My name is Lucio Matarazzo. I appear on behalf of the Australian Services Union. With me today appearing is MS DIANNE OBORSKI.

PN3

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Mr Matarazzo.

PN4

MR M BLANDY: Good afternoon, your Honour. My name is Martin Blandy from Northern Territory Chamber of Commerce and Industry. I am appearing on behalf of our member, Armaguard. With me in the hearing room is MR SLAV BRATKOVIC, sir. Would your Honour require me to spell that?

PN5

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, I have a note of that thanks.

PN6

MR BLANDY: And on the telephone in Adelaide we have MS GLORIA TSOTSIS, employee relations manager for my member for South Australia, Northern Territory and Western Australia. So she has got probably half of the country she is responsible for.

PN7

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Mr Brandy.

PN8

MR BLANDY: Thank you, sir.

PN9

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Mr Matarazzo.

PN10

MR MATARAZZO: Thank you, your Honour. The matter before you today relates predominantly to ASU member Ms Dianne Oborski and, in particular, in regards to the first and final warning that she received on June 3, 2002 from her employer in Darwin Mayne Logistics Armaguard. And today I am seeking to provide, as way of background, on the transcripts of the events believe and otherwise that led to the first and final warning that Dianne received. Furthermore, your Honour, the ASU will be raising matters as stated in the section 99 application by the ASU relating to matters involving other work related issues that we have raised.

PN11

But, in particular, in regards to guarantee minimum hours of work, rosters, what we believe is excessive casualisation of the workforce, traineeships issues and enterprise bargaining. Your Honour, in regards to the matters before you today, the ASU seeks to proceed by firstly putting on transcript its submission pertaining to the dispute before you today. And then allowing the employer representatives to respond and then going into a conciliation conference today in an effort to seek to resolve the disputes before the Commission today.

PN12

Your Honour, it is the ASU's position that if the disputes remain outstanding today, the ASU will be seeking that the matter be listed for another day in the near future when you or some other Commissioner is in Darwin so that the ASU can seek to have outstanding matters arbitrated if necessary. And if necessary, also ask for relevant witnesses to be subpoened and or cross-examined in regards to issues and dispute before the Commission depending on how matters progress today. Your Honour, as a way of background, I wish to advise for the record that Dianne Oborski has been employed in the Darwin Berrimah Mayne Logistics Armaguard depot in Pruen Road since May 2000, some 23 months ago now. And has been engaged by Mayne Logistics Armaguard on a casual now for around, on or around two years.

PN13

Your Honour, Dianne Oborski line of work includes clerical duties which involve, as the ASU understands, counting coins and dollar notes amongst other things. And the ASU submits that the safety net award that covers her employment is the common rule of General Clerks (Northern Territory) Award. Your Honour, Dianne Oborski has advised the ASU that on Friday March 1, 2002 that she had a meeting with Darwin Branch Manager of Armaguard, Mr Slav Bratkovic and another staff member, Ms Lidia Corsini. At the meeting Dianne advised that she was absent and on unpaid leave when Armaguard staff and management had a meeting, as I understant it, in late January or February 2002.

PN14

When they discussed a number of issues including whether they wanted certified agreements and or Australian workplace agreements or continuation of them thereon. The ASU understands that during the meeting of Friday 1 March 2002, which Lidia Corsini was present, Dianne advised Slav that she was concerned with proposed conditions of employment that were being offered in the new agreements by Armaguard and, in particular, proposed workers' entitlements relating to hours of work conditions and issues surrounding pay rises. Furthermore, Dianne advised that she was not happy with the proposed new agreements that did not guarantee a minimum total number of hours per week for workers and that there was no guarantee that the hours of work would be distributed equitably to all workers.

PN15

And Dianne expressed that she was not happy with the proposed pay rises on offer. At the meeting Dianne advised that she would be joining the ASU and at the time Dianne was the only in door staff member in the coin and money counting area who was to become an ASU member. Which she did, for the record on Saturday March 2, 2002. And I wish to tender an exhibit if I may, your Honour.

PN16

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Any objection, Mr Blandy?

PN17

MR BLANDY: No, none at all your Honour. And I think just for the record I would be quite happy to accept Mr Matarazzo's assurances of that in the absence of the exhibit in any event.

PN18

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Very well. I will mark it just the same since it has been tendered. The application form signed by Ms Oborski on 2 March 2002, I will mark exhibit ASU1.

EXHIBIT #ASU1 APPLICATION FORM SIGNED BY MS OBORSKI 2/3/2002

PN19

MR MATARAZZO: Thank you, your Honour. It just confirms that Dianne did join the ASU on that Saturday.

PN20

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN21

MR MATARAZZO: I wish to also now tender another exhibit, your Honour.

PN22

MR BLANDY: No objection, your Honour.

PN23

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Very well, I will mark the letter of 15 March to Mr Bratkovic from Mr Matarazzo exhibit ASU2.

EXHIBIT #ASU2 LETTER TO MR BRATKOVIC FROM MR MATARAZZO 15 MARCH

PN24

MR MATARAZZO: Thank you, your Honour. In the letter dated 15 March the date is supposed to have 2002 but it was a typing error. I faxed the correspondence and the ASU and the correspondence as you will see in it, I wrote and I quote:

PN25

The Australian Services Union writes to you requesting that in accordance with the provisions of the Workplace Relations Act that I am provided with access to the clerical and administrative staff at the Armaguard office in Winnellie at lunchtime Monday, March 18, 2002 (around 12 to 1pm).

PN26

The Australian Services Union is seeking to be involved in negotating a new collective enterprise agreement of the clerical/administrative section of the enterprise.

PN27

The Australian Services Union is also seeking if Armaguard can confirm whether or not any or all of the clerical staff at Armaguard office in Winnellie are employed under registered traineeships registered with the Australian National Training Authority and or the Northern Territory Employment and Training Authority.

PN28

End of quote. For the record, your Honour, I can advise that Mr Slav Bratkovic's representative I recall contacted myself in the Darwin ASU office and asked if I could visit the week commencing March 25 instead of the week commencing Monday, March 18. Due to the fact that Mr Slav Bratkovic was away and it suited the organisation better if I visited the later week. For the record, I can advise the Commission that I did agree the change put to me. For the record, the ASU understands that it found out later that the week commencing March 18, 2002 Mr Dino Spagnoli, that is S-P-A-G-N-O-L-I from the Adelaide Armaguard Human Resource office came to Darwin to visit the Armaguard office. The ASU understands that Mr Dino Spagnoli's visit included speaking to staff about the benefits of Australian workplace agreements. And on this visit Dianne has advised the ASU that she was not happy in the workplace but loved to work and also advised Dino that she was not happy with the way management was conducting itself in Darwin.

PN29

On Wednesday, March 20, 2002 the ASU sent a note of correspondence to Armaguard via facsimile which I now also wish to tender as an exhibit.

PN30

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Any objection?

PN31

MR BLANDY: No, your Honour.

PN32

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The letter of 20 March, 2002 to Mr Bratkovic from Mr Matarazzo I mark exhibit ASU3.

EXHIBIT #ASU3 LETTER TO MR BRATKOVIC FROM MR MATARAZZO 20/3/2002

PN33

MR MATARAZZO: Thank you, your Honour. It will be noted that in the correspondence the ASU wrote and I quote:

PN34

Further to the ASU correspondence sent dated March 15, 2002, the ASU is seeking to confirm a suitable day and time for myself to attend the premises of Armaguard during the week commencing March 25, 2002 in accordance with the provisions of the Workplace Relations Act.

PN35

PN36

I will be seeking in addition to visiting staff eligible to join the ASU to having a meeting with yourself to discuss the following issues.

PN37

1. Can Armaguard confirm whether or not any or all the clerical and administrative staff at Armaguard office in Winnellie are employed under the registered traineeships registered with the Australian National Training Authority and or the Northern Territory Employment and Training Authority?

PN38

2. Is Armaguard prepared to be involved in negotiating a new collective enterprise agreement of the clerical and administrative section of the enterprise with the ASU?

PN39

3. Is Armaguard prepared to negotiate with the ASU to develop processes that ensure that the work flow at Armaguard is rostered and distributed in an equitable and fair manner for all staff eligible to join the ASU and that consultation processes are in place to ensure such outcomes are achieved?

PN40

4. Is Armaguard prepared to negotiate with the ASU to ensure that staff eligible to join the ASU, who are part timers will have minimum set of hours guaranteed per week or fortnight which would be applied equitably or fairly to all part time staff?

PN41

5. Is Armaguard prepared to negotiate with the ASU to ensure that staff eligible to join the ASU for staff who are allegedly casual at present but work on a regular and continuous basis will have a minimum set of hours guaranteed per week or fortnight which would be applied equitably and fairly to the alleged casual staff?

PN42

6. Issues raised in the ASU correspondence to Armaguard on October 19, 1999.

PN43

7. Any other matters that may arise between now and my visit to the Armaguard premises in Berrimah.

PN44

End of quote. Your Honour, on Friday March 22, 2002, Mr Slav Bratkovic contacted me in the Darwin ASU office and expressed disappointment and annoyance that he had been contacted by the Northern Territory Transport Workers' Union official Mr Ray White asking Slav whether or not Slav was trying to get all workers covered by the ASU to sign Australian workplace agreements before my visit on the week commencing March 25, 2002.

PN45

I advised Slav I had not asked Ray White to contact him. We then organised a time for me to visit Armaguard premises on March 25, 2002 and have a meeting with Slav and ASU member, Dianne Oborski to discuss the issues raised in the ASU correspondence dated March 20, 2002. On Sunday, March 24, 2002 whilst working in the ASU office I wrote the following ASU correspondence and sent it to Armaguard via facsimile on that Sunday and I wish to tender a copy of that correspondence as an exhibit.

PN46

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Any objection?

PN47

MR BLANDY: No, your Honour.

PN48

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I will mark the letter of 24 March 2002 to Mr Bratkovic from Mr Matarazzo exhibit ASU4.

EXHIBIT #ASU4 LETTER TO MR BRATKOVIC FROM MR MATARAZZO 24/3/2002

PN49

MR MATARAZZO: Thank you, your Honour. In the correspondence, your Honour, I advised that I would be attending the premises on March 27, 2002 at 12 pm. That was to visit staff collectively to seek to explain about the benefits of enterprise bargaining. You will note in the correspondence I advised Armaguard of section 170WG of the Workplace Relations Act that states that:

PN50

an employee cannot apply duress or coerce an employee and knowingly make false or misleading statements to an employee with the intention of persuading an employee to sign an Australian Workplace Agreement.

PN51

I advised in the correspondence as you see the issue about prohibitive conduct in section 298 of the Act and further advised that I would be seeking to have discussions with staff about what the ASU perceive to be the benefits of certified agreements. Your Honour, for the record, myself and Dianne did meet Mr Slav Bratkovic on March 25, 2002 to discuss issues in the ASU correspondence dated March 20, 2002. For the record, we state that Dianne Oborski was not verbally counselled about her conduct on March 25, 2002 as has been suggested in an email by Ms Gloria Tsotsis which I now wish to tender as an exhibit.

PN52

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I will mark - any objection?

PN53

MR BLANDY: No, your Honour, thank you, sir.

PN54

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I will mark the email of the 18 June 2002 exhibit ASU6.

EXHIBIT #ASU5 EMAIL 18/6/2002

PN55

MR MATARAZZO: Thank you, your Honour.

PN56

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, that should be 5, Mr Matarazzo.

PN57

MR MATARAZZO: Thank you, your Honour. Your Honour, the ASU has highlighted where Gloria Tsotsis wrote in point number one:

PN58

Dianne verbally counselled re her conduct 25 March 2002.

PN59

For the record, the ASU and Dianne Oborski wish to state that our recollection is that that meeting was actually about the contents of March 20 and we discussed with Slav Bratkovic the issues in relation to the issues the ASU raised in that correspondence. And in that meeting I guess we didn't reach any satisfactory conclusions as to the ASU's satisfaction anyway. For the record on March 27, Wednesday 2002, Slav Bratkovic allowed me to visit the premises of Armaguard at lunch time to talk to staff about the benefits of ASU membership.

PN60

Why the ASU encouraged workers to negotiate collective certified agreements as opposed to individual Australian workplace agreements. For the record, I wish to state, your Honour, it was the first time since visiting the Armaguard premises since 1990 when I started in those days as the Federated Clerks Union official in Darwin that I wasn't allowed in the in-door staff lunch room but was afforded access outside the verandah contending with the sun and the warm weather. And it was March and still the Wet season. The other interesting thing for the record is we all remember the person on the ride-on lawn mower that started mowing the grass when I was talking at the time too. It made a loud noise.

PN61

Your Honour, shortly after the Easter long weekend, on Wednesday April 3, 2002 Dianne has advised the ASU that around this time she had advised that she wouldn't be signing the AWAs and she had - she still had concerns with the relevant issues and she was called into meeting with Mr Slav Bratkovic on 3 April 2002. In attendance at the meeting was also another staff member, Lidia Corsini who was the staff rep. For the record, she wasn't the ASU rep she was the staff rep of the clerical staff.

PN62

I wish to tender as an exhibit notes which - of the meeting which were at some stage later on handed to Dianne Oborski as an exhibit.

PN63

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Handed to Ms Oborski?

PN64

MR MATARAZZO: Yes. These are minutes. They are minutes of Mr Slav Bratkovic.

PN65

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: That makes more sense.

PN66

MR MATARAZZO: Sorry, my apologies.

PN67

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Any objection, Mr Blandy?

PN68

MR BLANDY: No, your Honour.

PN69

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The document headed notes from meeting held with Dianne Oborski on 3 April 2002 taken by Slav Bratkovic in the presence of Lidia Corsini I mark exhibit ASU6.

EXHIBIT #ASU6 NOTES FROM MEETING HELD WITH DIANNE OBORSKI 3/4/2002 TAKEN BY SLAV BRATKOVIC IN THE PRESENCE OF LIDIA CORSINI

PN70

MR MATARAZZO: The ASU submits with Dianne Oborski agreeing that she was - she is of the view that there seemed to be an obsession to try and find fault irrespective of how minor with Dianne's work. And furthermore, all of a sudden excessive time was spent with survellience of her work which one could allegedly call taylorist in nature in analysing to the minute detail her work. And Dianne would submit that no other in-door staff member was subjected to this amount of detailed survellience and otherwise. Dianne had also at this time after the meeting advised the ASU office that she believed she was being victimised, intimidated and humiliated by Slav and indeed she believed she was being treated significantly different from the other in-door clerical and administrative staff. And the other issue about the minutes of Slav is to this day we have been wondering, they are very detailed and they are descriptive and we, just for the record, wondering if there was a tape recording at the actual meeting.

PN71

So we just state that on the record as a general question. In an effort to have Dianne's concerns addressed, the ASU wrote a correspondence dated 16 May 2002 to the National Industrial Relations Manager of Armaguard in Melbourne, Mr Dan McPherson which we wish to now tender as an exhibit.

PN72

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Any objection?

PN73

MR BLANDY: No, your Honour.

PN74

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The letter of 16 May 2002 to Mr McPherson from Mr Matarazzo I mark exhibit ASU7.

EXHIBIT #ASU7 LETTER TO MR McPHERSON FROM MR MATARAZZO 16/5/2002

PN75

MR MATARAZZO: Thank you, your Honour. Your Honour, will note that on page one of that correspondence the ASU again - - -

PN76

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: They are the same points, aren't they?

PN77

MR MATARAZZO: The same points that were raised in the March 20 correspondence. But on page two without reading it directly into transcript, the ASU did seek the intervention of Mr Dan McPherson and the issues raised were that Dianne had been employed for almost two years. Working on a systematic regular and continual basis and to date wasn't yet permanent or guaranteed a minimum number of hours per week. A question was asked about the $18 year 2002 national wage case safety net.

PN78

And furthermore, the request was made if he would be willing to be involved in a telephone hook up with myself and Dianne Oborski as Dianne wished to raise a number of concerns about what - about the style of management and conduct of the management of the Darwin Armaguard office towards her. And the ASU sought a response by the close of business May 27, 2002 and reserved its right to refer to the matters to the Industrial Relations Commission after that date.

PN79

The ASU sent, for the record, this correspondence by post on Thursday, May 16, 2002 and my records indicate that the week after we did also send a copy by facsimile. Your Honour, on the afternoon of Tuesday, 21 May, 2002 after 4 pm Dianne contacted me in the Darwin ASU office advising that Slav Bratkovic wanted to have a meeting with her the next day. I contacted Mr Bratkovic and organised a mutually agreed upon time for the afternoon of Wednesday, May 22, 2002. As I had commitments, believe it or not, in the Industrial Relations Commission on the morning of Wednesday, May 22, 2002. And a meeting occurred.

PN80

I wish to tender as an exhibit which you may already have the letter on file. It is the ASU correspondence dated May 25, 2002 with a two page statement made by Dianne Oborski as well. If I may tender that as an exhibit.

PN81

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, we will do it as an exhibit. I think you are right it is on file but we will stay on one course. Any objection, Mr Blandy?

PN82

MR BLANDY: No, your Honour.

PN83

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The letter of 25 May 2002 to Mr Bratkovic with attachments from Mr Matarazzo I mark exhibit ASU8.

EXHIBIT #ASU8 LETTER TO MR BRATKOVIC WITH ATTACHMENTS FROM MR MATARAZZO 25/5/2002

PN84

MR MATARAZZO: Thank you, your Honour. In the correspondence the ASU has - we obviously wrote that letter on - over the weekend after the meeting occurred during the week. For the record, Ms Oborski at that meeting which I attended was suspended with pay. She had, I think it is called a swipe card I'm not sure, she had that taken off her as well. She was advised that there was some serious allegations about incidents that had happened in the workplace on the Tuesday afternoon. And that Armaguard wished to investigate the allegations. We - - -

PN85

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: When was this?

PN86

MR MATARAZZO: The Wednesday - - -

PN87

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Advised? The Wednesday. The meeting of 22 May.

PN88

MR MATARAZZO: Yes. Where I advised Armaguard that it was - we specifically asked for copies of the written complaints that have been made about allegations pertaining to Dianne Oborski. For the record, Armaguard advised that they wouldn't be providing us with a copy of those written complaints by, we understand it may have been two other staff members. For the record, we submit that, according to my notes, Slav advised that the allegations involved disruptive behaviour, unacceptable conduct, screaming and shouting, personal attacks on other staff and concerns about Dianne's attitude to other staff. We advise that we had concerns with the process the ASU and we believe that it is difficult for somebody to respond to allegations if they - specially if they are in writing and they are not provided with copies of those written complaints. We undertook to reserve our right to allow Dianne to respond in writing to the allegations made. And we undertook to do so by Monday - I think it is - Monday's date was 27 May.

PN89

For the record, I was surprised as to why Di was suspended with pay. We do acknowledge that it was with pay. And that upon receiving the - a written response from Di, Armaguard would on the Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday of the week commencing May 27 contact us after they had made their investigations. For the record, over that weekend - I think which was a Saturday was 25, the ASU did write and fax through the correspondence which is exhibit ASU8. Where we raised numerous concerns. Again the issues of the written complaints from staff members about Dianne that Armaguard didn't provide copies with - we question whether we believe that the process was truly and open and transparent and fair process.

PN90

We ask the question as to whether Armaguard management were fully colluded with other staff to the detriment of Dianne which may put her ongoing employment in jeopardy. We expressed surprise how a number of written complaints were submitted in such a quick time. We also raised the issue that we said since, I guess, the point we were making since Dianne became I guess an activist in the workplace in regards to working conditions and a union member all of a sudden. Her work performance became an issue.

PN91

After we - and for the record, there in exhibit ASU8, your Honour, I guess I don't need to read it out into transcript, is the two page statement signed by Dianne Oborski which is her recount of the what happened in the workplace on the afternoon of Tuesday, May 2002. Sorry, one moment, your Honour. Thank you, your Honour. So for the record, it is there as an exhibit. The ASU has read the statement and that was submitted to Armaguard as I said by facsimile. By, I can't recall if - it was around the Wednesday, May 29 Armaguard advised me at the Darwin ASU office that they wished to have a meeting on that Thursday which was May 30 thereabouts.

PN92

Where Slav advised Dianne and myself that after their investigation they would be issuing Dianne with a first and final warning. And basically that this would be issued to her in writing in due course. We - I guess, again the ASU was surprised that - how things had turned out. I wish to tender that letter as an exhibit, which is the first and final warning letter given to Di Oborski.

PN93

MR BLANDY: No objection, your Honour.

PN94

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Very well. The letter of 3 June 2002 to Ms Oborski from Mr Bratkovic I mark exhibit ASU9.

EXHIBIT #ASU9 LETTER TO MS OBORSKI FROM MR BRATKOVIC 3/6/2002

PN95

MR MATARAZZO: I guess - for the record, there - apart from the letter specifically stating this is the first and final written warning in the first paragraph. I draw your attention to the second last paragraph which states and I quote:

PN96

We will meet again on 31st of July 2002 to review your performance and future employment with Armaguard. If no improvement has been made by that date, the Company will have not alternative but to terminate your employment on the basis of unsatisfactory performance/conduct.

PN97

End of quote. The ASU and Dianne Oborski, for the record, wish to state that we dispute the alleged findings that claim that there was by Dianne disruptive behaviour in the workplace and that she had made verbal attacks on two other staff and that she was arguing with the supervisor, Robyn Brown and that she had verbally abused the cashier, Melissa Grantham. Dianne and the ASU wish to submit for the record that again we have not seen to this date the written complaints. Armaguard have not provided us with those details. We do not know how they came to that conclusion.

PN98

We state that basically this is over the top and basically Armaguard should have approached this more in a - calling all staff in and possibly discussing things rather than treating one particular staff member different to the others. I mean, we would be having treason trials like the Roman emperor days all over again if we allowed this sort of conduct to continue. We submit that basically this letter was over the top which is why we are here today. And I guess we do again submit that we have concerns with the processes of how Armaguard went about dealing with this whole matter and the fact that there is still, what we perceive, is a real threat to possibly terminate her employment on July 31, 2002.

PN99

And job security is an issue to Dianne Oborski. So without going further, the ASU wishes to state that on the record for the time being and obviously we will allow the employers to respond. But as I said if - we wish to reserve our right should no positive outcome occur today. On the issues of - which I raised earlier in regards to guarantee minimum hours of work, for the record, the ASU has - can state that Dianne has advised us that her average number of hours used to be around 30 hours a week late in the year 2001 and earlier this year. Her average hours of work have now fallen to 18 hours a week. We have made no comparisons with other staff but that would be an interesting comparison.

PN100

And I guess, rosters years ago used to be put a week in advance. I understand now they are put up the Friday afternoon prior to the week before. The casualisation rate the ASU understands is in excess of 50 per cent of the Darwin office. I guess on the issue of traineeships, the ASU has received a correspondence also dated 3 June from Gloria Tsotsis and has answered the question in regards to that. I haven't taken copies of that correspondence but it is on file. And I just wish to read into transcript the response to the ASU is and I quote from Mayne Logistics Armaguard:

PN101

Traineeships

PN102

All clerical/administrative staff at Darwin Armaguard were offered the opportunity to participate in certificate II or III Transport and Distribution (administrative Strand), a nationally recognised, ANTA approved program. Approximately 95% uptake was recognised.

PN103

We currently await approval from the Northern Territory and Training Authority to commence the program.

PN104

End of quote. For the record, the ASU is still non the wiser in regards to the issue of traineeships and for the record I wish to tender an exhibit which possibly the other side have not seen yet.

PN105

MR BLANDY: Member, I've got no objection.

PN106

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Very well. The letter of 12 June 2002 to Mr Peter Plummer from Mr Matarazzo on the subject of Mayne Logistics Armaguard traineeships I mark exhibit ASU10.

EXHIBIT #ASU10 LETTER TO PETER PLUMMER FROM MR MATARAZZO 12/6/2002

PN107

MR MATARAZZO: Thank you, your Honour. Simply it is a letter to the Northern Territory Department of Education, Employment and Training. In the correspondence to the Department we have quoted the question we have put to Armaguard on March 20, 2002. We have quoted the response by Armaguard dated June 3, 2002. And we have simply asked the Northern Territory Department just to investigate and find out if the traineeships or otherwise are complying with relevant legislative and compliance requirements. We have yet to receive a response from this correspondence.

PN108

We're - that is all I wish to state for the record at this stage. We are happy to hear from the employer representatives and we would be seeking to go into a conciliation conference later on today.

PN109

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Very well, Mr Matarazzo. Mr Blandy.

PN110

MR BLANDY: Thank you, your Honour. Your Honour, I would like to begin by giving you a very brief background and overview of our member. They are, provide effective to what I would call in the banking game, a treasury service. They operate out of high security premises. Indeed one has to first get through the outer perimeter fence. I think then admission into the building which in a secured area, then further admission into the building from that secured area and then further admission into various other areas in there. They are all secured. It is a high security facility for obvious reasons. I won't expand too much on transcript, sir. 27 employees at the moment employed by the Darwin Armaguard office. The company employs 20 to what I refer to as road crew. They are the delivery drivers and security guard back-ups and other security - - -

PN111

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Persons.

PN112

MR BLANDY: Members. The company employee seven in the cash room. One full timer, three part-time and three casual. The applicant, sorry, Ms Oborski is, if I could use the abbreviation an AWA employee. She - an AWA - Australian Workplace Agreement has been registered with the office of employment in relation to her.

PN113

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Is it still within its time?

PN114

MR BLANDY: I'm just checking that. I'm not sure, your Honour, whether it is - its normal expiry date has passed but as your Honour would be aware - similar to award certified agreements and continues past its normal expiry date for obvious reasons, that is the case. I have a copy of it here, in fact I have four copies of it. It is 22 pages, sir. It is a, what I describe, as a fairly generic AWA. It does have a dispute resolution procedure in it in clause 28 which, it would seem has not been followed in this matter.

PN115

And I think it would have been appropriate for that to have been followed. And I'm not sure if my good friend, Mr Matarazzo, was aware that his member was an employee subject to an Australian Workplace Agreement. I might hand it up because if he hasn't got one, it is appropriate to provide him one now. Does your Honour want one or two copies, sir.

PN116

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: One copy will be sufficient.

PN117

MR BLANDY: I think clause 28 is relevant. Your Honour, would have on the front the approval notice that relates to it.

PN118

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I will mark this as an exhibit for identification purposes at least the copy of the AWA. How is Ms Oborski a party to this AWA?

PN119

MR BLANDY: There is a signature on - a fairly extensive schedule, sir, it is page, probably page 10, but it is actually called, it is actually referred to on it as page 1. It is a signing page.

PN120

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, I see. All right the AWA between Mayne Nickless and amongst others, Ms Oborski, is marked exhibit A1.

EXHIBIT #A1 AWA BETWEEN MAYNE NICKLESS AND AMONGST OTHERS, MS OBORSKI

PN121

MR BLANDY: My instructions are that Ms Oborski is a casual employee pursuant to this Australian Workplace Agreement which defines what a casual employee is in it. And that is so because, and I have - probably conflicts with some of them - my good friend, Mr Matarazzo submissions to you that she was not offered alternative employment. My instructions are that she was offered part-time employment but declined that and so did one or two others. My member has been keen to convert a number of their staff to part-time employment because they feel that they can offer regularity of work to certain staff members.

PN122

Their business is subject to the vagaries of demand - supply and demand. And, if your Honour will excuse me, I'm probably recovering from something that has been affecting me for several weeks now. My voice is a little strange. She declined the offer of part-time employment. Now, bearing in mind that there are three other casuals and as I understand it, Mr Bratkovic will correct me if I'm wrong, but the other two were in a similar position, they also declined part-time employment. And I suspect obviously for monetary reasons. The consistent with standard casual labour practices at 20 per cent, certainly in the Northern Territory 20 per cent loading would be carried with that.

PN123

Our member has suffered a downturn in business and indeed at a conference earlier this week in our offices with Mr Bratkovic and Ms Tsotsis, who is on the telephone at the moment, we discussed a number of issues and the - one of the issues is that our member is about to lose a contract with a client. It is a substantial contract. It will be - it will cease on, I suppose midnight on 30 June this year. That will result in a reduction in hours, particularly to the casual workers. Mr Bratkovic tells me that he raised that with the staff I think about two weeks ago.

PN124

MR BLANDY: An e-mail, your Honour. Unfortunately I don't have that with me. And at our conference earlier this week he - I raised with him the difficulty that this presents that there is going to be a reduction in hours and that it needs to be - the staff need to be formally alerted to it. He was concerned about doing so because of this matter that is before you. And on my advice, he has issued a memo and unfortunately notwithstanding, your Honour, I did ask him to bring it today, he forgot and I am guilty of the same sin because I forgot to bring a letter to the Deputy Industrial Registrar that I had printed to bring down as well. There is a memo explaining the fact that the contract will be lost and that it will result in a reduction of a number of man hours, if I can use that term at the - in the cash counting room and that the reduction in hours will be based upon the performance of the casual workers between the date of the memo and 30 June on my advice.

PN125

And it will become apparent to you why that was so, your Honour, in a few minutes. But I will now touch on it briefly. There are some serious performance concerns with the applicant. And my advice to my member was that it would not be appropriate to rely upon those performance concerns in deciding who or how many casuals lost hours, which casual or casuals lost hours. So the memo points out and I don't know that Ms Oborski has seen it but I think she may be in a day off situation at the moment. And I regret that we can't provide her with a copy of that today.

PN126

So in effect, the decision will be based upon performance of the staff between the day on which I suggested it - - -

PN127

MR BLANDY: Put up this morning, sorry and 30 June. Unfortunately it is not very long but it is certainly enough to allow the staff to demonstrate their performance capabilities. And the performance letters we are talking about here, your Honour, is their cash counting ability. And if I might, your Honour, hand some documents and I only have one coloured in but I think it can be referred to collectively by us all. It is a comparison chart which Mr Bratkovic prepared of the cash counting performance of the various staff - casual staff in the cash counter room.

PN128

The - I will have another one to tender in a few minutes, your Honour.

PN129

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: You do tender this do you?

PN130

MR BLANDY: Yes, I do, sir.

PN131

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Any objection, Mr Matarazzo?

PN132

MR MATARAZZO: No.

PN133

MR BLANDY: This one bears a fairly large roman numeral I, your Honour.

PN134

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN135

MR BLANDY: And the next one would have a roman numeral II.

PN136

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. I will mark the comparative table document marked I exhibit A2 and that is all I will do at the moment.

EXHIBIT #A2 COMPARATIVE TABLE DOCUMENT

PN137

MR BLANDY: Yes, thank you, your Honour. Now the first one, Thursday, 21 March 2002, the applicant, sorry, Ms Oborski was not at work on that day so she was not assessed. But she would have been yellow, sorry, (c) on your Honour's chart. But she is (c) on the remaining ones. And on the colour coded one we have various colours, it is quite an easy to understand if you've got the colour coded properly, which I have. But it shows her cash counting performance per hour and I need to be cautious here if your Honour will forgive me. But the figures above the columns are thousands of dollars.

PN138

And you will see there is a line drawn across at a particular dollar value on each of the documents. I'm being coy if your Honour will forgive me for security reasons. As that being an acceptable standard per hour. Now it unfortunately is a very sad indictment of Ms Oborski's cash counting performance and indeed in one case I think it would probably be a victoria cross could have been awarded to one of the staff there - the 27 March one. But your Honour can see that the majority of staff easily achieved that standard. Ms Oborski's performance was unfortunately ..... quite sub-standard.

PN139

If I now maybe tender the roman II comparison chart, your Honour.

PN140

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Any objection, Mr Matarazzo?

PN141

MR MATARAZZO: To?

PN142

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I'm sorry to documents you may not have seen, have you?

PN143

MR BLANDY: Yes, I'm sorry. I haven't explained that and I will in a moment, your Honour.

PN144

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. Explain it before I call on Mr Matarazzo.

PN145

MR BLANDY: The - our member encouraged the applicant to improve her performance and gave her assistance in doing so. What I imagine would be exhibit A3 roman II shows the cash counting ability after encouragement, assistance etcetera. So it shows an improvement albeit on this one she appears as (a). Mr Bratkovic tasked one of his other staff to prepare it and they weren't aware of the significance of the (c). So on II, roman numerals II, Ms Oborski is (a), column (a).

PN146

You can certainly see - see there has been an improvement.

PN147

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Right. Well, any objection to the tender, Mr Matarazzo?

PN148

MR MATARAZZO: No but we may wish to respond on them in due course.

PN149

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, very well. I will mark the comparison table marked II exhibit A3.

EXHIBIT #A3 COMPARISON TABLE MARKED II

PN150

The cash counting being Ms Oborski's primary duty and a duty she has fulfilled I think for close to two years. It shows a fairly poor level of ability compared to her peers. And it is something that a member is entitled to expect her to maintain at least a certain level of performance. It is not an unreasonable level I am instructed either, your Honour. And I think, looking at the figures, you can see the others in a number of cases exceeded by more than 100 per cent. Now the review will be based on the basis of this cash counting ability. And my respectful submission and certainly it is on my advice and I am aware and accept any criticism for it but I think it is the most fairest and most equitable way of dealing with the matter in alerting the staff that this will be the process.

PN151

So they are not being bush wacked so to speak but they will be aware of the process that will be applied and no doubt will strive to achieve that level. But the fact remains that a contract has been lost and that is going to result in a reduction - - -

PN152

MR BLANDY: An eight hour or an eight man hour reduction within the cash counting room. Now - - -

PN153

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Eight overall?

PN154

MR BLANDY: Yes.

PN155

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Eight overall in what period of time?

PN156

MR BLANDY: In a day.

PN157

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: In a day. And what is the current hour?

PN158

MR BLANDY: I will have to refer to Mr Bratkovic, I'm sorry, your Honour sir.

PN159

MR BRATKOVIC: It is about 40 hours per day.

PN160

MR BLANDY: About 40 man hours for the day in the cash counting room.

PN161

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: So it is going down to about 32.

PN162

MR BLANDY: About 32. But your Honour, I think if you bear in mind that there is one full-time employee, three part-timers and three casuals. Certainly must take away hours from casuals before weekly employees and whilst I'm sure my friend, Mr Matarazzo, might suggest in all the fairest and most equitable process would be to snip a bit off everybody. That is not a, in my respectful submission, a sound way of doing business. If you have got a number of stars in that cash counting room and somebody who has shown an, unfortunately, a lack of ability in comparison with them that the risk, of course, is if a member does move hours equally from all three casuals then of course they face the risk of in fact losing those. Their hours are down.

PN163

Our member has 27 or thereabouts employees. I suppose with the nature of the workforce these days that my now deceased good friend Doctor Ian Hawke co-authored a paper in 1996 in reduction in union membership in Australia, has certainly had an impact at this work site. Over the years I have seen a reduction in - obviously in membership and it - union membership at this work site is at least certainly quite low. Which I think it is a fairly amicable, friendly work site. And one of the ways of addressing issues at the workplace that Mr Bratkovic has implemented and he did this several months ago, was there are two what I call employee representatives in the work site.

PN164

To in effect provide the services of what would normally be a trade union workplace representative. They are and can be the first point of contact for an employee to bring issues and grievances and have those matters dealt with. And it has worked in my - from what Mr Bratkovic tells me worked magnificently. That there are issues that crop up. They are addressed immediately and that issue simply disappears. Now this matter did not come via the employee representatives. Ms Oborski has obviously recently joined the union and felt concerned about a number of issues and my good friend has put a raft of issues very eloquently before you today.

PN165

But the letter, I will back track a moment if I may. My good friend's national organisation the Australian Services Union is dare I say it leading the charge in this country in relation to workplace bullying. And obviously as a union it has a large of proportion of female members and that female employees are probably more likely to be bullied than male employees. And I think that is probably the reason why they are leading the charge and I have certainly seen a number of papers and documents that the ASU have distributed. But Ms Oborski's conduct in this workplace would certainly fit well within the parameters of what my good friend's union would class as workplace bullying.

PN166

There are a number of staff. I think two. Two that have directly resigned rather than work with her. Now a number of other staff have - we have them here written statements concerning her conduct, attitude and those other I suppose intangibles towards them. But things that make a workplace unpleasant. Your Honour and myself may not be able to pin them down specifically but nevertheless make for an uncomfortable environment for the staff. Two have been ...... with their feet. I think - at least one of them included that in the written reasons. That specifically it may even be in the second one. Sorry, only the first one. But the second one I think explains that - will see the reason, your Honour. What my - well our member has been trying to do is to address those issues. They are not preparing her for slaughter. They are endeavouring to bring about an improvement in her work performance and her conduct or behaviour towards her colleagues.

PN167

She is booked in for an anger management course conducted by the well respected Employee Assistance Service which are a business in Darwin that my good friend is well aware of. And a number of those staff are qualified, professionally qualified psychologists. It is a service of the Northern Territory government and the Federal government to make available to employees in the Northern Territory. And has been around for several years. She is also booked in to attend a course conducted by organisation in conflict resolution. Now quite our member is trying perhaps straining to bring about an improvement in Ms Oborski's conduct and performance.

PN168

But they can only tolerate so much, your Honour. For mine, their patience seems to go on forever. Now in relation to the warning matter of 3 June, it certainly does say first and final warning in two places, the first paragraph and the penultimate paragraph, sorry, withdraw that. The anti-penultimate paragraph. And I have known Mr Bratkovic for some years now and I think it is a measure of, I suppose, his frustration that he put that in there to, I suppose, give - let her know that her conduct was inappropriate and needed to be addressed. Ms Tsotsis in our conference earlier this week, we agreed that those words would be withdrawn and that was conveyed to Mr Matarazzo.

PN169

But in any event Mr Bratkovic would never proceed to terminate Ms Oborski on the basis of one further incident. He does seek my advice and counsel on a regular basis over a variety of issues. And if I may be so bold to say that he implements my advice. But she certainly would not have been terminated. It wasn't something that I would sanction nor any of my colleagues either. Effectively the letter whilst it says first and final, it would not have been treated as such. And we have conveyed that to Mr Matarazzo or Ms Tsotsis has. I don't think it actually specifies it in the email but as I understand it Ms Tsotsis has certainly communicated to Mr Matarazzo that - yes, I'm sorry, it does say it, yes. Lucio ...... without prejudice and changed the warning issue to a first written warning still stands and so on.

PN170

Now a number of other things, I will try and touch on them as best I can, in relation to the number of the letters that Mr Matarazzo written concerning the almost seems the attitude of Mr Bratkovic to try and ram AWAs down employees necks. There is a process that the Office of Employment Advocate observes here with the exception of one person. I have personally worked with them, all of them in the Department of Industrial Relations and I know them well. And I know the processes ..... applied your Honour and employees do not enter into AWAs without knowing and without understanding from the Office of Employment Advocate's point of view.

PN171

I should also at this point sir, concede Mr Matarazzo's early contention that the General Clerks (Northern Territory) Award 1985 is applicable although I thought it had - it actually probably would be 2000. It has been simplified I think and I am just thinking of - - -

PN172

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well, anyway it is that award.

PN173

MR BLANDY: Yes. Certainly what we, Mr Matarazzo and I would have called the G0019 Award but it is now a fairly long number attached to it, General Clerks Award. It is - - -

PN174

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The Common Rule Award.

PN175

MR BLANDY: Common Rule Award that applies to the clerical industry in the Northern Territory. And indeed as you will see it was the award utilised in the no disadvantage test in the Australian Workplace Agreements which is exhibit A1, Ms Oborski's AWA. Your Honour, I've - perhaps I've also neglected to do something, at the outset I could have said here that for legislative purposes I suppose it is open to your Honour to find a dispute within the meaning of section 99 in relation to this matter.

PN176

Something we - I suppose we seem to forget over the years. It is something that we all did back in the early nineties and it was the first thing that was either asked or conceded. But I certainly think that there is power for you to find the dispute. That many of the issues I would respectfully subject, they are outside the jurisdiction of the Commission. The performance issues are rarely need to be addressed are not something that the Commission should interfere with and if those performances issues ultimately result in Ms Oborski's termination then she will have a right of review to this place that I am convinced that she will exercise.

PN177

If your Honour will forgive me for one moment. Your Honour, just to put as forcefully as I can. Our member does not have a policy preferring one type of agreement over the other. The Transport Workers' Union who have formed or whose - the road crew employees who form the bulk of the company's workforce would be eligible to join the Transport Workers' Union and they indeed have one or two members. I don't know that it is that many more than that. Have certified agreements with my member and they have had a - renew them reasonably proximate to the nominal expiry date of them. Well, they certainly have in the past.

PN178

It is up for review at the moment, there is one on the table now. So there is no policy of preferring one type of agreement over the other. It was something that my member offered the employees in the cash room and a number of them took it up. I haven't looked at it in detail but I suspect it provides a higher rate of remuneration and probably a few other things in the General Clerks Common Rule Award. Yes there is $20 an hour, sorry, $20 per week more. Now there is a number of things that Mr Bratkovic was making notes of. He tells me that there was nothing said about minimum hours in a meeting with Ms Oborski and Lidia.

PN179

Still a proposal, nothing had been decided at that stage. He has underlined quite angrily if that is an appropriate phraseology, the comment that Mr Matarazzo said in relation to Mr Spagnoli speaking about the AWAs are incorrect. He simply greeted staff with pleasantries. In relation to - I'm not sure whether my good friend was referring to when he first joined the Federated Clerks Union in 1990 and being excluded from inside the premises or whether this was something that was recent. I missed the date that he said there but given the security features that prevail in there that it is understandable. The area is outside. It is shaded. It is private. Certainly no one can hear and that could not be said for inside the premises.

PN180

The only real area that he could have used is a dual lunch room. It is a dual lunch room for both the road crew people - Transport Workers' Union eligible employees and the ASU eligible employees. Unless there is anything in particular your Honour wishes me to address I think I will resume my seat now, sir.

PN181

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. I think we might go into conference.

PN182

MR BLANDY: Sir.

PN183

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Do you want to say something, Mr Matarazzo?

PN184

MR MATARAZZO: I just wanted to put a couple of quick things on the transcript.

PN185

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right.

PN186

MR MATARAZZO: About going into great detail.

PN187

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Very well.

PN188

MR MATARAZZO: Just for the record, the ASU understands in regards to Australian workplace agreements that clerical staff when they commence employment are offered an Australian workplace agreement. And as I understand, Dianne Oborski when she commenced in May 2002 was offered an Australian workplace agreement at the commencement of her employment. Sorry, I understand it didn't apply to Ms Oborski but it has applied to other staff.

PN189

The issue of the allegations for the record, today there have been two additional allegations that two staff have directly resigned due to alleged conduct of Ms Oborski. Again we challenge the company to table those letters. We find it amazing that the company will not table those letters. For the record, we acknowledge the company has still decided not to table the letters of complaint of May 21, 2002. Again we ask why, why not. They are serious allegations and are having detriment to our member and I'm left speechless that - of the way Armaguard conducts its business.

PN190

In regards to exhibits A2 and A3, I wish to state on the record that we may come back to these at some later stage but they are selective. They do not take into account - they are making the assumption that all the staff do exactly the same task. We submit that Dianne Oborski may be using different machines to another staff member. There are times when she counts by hand and other staff count with machines. So you are not comparing like with like. There are different clients. Some bags come in and there is more money in them than other bags. So how can you - you are not comparing like with like.

PN191

Like one bag, I'm just using imaginary numbers, may take the same amount of time to count than another bag. But one bag may have $100 in it another bag may only have $50 and therefore the claim is that one person is faster than the other. The ASU understands that the manager has - can allocate different tasks to different staff which has been occurring. So we submit that A2 and A3 are not, in our view, representing like with like and the information in those exhibits are distorted. They are selective. For the record, Dianne has been there for some two years and it is now interesting that all of a sudden her performance and there is selective data being tabled today to try and show that she is the slowest.

PN192

And furthermore, we say that it is something that we do not concede. And there are plausible reasons. And in fact, as the ASU understands, there have been days Dianne advised where she has actually counted more than other fellow staff. And we notice that that data has not been tabled today.

PN193

So, basically, that is the major issue. We simply say that her AWA nominal expiry date has expired. And a number of staff have indicated they want to do a certified agreement and the company has not been too co-operative in that area with ASU. We now have three ASU members at Armaguard, hopefully that will improve.

PN194

And finally, again we challenge the company to provide evidence that they are losing their contract on 30 June. We are not convinced that it may be the case. And that is all I wish to state for the time being. Thank you, your Honour.

PN195

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I will go into conference now.

OFF THE RECORD [3.35pm]

NO FURTHER PROCEEDINGS RECORDED [4.33pm]

INDEX

LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs

EXHIBIT #ASU1 APPLICATION FORM SIGNED BY MS OBORSKI 2/3/2002 PN19
EXHIBIT #ASU2 LETTER TO MR BRATKOVIC FROM MR MATARAZZO 15 MARCH PN24
EXHIBIT #ASU3 LETTER TO MR BRATKOVIC FROM MR MATARAZZO 20/3/2002 PN33
EXHIBIT #ASU4 LETTER TO MR BRATKOVIC FROM MR MATARAZZO 24/3/2002 PN49
EXHIBIT #ASU5 EMAIL 18/6/2002 PN55
EXHIBIT #ASU6 NOTES FROM MEETING HELD WITH DIANNE OBORSKI 3/4/2002 TAKEN BY SLAV BRATKOVIC IN THE PRESENCE OF LIDIA CORSINI PN70
EXHIBIT #ASU7 LETTER TO MR McPHERSON FROM MR MATARAZZO 16/5/2002 PN75
EXHIBIT #ASU8 LETTER TO MR BRATKOVIC WITH ATTACHMENTS FROM MR MATARAZZO 25/5/2002 PN84
EXHIBIT #ASU9 LETTER TO MS OBORSKI FROM MR BRATKOVIC 3/6/2002 PN95
EXHIBIT #ASU10 LETTER TO PETER PLUMMER FROM MR MATARAZZO 12/6/2002 PN107
EXHIBIT #A1 AWA BETWEEN MAYNE NICKLESS AND AMONGST OTHERS, MS OBORSKI PN121
EXHIBIT #A2 COMPARATIVE TABLE DOCUMENT PN137
EXHIBIT #A3 COMPARISON TABLE MARKED II PN150