|
|
Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Australian Industrial Relations Commission Transcripts |
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:(03) 9672-5608 Fax:(03) 9670-8883
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
O/N VT02088
AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL
RELATIONS COMMISSION
COMMISSIONER LEWIN
C2001/5613
QENOS AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED
and
THE AUSTRALIAN WORKERS' UNION
Application under section 170LW of the Act
for settlement of dispute re classification
structure of employees employed as owner operators
at the LPPE Plant and who are eligible members of
the AWU
MELBOURNE
10.39 AM, THURSDAY, 17 JANUARY 2002
Continued from 14.11.01
PN112
THE COMMISSIONER: Good morning. Are there any changes in the appearances?
PN113
MS Z. ANGUS: Yes, Commissioner. There is a change of appearance from the AWU. I now appear on behalf of the AWU.
PN114
THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Ms Angus. Yes. Mr Dalton, have you been in the matter before? I can't recall.
PN115
MR DALTON: Yes, I have.
PN116
THE COMMISSIONER: I think you have, yes. Was there any issue of leave at that stage?
PN117
MR DALTON: Yes, there was, Commissioner. The application for leave was opposed originally. The matter was the subject of conciliation and I was granted leave for that but you asked that I make a fresh application if the matter wasn't able to be resolved and had to be arbitrated.
PN118
THE COMMISSIONER: All right.
PN119
MR DALTON: And I make that application.
PN120
THE COMMISSIONER: Does the objection continue?
PN121
MS ANGUS: Yes, we do press our objection.
PN122
THE COMMISSIONER: Perhaps I might just sort of encourage some discussion about this subject from this perspective to give you an idea of what my instincts tell me is the best way to deal with these proceedings. As I understand it, there are only going to be two persons give evidence in this matter, Mr McKenzie and Mr Harvey. They have both filed witness statements. I take it that what would happen is that each of them would testify to the truth of the statement. There may be some supplementary questions which have arisen on instructions since the statements were written. They would then be cross-examined and at that point it seems to me that there is no reason why the submissions in the matter couldn't be put in writing. Now, if that was the case, I just wonder, Ms Angus, you know what the consequence of granting leave would be apart from the fact that Mr Dalton in those circumstances would be equipped for the cross-examination by virtue of his training.
PN123
MS ANGUS: Well, Commissioner, I think it is preferable to proceed on the basis of oral submissions. We have set aside two days for this arbitration and it is - - -
PN124
THE COMMISSIONER: To be honest to be with you, I only did that to assure the parties that the matter would conclude. I didn't know at that stage how elaborate the proceedings might be. I only did it as a precautionary thing so that there could be absolute certainty that this matter would not be delayed. I didn't want the industrial relations ramifications to incorporate dissatisfaction about potential delays, that is all. And I just - could I just indicate to you that there is a particular reason why in this case, although I usually prefer written rather than oral submissions, that I would - I may need to do so.
PN125
I am anticipating having to go on leave in the near future for some time and I have a significant number of decisions that will have to be written and published. And I am going to have to obviously work on some of those while I am on leave as well. So I am inclined at the moment to try and ensure that in all of the matters that I am hearing I take the submissions in writing because I find that they are well ordered and they assist the writing of a decision at a distance much more than oral submissions which are transcribed. In my experience, the transcription is never as accurate and as well ordered as when the parties themselves choose to publish their own submissions.
PN126
So apart from the question that, you know, the time allowed was really provided to take into account the industrial relations conflict over this subject, not so much to allow for lengthy oral submissions. That is another consideration as well. So how would you be prejudiced if the submission had to eb put in writing?
PN127
MS ANGUS: No, I don't see that that would be a prejudice and, given the Commission's own plans, then I don't oppose that. Although I registered a preference for oral submissions, it is purely for the sake of efficiency.
PN128
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.
PN129
MS ANGUS: That is one issue, and the union is happy to proceed on the basis of written submissions if that is more convenient to the Commission. There is though a primary issue though of the appropriateness of having - of granting leave to counsel to appear on behalf of the company and there is a threshold issue that has actually got to be made out by the company or by the counsel on behalf of the company to justify their presence. Now - - -
PN130
THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Well, you want to hear that first, do you?
PN131
MS ANGUS: Hear the arguments on behalf of the - Commissioner, my arguments or - - -
PN132
THE COMMISSIONER: No, no, Mr Dalton's application.
PN133
MS ANGUS: Yes, certainly.
PN134
THE COMMISSIONER: You want him to support it? All right.
PN135
MS ANGUS: Yes.
PN136
THE COMMISSIONER: Go ahead, Mr Dalton.
PN137
MR DALTON: Commissioner, could I say at the outset in relation to the application for leave, we are a little disappointed that we weren't given prior indication of the AWUs intention to oppose that. Given that we have exchanged material in advance, including the written statement of Mr Harvey, and it has been some time since the conciliation of the matter, the parties have had a lot of notice of my intention to be involved in the arbitration. The arbitration has been listed I think back in early December.
PN138
Notwithstanding that, the application for leave is brought on the basis that the subject matter of the proceedings means that there is special circumstances that mean that it is desirable for the Commission to grant leave. That is - I don't have a copy of the Act in front of me but I think that is section 43(2)(b).
PN139
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.
PN140
MR DALTON: The application is an arbitration under the procedures for the certified agreement. I think it is the first one that I am aware of that follows the special recommendations that you made that ended a very difficult and protracted dispute down on the site. It involves important questions about the application of the classification structure, specifically in relation to the low pressure plastics plant in the context of some restructuring. But also it has potential implications across the other sites. It involves a reasonable amount of evidence. That evidence, fortunately, has been recorded in writing by both sides but the circumstances are such that it is desirable that Qenos have the benefit of counsel to deal with the evidence that has been prepared and to make submissions at the appropriate time.
PN141
I should point out, Commissioner, in relation to your opening observations about how to deal with this matter, I am content for the submissions to be put to you in writing if that assists. And I can also say that I am very confident that this matter can be dealt with today. In fact, I think that there would be some change at the end of the day. I am confident that we can get through the evidence pretty efficiently this morning. That is the application in support of the application for leave.
PN142
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Ms Angus.
PN143
MS ANGUS: Yes, Commissioner. It is section 42(3) of the Act that in the absence of consent of all parties, there are really only two circumstances that would warrant the appearance of counsel; that is that there are special circumstances or that a party can only be adequately represented by counsel. Mr Dalton has spoken to one of those and not the other so perhaps I don't need to make out a case to argue against the other. Suffice to say in terms of whether or not the company can be adequately represented without counsel, we are all aware on the basis of the material that has been filed actually in the Commission that Qenos is a subsidiary of Exxon Mobil, at least in large part, and that Exxon Mobil is one of the largest oil companies in the world; in fact, I think probably the largest oil company in the world.
PN144
There is a massive corporate structure backing Qenos and not only is that the case, but there is a - they have their own HR team of almost a dozen dedicated HR operators. One of the key witnesses has been with the company for 15 years. That HR team is actually made up of people who have all served a number of years with the company in rotated posts so have experience of a number of different plants within Qenos and proceeding companies and, therefore, have a lot of experience and extensive knowledge in the operations of the company.
PN145
They have also - I understand that Mr Last, who is here with us today, is one - has only recently joined the company but he himself, along with all of the HR team, have extensive involvement in the Commission. As you, yourself, Commissioner, would be aware, there has been a lot of proceedings in the Commission over the course of the past year. Almost all of them, I understand, have not involved legal counsel but have actually been directly - arguments have been directly put by the company and the union. And so on that basis I would argue that the company is intimately familiar with the operations and proceedings of this Commission and, therefore, perfectly adequate - perfectly able to represent itself in these proceedings.
PN146
In terms of special circumstances, Mr Dalton has made the point that there are special circumstances that would make it desirable. I don't think he has put it any higher than that, because the issue is one of the application of the classification structure. I think we are agreed about the parameters, if you like, of this case. At the heart of the issue is whether - is how additional duties that are to be picked up by operators would be reflected in the classification structure; whether they are absorbed at a lower level or whether they form the basis for enabling operators to advance to more senior levels above the SISS9 classification level and, therefore, attracts additional remuneration. The heart of the issue is a classification issue.
PN147
Now, classification structures are human resource management, industrial matters. There are no complex legal issues that are going to be nutted out here. There is no question of jurisdiction. We both agree, we have got a - we have agreed to a process to have this matter determined. We have agreed that the Commission can determine the matter, and we have agreed that we will both put our cases about the operations of the classification structure and the nature of those additional duties to you for you to make a basis in terms of the merits of the case, not in terms of any legal ..... analysis. There is no legal precedents that need to be assessed here. It is simply about the additional work - additional responsibilities and then how they fit in terms of the classification structure as it is defined in an industrial instrument.
PN148
This is essentially an industrial human resource management matter; it is not a legal matter. And for that reason there are no special circumstance that would warrant one of the - a subsidiary of one of the largest companies in the world having legal counsel to run their case for them. For those two reasons, Commissioner, that the company can adequately represent itself and that the circumstances of this case actually relate to issues which are essentially of a human resource management and industrial nature, not a legal one, for those two reasons we press our opposition that it is the HR team who are most intimately familiar with the material who present their case before the Commission directly.
PN149
THE COMMISSIONER: Do you think they should be required to proceed today if leave is not granted?
PN150
MS ANGUS: Well, can I put it this way. We wouldn't oppose a short adjournment for them to re-organise their advocacy team, if you like.
PN151
THE COMMISSIONER: So you think they should proceed today to become the advocates in the matter?
PN152
MS ANGUS: Yes, yes. I think we - and can I just also make the point that the reason why I, or the union didn't notify Mr Dalton that we opposed leave being granted to counsel was precisely because we notified him of this right at the beginning and he has had enough experience himself of operating in this Commission to be aware that - well, without wanting to sound cynical, that it shouldn't take him by surprise that we are standing up today and saying: this is an HR matter, it should be dealt with by the HR team. So, yes - - -
PN153
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, I don't think he was necessarily surprised entirely by your view. I think his observation was that it would have been at least constructive if - what it was - the fact that it was likely to be pursued today had been known earlier. And would you like to just address the matter that I put to you earlier which was that in the circumstances of the case, having regard to the procedure that I outlined, I just wonder whether or not it might not be desirable that leave be granted on grounds of expedition because of the lack of prejudice to your side of the argument. You see, it seems to me that some of the points that you have made are a bit of a double-edged sword, and that is that if it is the case that there are no meta-legal texts to be explored in the course of the argument, then allowing leave grants no advantage over you. Because this is really going to be an argument about, as you have said, I think quite correctly, wages - the level of wages, having regard to duties of employees and the context in which the controversy has arisen. It is unlikely to involve questions of law. Mr Dalton then just really becomes an advocate of the facts and, in particular, if the submissions are to be in writing, he could have drafted those submissions on Mr Last's behalf, or advising Mr Last, or by whatever means contributed to the construction of the company's submissions in any event.
PN154
MS ANGUS: Commissioner, the disadvantage, the prejudice to us is this. You are right: in terms of a written submission, who knows who drafts either parties' written submissions. And so there is nothing that can be said or done to prevent Mr Dalton filing written submissions on behalf of the company. In terms of the eliciting and the cross-examination of evidence today, there is a prejudice to our case and that is that the witness that we have and want to put in the box is not experienced with this Industrial Relations Commission. This is his first time in any sort of proceedings and to have - to come up against the lawyer, rather than an HR expert, when it is essentially - the subject matter is essentially one of HR industrial matters is - does represent a prejudice to our case.
PN155
THE COMMISSIONER: What is the nature of that?
PN156
MS ANGUS: Well, it is an unfair power - - -
PN157
THE COMMISSIONER: I mean, Mr Dalton will be confined to such questions as are permitted according to the rules of evidence or to the extent that I, in my discretion, allow beyond that. And so, too, would Mr Last for instance if he was called upon at short notice to equip himself - - -
PN158
MS ANGUS: Commissioner, I think we have moved on to - there is a primary question that I want to focus on, whether or not a company in a matter before the Commission has a responsibility to organise its own case and run its own case on the basis of merits, and that is what I would argue in terms of the subject matter of these proceedings is the responsible course of action.
PN159
THE COMMISSIONER: With respect - - -
PN160
MS ANGUS: Just because it is - it might expedite matters or because it is convenient - - -
PN161
THE COMMISSIONER: With respect, that is irrelevant; with respect, that is irrelevant. The reason why I say that is because it is the statute that guides the consideration as to whether or not leave should be granted, and that does not include the attribution of particular responsibilities to corporations, regardless of their size, global reach, resources, whatever. The issue is contextualised; that is to say, it is the circumstances and the desirability of exercising a discretionary power to grant leave in the matter. It is not to be determined according to some sort of moral grammar of corporate behaviour. It is to be decided having regard to the particular matter that the Commission has to deal with and decide.
PN162
Now, if we were conducting a Royal Commission into the activities of multi national oil companies in Australia, there might be something to be said for - the perspective that you are addressing the matter from. This is not a matter of that gravity. It is just a simple matter of convenience as to how I can determine whether or not these circumstances that we are confronted with make it desirable that Mr Dalton in particular, in my view, be granted leave. Although the grant of leave obviously is to be represented by counsel, legal practitioner, I have focussed for the purpose of our discussion on the practicalities of the situation rather than the sort of - I don't think I am deciding a question of principle about legal representation.
PN163
MS ANGUS: I press the point that in terms of the issue of principle, I oppose for all the reasons I have outlined. In terms of practicalities, we wouldn't be opposed to standing the matter down for perhaps the course of today if it is simply a matter of re-organising material and, you know - there are ways that those practicalities that you have outlined, Commissioner, can be dealt with and we wouldn't oppose a short adjournment for that purpose.
PN164
THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Thank you. I intend to grant leave. I am satisfied that the subject matter of the proceedings - in the subject matter of the proceedings there are special circumstances which make it desirable to grant leave for the company to be represented by counsel. Those circumstances are that the matter has been the subject of discussions between the parties without legal representation. However, it has not been resolved and must now be adjudicated. The company has sought Mr Dalton's assistance in the preparation of the evidence in the matter and he has obviously been involved in the preparation and filing of the witness statement on behalf of the company. That witness will need to give evidence, prove the truth of the witness statement, be subject to cross-examination and re-examination. I anticipate, given the level of preparation that Mr Dalton has obviously achieved in respect of that procedure, there is a strong ground to believe that convenience and expedition would suit him being able to facilitate the reception by the Commission of that evidence.
PN165
To decline leave would potentially delay the matter and, on the current circumstances of my diary at least until March, on the assumption that Mr Dalton was going to present the case the company is obviously in a position where it would need to quickly re-organise its representation and advocacy and prepare for a totally different set of circumstances than it anticipated. Regardless of whether or not it should have taken steps to anticipate a potential objection and decline the grant of leave, I think in the circumstances of the case - and they include the historical circumstances out of which the dispute settlement procedure currently contained in the agreement and which is the jurisdictional basis of the Commission's entertainment of this matter, and the recommendation made by me on 5 February 2001 - I consider it undesirable to countenance any further delay in the settlement of this particular matter. Indeed, the current enterprise agreement in practical industrial relations terms is now entering the evening of its life.
PN166
Furthermore, given that I intend to require that submissions in the matter be put in writing, it seems to me that Mr Dalton's participation in the matter is likely to be confined to the cross-examination of witnesses. I doubt in any real sense, having regard to the substance of the matter as opposed to the form of its conduct, that this will provide any prejudice to the AWU. In all of these circumstances, I think it is desirable that Mr Dalton, in particular, be permitted to present the case that has been prepared on behalf of the company.
PN167
It is, in fact, more to do with the convenience of Mr Dalton's representation that I am inclined to grant leave for him to represent the company as counsel because it is unlikely that the matter will have any further hearing than will take place today. Whilst it wasn't specifically relied upon by Mr Dalton, it is open to me to grant leave in light of the application made if I am satisfied that the company can only adequately be represented by counsel, solicitor or agent. In the circumstances of this case, with my clear intention that the matter will be heard to conclusion today, I doubt that a brief adjournment as suggested by the AWU for Mr Last to suddenly become the advocate in the matter would really provide the company with adequate representation. I think the way in which this matter has been prepared is such that if it is to be heard today, the company can only be adequately represented by Mr Dalton which means that in this case it can only adequately be represented by counsel. It is for those reasons that I grant leave, Mr Dalton.
PN168
And I think moving on now to the question of how we hear the matter, what I would like to do is just indicate how I understand the parties' cases so that we can, if necessary, avoid the requirement for openings. My perspective of the AWUs case as I gleaned from the witness statement of Mr McKenzie and the other materials that have been forwarded to me is that it is argued that the utilities role, in particular the waste water process plant, responsibilities by virtue of all the matters referred to in Mr McKenzie's statement and perhaps others constitute a significant net addition to the duties of operators in the low pressure plastics plant. Both the day work duties and the occasional duties required on other than day work and that the Commission should, therefore, fix a higher rate of pay than currently applies when those duties aren't performed, regardless of any other considerations which are relied upon by the company in respect of the structure and history of the SISS classifications structure applicable to the company's operations.
PN169
Moreover, as I understand it, it is suggested that, given the extent of the waste water processing plant and other utilities duties associated with it, that the significant net addition to the value of the work is such that an employee required to perform those duties on day work or occasionally on other shift work should be classified at the level SISS10. Would that be a fair summary of the AWUs position?
PN170
MS ANGUS: That is not our case in entirety, but that is a fair summary.
PN171
THE COMMISSIONER: No, not in its entirety.
PN172
MS ANGUS: Yes.
PN173
THE COMMISSIONER: It is the kernel of it, is it?
PN174
MS ANGUS: Yes.
PN175
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, all right. And as I understand the company's case, it is suggested that for various reasons, amongst them two most importantly, the classification of SISS9 is appropriate, the first being that the performance of the duties are not such as to constitute a significant net addition to the work of operators classified at SISS9 in the low pressure plastics plant, having regard to the fact that that particular classification requires competency in a number of work competency modules and that one of those modules is currently not performed. That is to say, one of the modules in the nominated number is not performed and, therefore, the appropriate conclusion is that the duties in relation to the waste water process plant really take the place of the vacant module. That particular reason is one largely to do with the specific work value considerations of the kind relied upon by the AWU.
PN176
The second, as I understand it from the company's perspective, is that as a matter of agreement between the company and the organisations of employees which are parties to the enterprise bargaining agreement there is an agreement in relation to the classification structure in particular, and that agreement is that all basic technical skills should be contained within the classification SISS9 and that to add to that classification in the lowe pressure plastics plant such as to reclassify those employees who perform duties in the waste water processing plant an additional level of classification to SISS10 or any other consideration over and above the rate of pay for SISS9 would, in fact, be a breach of that agreement and understanding between those parties; and, furthermore, would likely lead to claims of a similar kind in other areas of the plant. Was that a fair summary of the - - -
PN177
MR DALTON: I am content with that summary, Commissioner. The only other matter that I should mention for completeness is the issue of the emergency response liaison task. My understanding is that that is still the subject of dispute between the parties. It is proposed by the company for the same reasons that you have outlined that the emergency response liaison task be available for use by each operator and - - -
PN178
THE COMMISSIONER: As part of SISS9.
PN179
MR DALTON: Again as part of basic technical skills, yes. That task used to be performed wholly and solely by the shift team leader on high pressure plastics and, for reasons which Mr Harvey can go into, it is proposed that everyone have that skill available for safety purposes.
[11.10am]
PN180
THE COMMISSIONER: Very well. Look, my summaries are obviously abbreviated and I don't hold either party to them. I just wanted to make sure that I had a basic grasp of the central arguments, or what we might call, the fundamentals of each side's position. And I fully expect that they will be elaborated in the course of the hearing of the matter and they may well go beyond the limits of the description that I gave. However, I think what it does is to enable us to go straight to the evidence unless either party, in due course, wishes to offer any further opening. Very well, I think we will hear your evidence first, Ms Angus. Your evidence first, I think.
PN181
MS ANGUS: All right, despite the fact I think it is the company's notification.
PN182
THE COMMISSIONER: I think it is appropriate. It is the company's notification but I think it is desirable that you be, in effect, the de facto applicant, because it is you that wants a variation in the current arrangements. I mean, I know that that is, sort of, on the surface of it, that is a reverse of the proceedings on paper, but the way I view it is that, what the company has done is to refer the dispute to the Commission. It is really up to me then to work out which is the best way of going about hearing it.
PN183
MS ANGUS: I don't object to that course of action in which case - - -
PN184
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, I think the way I should just, sort of, indicate is that I do see that there is a procedural and substantive onus on the AWU if I am to make a decision which is to the effect of what you want.
PN185
MS ANGUS: In which case I call David McKenzie.
PN186
MR DALTON: Commissioner, Mr Harvey is giving evidence in this matter. He has filed a written statement. I just thought I would raise that our of courtesy.
PN187
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, no, I appreciate that. Just stay there for a moment, Mr McKenzie. Do you want Mr Harvey to go away?
PN188
MS ANGUS: Yes, I suppose that would be - that is an appropriate course of action.
PN189
PN190
THE COMMISSIONER: Thanks, Mr McKenzie. Please be seated. You don't need to whisper. It is all right, we will close the door if you think Mr Harvey can hear what you are saying?---No, that's all right.
PN191
Please don't be offended. I was just really trying to indicate to you that I think you will have to speak a little bit more loudly than that. One of the reasons why, of course, is that if you address yourself to me, well, Mr Dalton won't hear it too well, in particular and he is obviously going to want to cross-examine you and to do so effectively he needs to hear what you are saying. Likewise, I think, for Ms Angus' purposes and she is a little bit further away. She will need to hear you clearly too. So - - -?---Yes.
PN192
Please speak up a little bit.
PN193
MS ANGUS: Hi, Mr McKenzie. Can I hand you a copy of a document - and Commissioner, can I just check that you in fact have received attachment C of that document.
PN194
THE COMMISSIONER: No, I have not.
PN195
MS ANGUS: No.
PN196
THE COMMISSIONER: I received the draft training hours.
PN197
MS ANGUS: Apologies for that, if I could hand that up now.
PN198
THE COMMISSIONER: Which is B, I think, thank you. I will just attach that.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
PN199
MS ANGUS: Yes.
PN200
I want you to have a quick look at that document. Do you recognise it?---Yes.
PN201
Is this a statement that you have prepared for these Commission proceedings?---This is correct.
PN202
And to the best of your knowledge, is it a true and accurate reflection of events?---Yes, it is.
PN203
PN204
MS ANGUS: Mr McKenzie, can you just tell the Commission your position and your length of service?---I have been in employment with the company for 19 years in the low pressure plastics plant. My current role is the waste water process plant dye operator in the plastics plant. And over the past 19 years have I have attained all area skills in the low pressure plant, being the first operator on site to do so.
PN205
Right, thanks, okay. Now, perhaps, just in your own words, if you could - the Commission has obviously had an inspection of the waste water plant and the utilities area - but can I just get you in your own words to tell us the importance of that area in terms of overall production and the low pressure plant?---It is very important to the running of the production plant because it needs water and it needs air to operate the various valves throughout the plant and any malfunctions would bring the plant down. If you lose water you lose your cooling. You can't control the plant and if you lose air the same happens to that. There are certain duties in making sure that the plant operates to the best
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
of its ability by chemically treating the water so that we get the correct - we don't have premature failing of plant equipment through scaling of pipes causing corrosion or fouling up machinery that could cause valuable loss of production and downtime and expensive replacement and maintenance costs.
PN206
And it is an area that traditionally has belonged to the high pressure plant; correct?---That is correct.
PN207
And there is no dispute between the parties about that as far as you are aware?---No, this is outside of the low pressure plant area; it was in the high pressure plant and now we are being asked to pick up this duty on shift. It is going outside of the low pressure area.
PN208
Right, okay. Now, from your perspective, in order to maintain that area at its - as a safe and properly functioning area, does it require a dedicated person?---Yes, it does.
PN209
All right, can you just run me through briefly - it is probably a difficult thing to do - broadly, then, your responsibilities as that dedicated person?---Just monitoring the plant for rostered days off, weekends, holidays and things like that. The purely monitoring role doesn't pick up things that happen. Just recently we have had the automatic dosing system has malfunctioned about four times in the last six months; they have been operating the plant and we have had to put it on manual to control the dosing. If we don't get the correct levels; if it falls below what is required we have immediate remedial actions to do. That being the - we could have possible legionella in our cooling towers and that gets out into the community. We have got a community action group that meets regular at the site and the in past two years we have had one instance of that and they were very concerned. Plus we had certain - - -
PN210
Actually, before you move on, can I just get you - you said that there have been a couple of malfunctions in the past couple of months?---In the - - -
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
PN211
What would happen in that situation, what would you do?---If the - if it was showing that it didn't need - it was showing a high reading and it was indicating that it had malfunctioned to a high reading, we wouldn't have any chemicals actually going into the plant. And if you - we do have water tests that pick up this but with the workload especially if they are doing a lot of activities in the low pressure plant; starting up, shutting down reactors, colour changes on machinery - this just purely monitoring role would not reflect on this. Doing the actual test which show you there is a problem but you would have to spend more than that allocated time down there and follow the correct response procedures which would take a considerable and more time than just 20 minutes monitoring.
PN212
All right. Is the 20 minutes - in your statement I think you have referred to 30 minutes, the company has referred to 20 minutes as a monitoring role. Is that possible to do in the absence of the dedicated person responsible for that area?---It is but it is not the duties - actually I leave the - especially the out pressure plant operators at the moment - get them to do certain things and we are going to start a procedure for - we are going to keep things in parameters. We are just outside some of the parameters. We have got higher readings from the higher side and we have to do certain functions. We propose to do that mainly on day shift but especially on long weekends, on holidays; somebody would have to perform that task.
PN213
All right, so in order to keep that area within those parameters that you are referring to, roughly how much of your time is spent in that are?---An average, about four hours a day just doing the routine tasks to meet the licence requirements and get the best out of the plant. I do a lot of work outside those hours in housekeeping especially. The plant was a very, very neglected plant - area of the plant - and it has been brought up to a standard now where most people within that time could - that four hours - keep it to that standard. But there may be other problems within the plant we may have to rectify. We have had other problems that have caused a two to three day shutdown of the plant due to corrosion of a sluice gate. So there is varying degrees of workload in that.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
PN214
How much training did you go through in order to develop the competency to take responsibility of that area?---I roughly went through about 260 hours of training.
PN215
All right, and how does that level of training measure compared to say the training that you have undertaken to be responsible for other posts that you have held?---That training compares with the training of other area skills and in some sense it goes even beyond that amount of training in time.
PN216
So it is roughly equal to a post or more or less?---It is roughly equal or more than some of the other skills.
PN217
THE COMMISSIONER: Sorry, I am a little bit confused because I think two different criteria of comparison are being used in the dialogue here. Ms Angus has said a post. Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that you are answering, not so much for a post, but for an area?---There is a bit of confusion. We call posts under areas on the site. So I am actually on a post, I should be stating, not an area.
PN218
A post?---Yes.
PN219
MS ANGUS: So, how many posts are there in the - - -?---Six.
PN220
- - - existing area at the moment in low pressure?---Six posts.
PN221
Six posts. And can you give me an example of a couple of posts and the training requirements for those posts?---Yes, F270 would take - equivalent - 260 hours to achieve that post - skill for that post. Similar with the 9UM. The gas area has two components. It is 180 hours and I think the catalyst component - I would have to look at the notes to get you that one - if I can just do that. Catalyst preparation is 180 hours and the gas area operation, 180 hours, so 360 hours there in that one.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
PN222
So you are saying that the training requirements for utilities waste water area in general are about the same as a number of the other posts that make up the lower pressure plant?---Yes.
PN223
Okay. Have you read the company's material on the monitoring requirements?---Yes, I have.
PN224
Yes, and do you have any comments about that? Do you agree with the company's position about the responsibilities and the time involved in monitoring?---No, they put down one test there per shift, it is actually two shifts. Two free chlorine tests. Just recently - - -
PN225
Two - sorry - two - - -?---Two free chlorine tests.
PN226
Two free chlorine tests?---Free chlorine. And we actually do two chlorine tests per shift. One from the dosing channels and one from the cooling water return. And we have been liaising with some contractors who look after the chemical dosing and checking of other water tests. We get a technical service report of them and we have actually just been conducting another test for the effluent makeup water to the cooling towers. So we have been performing an extra test for nearly two weeks. We just discontinued doing that last week. We do other tests as required and we do other adjustments as per a technical service report.
PN227
And those tests that you have described are not contained in the material that the company have supplied to the Commission?---No.
PN228
Okay. All right, can I ask you a couple of questions, Mr McKenzie, about an old level - that old C empty classification?---Mm.
PN229
Do you have a packaging competency?---I do.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
PN230
Yes, okay. And can you tell us then, is packaging still performed at Qenos at the moment?---Packaging is still performed on site. It is not put into bags as we used to do. Packaging is put into containers. 36 tonne blenders went into 18 tonne and went into two separate containers per blend.
PN231
And is it operators who are still doing that packaging work?---The compounding operators are to pick up this work and included in this work as well is the requirement for a forklift licence to drive and distribute material from the warehouse. So we still perform a function packaging and day operators used to perform for the compounding people.
PN232
THE COMMISSIONER: Excuse me, I got a different impression. It may be just a matter of how you describe this activity. But when I was on the inspection I go the impression that in the past the product was bagged?---Correct.
PN233
It is no longer bagged?---No.
PN234
It is loaded in containers?---Yes.
PN235
How is it loaded in the containers?---We have a transfer line from where the product is kept, stored and blended. In the olden days when we had packaging that was transferred to a packaging bin. The packaging operators would then package that up by whatever method.
PN236
Was that just a matter of batching a weight into a bag?---That is correct.
PN237
With a tie on the top?---It was formed and sealed through a special machine.
PN238
Right, and what was the weight of the bag?---25 kilos.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
PN239
And those bags would be - would they be packaged then or - - -?---They would be automatically put on to pallets in the - - -
PN240
They would be palletted and then loaded into a container?---No, they were then put on the back of a trailer and distributed.
PN241
Or a trailer?---Yes.
PN242
Right. And now what happens?---Now the compounding operator had to pick up the extra work. We used to transfer one 36 tonne blend to a packaging bin, now that is divided into two 18 tonne containers.
PN243
When you say containers, are you talking about transport containers?---Transport containers, you can see on the road there - shipping containers.
PN244
So how does the product get into the container?---The - we set up the transfer line with a nozzle going into a plastic liner that is contained inside the container and we fill that.
PN245
I understand. So that rather than the material being put into 25 kilo bags out of a bin - - -?---We now bulk - - -
PN246
- - - it is now transferred directly into an 18 tonne plastic sleeve inside - - -?---Yes.
PN247
- - - a transport container?---Yes.
PN248
So is it one 36 tonne container or two 18 tonne - - -?---Two 18 tonne containers.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
PN249
So it is a steel container, 18 tonne capacity, plastic bag inside - - -?---Yes.
PN250
- - - filled through the transport line by way of a nozzle?---Yes.
PN251
You turn the supply on or off?---Yes.
PN252
Right, thank you.
PN253
MS ANGUS: Are there other additional duties that you haven't described to the Commissioner - - -?---Yes, we - - -
PN254
- - - that are now - the new form of packaging?---Yes, we have to keep track of what product we are sending offsite. That used to be a packaging operator's duty to fill in a log. We now have to fill in a transportation log. We have to also manufacture labels. We attach those labels to the containers with the seal and we record those seal numbers. And collect samples and bring them into the laboratory which used to be a packaging operator's duty.
PN255
But it is still the case, as you said, responsibility - competency, if you like, of operators to perform packaging work?---Yes.
PN256
Yes, all right. So in your mind do you see that there is a - is there an empty competency in the classification structure?---No, I don't see it as empty competency. What are we - we picked up since packaging went offsite quite a lot of other additional duties.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
PN257
Can you talk us through some of the key ones of those?---Well, in the catalyst area, for one, when we had day workers and packaging people on site, they would deliver the silica to the catalyst activation building. Now the person in the catalyst activation building would have to collect that himself because of the warehouse. For the compounding, the compounding operators used to have products delivered to them for their additives. Now, they have actually got to manage that in the warehouse. They load and unload trips that come in, they rotate stock and they have to have the responsibility of cleaning the warehouse and maintaining the safety standards within that area which used to be performed by the packaging operator.
PN258
And did you at any stage - were you of the view that there would be a requirement by the company to fill that, what they saw as an empty competency?---No, no.
PN259
Is it fair - no - is there a classification - is there a career path that operates at Qenos?---Yes.
PN260
Can you describe - - -?---Shall I - - -
PN261
- - - to the Commission then, how that works, say, up until the notion of SISS9?---There is career paths - you were coming through the gate as a new employee, you would learn the generic skills.
PN262
You might need to speak up, I think, Mr McKenzie.
PN263
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, just a little bit, your voice is falling away again, Mr McKenzie?---As a new employee coming into Qenos you would go through generic skills and then you would have - the floor path that was adopted in those days was, packaging was your first skill then you progressed through compounding via 270 or 9UM. You would then progress to the gas area, then the reactors, then the panel. The lab was separate in those days
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
because of certain requirements - they split up the lab. We can get to SISS9 via two paths. One is old skills below including the lab. And old skills below excluding lab but you have the panel to replace the lab. And that is the career path that we operators have.
PN264
All right. And this distinction between lab and panel, can you just briefly tell the Commission how that came to be. Is that some sort of - there is a bit of history to that?---There is. The company was going through its ISOL accreditation and they wanted dedicated lab operators for that position so you would get consistency of testing, consistency of product results and things like that. And when we went to the team concept the lab operators came back into the teams. They only have one skill and they had to be trained up so they could actually function as a team member. Packaging was the first skill that they were trained up in. Could you just repeat - - -
PN265
I just want, from your experience, the background to why there is two paths to SISS, and for the record, that is S-I-S-S 9 - why there is two paths. There is an alternative between lab and panel?---That was - because the company's failure to pay SISS10 for old skills in the area. You could attain SISS9 via the lab path or via the panel path.
PN266
All right, because the lab was originally incorporated into - - -?---The lab was separated from the - - -
PN267
I see?--- - - - structure.
PN268
But is it fair to say then that in terms of progression from a trainee through to a - no - let me ask this question. Aside from the anomaly of the lab and panel, right, do you agree that a SISS9 at Qenos - - -
PN269
MR DALTON: I object to the question - just the way it is framed. It is inevitably going to be leading and it is quite focused in its leading nature.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
PN270
MS ANGUS: All right, I will rephrase that question.
PN271
THE COMMISSIONER: Please. You might need to break it up a little bit, just to get there.
PN272
MS ANGUS: Yes.
PN273
THE COMMISSIONER: It is not so much his agreement as opposed to what he can tell us that leads to that conclusion, isn't it?
PN274
MS ANGUS: What is your definition of - - -
PN275
THE COMMISSIONER: You are asking him to make a conclusion.
PN276
MS ANGUS: Sorry.
PN277
THE COMMISSIONER: You are asking him to reach a particular conclusion by - - -
PN278
MS ANGUS: Yes, I - - -
PN279
THE COMMISSIONER: - - - reference to his knowledge. I think it is more important that we have the knowledge rather than the conclusion.
PN280
MS ANGUS: All right, can I then ask you - I will ask you this very generally, Mr McKenzie, what is your understanding of a SISS9 - of a full operator?---A full operator who holds all the skills either panel or lab within the low pressure plant.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
PN281
Right, okay. And based on what you have said - is it fair to say that from the trainee to the full operator there is a career path in place at Qenos?---Yes.
PN282
At the low pressure plant?---Yes, there is.
PN283
Okay.
PN284
THE COMMISSIONER: Could I just interpose for a moment just so that I understand this a little bit better. If you had panel and lab would you be a SISS10?---No. The company refused to go outside the SISS9 structure.
PN285
So you can be SISS9 if you have all skills - - -?---Either panel or lab - with either panel or lab.
PN286
With either panel or lab skills?---Yes.
PN287
All other skills except panel or lab - - -?---Yes.
PN288
- - - plus one of those equals SISS9 - - -?---Yes.
PN289
- - - but plus two of those does not equal SISS10?---No.
PN290
MS ANGUS: Is i your view that there is a career path that extends beyond SISS9?---Yes, pay SISS9 - SISS10 for all the skills. The panel operator should be recognised at the co-ordinator for - - -
PN291
Hang on. I don't think my question was clear. You are telling us now about what you see to be - you would like to be the case or - - -?---Yes, like to be the case.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
PN292
In terms of the current operations at Qenos and low pressure, is there a career path that extends beyond SISS9 for operators?---Not at the moment.
PN293
Okay. Is there anyone, for example, classified at SISS10?---There is no-one classified at SISS10 in the classification structure at plastics.
PN294
And in terms of current practice, is it possible to get to SISS10, from your experience?---It is not possible to get to SISS10 at this moment in time.
PN295
So is there some sort of formal cap on - formal sealing at SISS9?---Yes, there is.
PN296
All right, in your view, what would be an effective way to develop competencies beyond SISS9?---To be a SISS10 for all area skills, that includes the panel and the lab and the waste water plant - maybe that could come in with a specialist operator - another level - co-ordinator's role.
PN297
THE COMMISSIONER: Let me understand this just a little bit more clearly. Sorry, just before we go on to elaboration of the positions. Just focus on the policy of payment in relation to SISS10 or skills required. What I understand you to be saying is that including waste water process plant skills, either day shift or other shift, a SISS10 classification should encompass a requirement to be fully competent on all skills in the plant, including both panel and lab?---Yes.
PN298
Understood.
PN299
MS ANGUS: You mentioned, Mr McKenzie, the term specialist operator; do you know of any specialist operators across Qenos, or any other plants that have this function, this role of specialist operator?---We don't have it at plastics; I think there is one at resins. There are specialist operators over there. To go outside the classification to a SISS10 is by appointment only to STOs. We don't have any other career path outside of the SISS line.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
PN300
But in your line, then, what would justify someone being a specialist operator rather than say an ordinary operator?---Having all various skills, whatever it is, included in the low pressure area.
PN301
THE COMMISSIONER: I think, if I am not mistaken, what you are saying is that this operator who has all the skills in the low pressure area, including both lab and panel and waste water processing would be described as a specialist operator?---Yes.
PN302
MS ANGUS: All right. Well, would picking up additional duties associated with another plant, would that form the basis of a specialist worker, also?---Just to clarify?
PN303
Picking up the duties of another plant is additional duties?---Of course it is, yes.
PN304
That in your mind would form the basis of a specialist operator's task as well?---Yes.
PN305
Are there any other ways then - you see, you have mentioned one, you have mentioned this specialist operator as possibly being a SISS10 position; are there any other ways an operator might progress across the SISS9 point?---Well, the panel operator is a co-ordinator of the whole plant. He has to co-ordinate all the other posts in that area. And that is not reflected in his duty - in his pay, his remuneration. He has to monitor two separate reaction systems as well as co-ordinate the running of the other posts. There are requirements for him to transfer, to open valves, close valves in other areas; liaise with maintenance, do the same. His workload is very, very demanding. Plus the telephone, constant lines going up in the plant, he has to action all these. It really does not reflect what the panel operator does.
PN306
Does that mean that at most other posts, most primarily have technical competencies only?---Yes, yes. No co-ordinating duties.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XN MS ANGUS
PN307
And the panel then has - I withdraw that question. Why do you think, then, people should be paid for picking up these additional duties?---Well, it is increasing the workload and the responsibilities and they are not going to get any remuneration for it. To get remuneration for this it will resolve this dispute that we have.
PN308
THE COMMISSIONER: I think we are at the point of submission now, aren't we?
PN309
MS ANGUS: Yes. No further questions.
PN310
PN311
MR DALTON: Mr McKenzie, you have been at the low pressure plastics plant for the 19 years you have been at Qenos?---I have.
PN312
And in that time you have been employed as an operator?---That is correct. Shift operator initially.
PN313
Okay. And you have not been personally involved in the negotiation of any of the enterprise agreements?---No.
PN314
No. Now, paragraph 5 of your statement you make mention of what you say are a number of additional duties that you have undertaken which don't form part of the competencies of low pressure plastics?---Correct.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XXN MR DALTON
PN315
Just to clarify that, it is true, is it, that you have accepted a position which requires you to perform only certain aspects of the plant operations, specifically your primary role is to take care of the utilities and your other primary job is the catalyst preparation, and you are not required to perform any of the other duties set out in the competencies; is that a fair summary of your position?---That is not quite true. I am used as convenience for engineers to complete projects, sign off, things like that. Because I am on day shift, other people in the low pressure plant see me as someone who can reduce their workload by me not impacting on the shifts, by asking me to perform certain other duties.
PN316
You are paid as a SISS9?---Yes.
PN317
And you know that a SISS9 has, or to get to SISS9, you are trained on and you are expected to exercise a range of skills of the various posts, including reactor, gas area, and other such areas that you have mentioned, yes?---As a shift operator, yes.
PN318
I am suggesting to you that in your current position you are not required to act in posts in those various areas that you are skilled in?---I am not required to, but I have been requested to.
PN319
You are only asked to take care of the utilities are and the assist in cat preparation and some other ancillary tasks that you might be asked to perform from time to time?---That is what is described in my duties, but every day I go in that plant, either by engineers or by other people, I am asked to perform other duties.
PN320
Now at paragraph 7 you list a number of duties that you are required to perform each day, and in relation to waste water treatment, you would agree with me, wouldn't you, if I said that most of the tasks involve monitoring and checking. So, for example, you might go to a unit and record in your log a figure, and that could be to ensure that, or generally to ensure that that piece of equipment is operating within the acceptable parameters. Is that a fair - - -?---On certain things, yes, certain monitoring things, yes.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XXN MR DALTON
PN321
So many of those things, for example, you have said monitor and adjust or check, things like that. So there is a lot of monitoring tasks?---Yes, a lot of monitoring tasks, yes.
PN322
And you are required them on day shift, aren't you?---These tasks are still performed by the high pressure operators on shift .....
PN323
Well, the evidence from Mr Harvey will be that apart from the chlorine test, the people who work on night shift are only required to do a walk-by check of the area once or twice during the shift; do you agree with that?---That depends on what test results they get. If they get test results that are slightly high, slightly low, they have to actually perform another test to make sure that that is moving in the correct direction.
PN324
And when you say the test, you are talking about the chlorine test?---The chlorine test, yes.
PN325
Now, the chlorine test, I think you said you didn't agree with Mr Harvey's statement because he only referred to one test?---Yes.
PN326
Now, I think Mr Harvey's evidence will be that it is one test but you take a sample in two different locations. Now, if that is his evidence do you agree with that?---That is one - it is a minimum requirement of one test.
PN327
Yes. And if that is within the parameters then that is all that is needed to be done on that particular shift?---Yes.
PN328
Yes. And you would only need to take another test, again presumably taking samples from the two different areas that you mentioned, if on taking the first test it fell below or above the acceptable parameters that are set?---Yes.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XXN MR DALTON
PN329
And it is true, isn't it, that in a number of respects the equipment is now the subject of the parameter alarms that are able to be monitored from the control panel?---Yes, the equipment is, yes.
PN330
And that reduces the amount of time that you need to actually spend outside in the utilities area to conduct those checks?---In certain parts of the equipment, yes. But you would have to respond to those alarms. You would have to go down and find out what was wrong.
PN331
And it is true, isn't it, that the - I think you refer to it as biosyde - that is the subject of the free chlorine test, yes, but generally speaking that falls within the prescribed parameters and nothing needs to be done in relation to that test other than the initial test?---It all depends on the malfunction of the equipment. It may be giving you a false reading. As I have mentioned before, there was four instances of a ..... giving a false reading and we were over-dosing on two occasions and under-dosing on the other two occasions.
PN332
I will ask you the question again. It is true, isn't it, that generally the test, once taken, reveals that the biosyde result falls within the parameters?---Yes.
PN333
Yes.
PN334
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, either it does or it doesn't, you mean. Or are you trying to show us what the incidence of the results are?
PN335
MR DALTON: Yes.
PN336
THE COMMISSIONER: The incidence of the results?
PN337
MR DALTON: The - I said general - I think the evidence is that generally - - -
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XXN MR DALTON
PN338
THE COMMISSIONER: The incidence of the results is usually within parameters.
PN339
MR DALTON: And then nothing needs to be done following the test.
PN340
THE COMMISSIONER: That is right.
PN341
MR DALTON: Could I take you to page 3 of your statement, and at the top of the page you have got a sub-heading which reads: Other duties from the HPPE; do you have that in front of you?---Yes.
PN342
Now, just going down that list, if you could look at those. I will just ask you this question: none of those duties that you mention there form part of the specific duties that are required to be performed by operators on night shift. These are all duties that fall under two categories. One, you are supposed to do them on day shift, and two, there are some duties you mention there that everyone needs to perform. Do you agree with that?---Yes. There is - on day shift I cover a lot of these. Deliveries will be done during day shift.
PN343
Escorting non-inducted personnel on site, that is day shift again, isn't it?---If goods are delivered during silent hours, then, no, someone would have to escort them in.
PN344
Okay, but that is much less frequent, isn't it?---It has happened.
PN345
It has happened, okay. Drafting and reviewing standard operating procedures, every operator is required to do that as part of their normal duties, aren't they?---Not in the waste water plant. Not in the waste water plant.
PN346
Right. You are saying that until now people in low pressure plastics weren't responsible for waste water, therefore they didn't have to draft the procedures, is that right?---That is right.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XXN MR DALTON
PN347
Okay. The others there, they are all your job?---If something happened on night they would refer equipment for maintenance, for out of action maintenance.
PN348
And that is done in accordance with the standard procedures that have been written up, isn't it?---Yes. And again, they would assist in plant operations required. If they wanted to clean up and things like that; it is a 24-hour plant.
PN349
All right. So apart from that, you would agree with me?---Yes.
PN350
Okay. The next one. Extra co-ordinating duties will include, and then you list six points there. I will ask you again; they are all duties that you are required to perform on day shift, aren't they?---Well, these - I would not, from working in the waste water plant, see these alarms. These alarms will be seen by the panel operator in the low pressure plant, and he would have to contact me to action on these alarms.
PN351
Yes. Right. Now, paragraph 9, you talk about the monitoring role and that each operator is required to attend a four-day full-time course of about 30 hours to do that competently; yes?---Yes.
PN352
And the operators have, as I understand it, undertaken that training; is that right?---About 26 operators have fully completed that assessment and it has been recorded in their files.
PN353
Okay. And that enables an operator on night shift to know how to conduct the free chlorine test?---That was the intention.
PN354
Yes. And it also enables the operators to monitor the equipment and to follow the basic procedures, for example, for preparing any equipment that needs maintenance the next day on day shift?---Correct.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XXN MR DALTON
PN355
Yes. Paragraph 10, I just want to clarify the last sentence. You are talking about the chlorine tests. That is the one test that is taken in the two locations, yes?---Two locations - three locations prior to this week, yes.
PN356
Okay. In the last sentence you say: Adjustment is required. Testing and re-testing must occur over several hours. Are you saying that the test - you need to wait some hours and then take the test again?---To wait for a reaction, yes.
PN357
And while you are waiting, of course, you can do other duties?---Yes, you return to your other duties.
PN358
Yes. Paragraph 11, you talk about the amount of training time to become competent in waste water and utilities area being 260 hours?---Correct.
PN359
That is the length of time for training for you to be competent in your role as the day operator?---Full competency, yes.
PN360
That is not the training that is required of the operators on night shift?---It - for the emergency, emergency co-ordination and liaison role no, that is not what is required, but in my opinion everyone should be trained up to - everybody should have that opportunity to be trained up to that competency level because of the - the licence requirements and the concerns that I have that, you know, being seen as a - if we did have a positive Legionella result, what concerns the community have with this.
PN361
Okay. So it is your opinion that every operator in low pressure plastics should receive the same amount of training in waste water and utilities as you have received, is that right?---It is a skill and they should have the competency to perform that skill.
PN362
Yes.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XXN MR DALTON
PN363
THE COMMISSIONER: I think that Mr Dalton's question is somewhat more specific than that. Someone else may say that they can obtain the necessary level of competency for the circumstances of the work organisation on night shift, having regard to you being stationed on day shift without 260 hours training. What Mr Dalton is saying is that it is your opinion that the whole of the 260 hours is required; that is what he is wanting to know from your?---Yes, well, my opinion is that the plant should be covered 24 hours a day with a fully skilled operator.
PN364
So that means 260 hours training?---Yes.
PN365
MR DALTON: Yes, but it is true, isn't it, that the company is only requiring the night shift operators to do 30 minutes - sorry, 30 hours of training?---Yes. To perform a purely monitoring role, yes.
PN366
That is right. Paragraphs 13 and 14, you talk about training and you make some comparisons with the amount of training that needs to be done to be cross-skilled in the olefins plant, yes?---Yes.
PN367
Can I ask you a couple of questions about that document, attachment B, to your statement. If I could take you to that. Actually - sorry, could I take you to attachment A. That is the operations training manual that you referred to in your statement?---Correct.
PN368
You will see at the top of the document it is dated June 1995?---Yes.
PN369
Are you aware that this training manual is no longer in effect and hasn't been for some time?---No, I am not.
PN370
You will see at the bottom of the first page it says: Total number of nominal hours - - -?---Yes.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XXN MR DALTON
PN371
- - - to be awarded. Did you know that that means the minimum hours required to be done to be deemed to be competent in an area?---Well, that is what I took it upon, yes.
PN372
Right. Did you know that the training process at Qenos these days requires assessment of actual competency rather than deemed competency, so it may in fact take longer than the nominal hours that are set out in this document?---Everybody's level of learning is quite different, so that would be a sensible approach, yes. I am not aware of it, but these documents are the only documents available to me in the training department where I sourced this information.
PN373
Okay. You will see in plastic stream 1 table, that is the second table there?---Yes.
PN374
See where it has got: packaging?---Yes.
PN375
You will see it has got nominal hours of 240?---Mm.
PN376
I don't have a further question on that. Can I take you to attachment C?---i don't appear to have that document.
PN377
Yes. I just received a copy of this this morning; it may not have been attached to the witness's copy?---Thank you.
PN378
This is a list that you prepared?---Yes.
PN379
You personally prepared this list?---With the help of some other operators on the plant, yes.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XXN MR DALTON
PN380
Right. Okay. And this is a list which you say contains various skills that operators have been required to perform since packaging was outsourced, is that right?---Correct.
PN381
Can I deal firstly with the Compound heading. All of those skills which you mention there have been exercised by operators who are posted to the compounding area since 1996, aren't they?---Yes - since - we have always had these duties, but since packaging left we have picked packaging duties, yes.
PN382
Yes, okay. And under Laboratory, those skills form part of the laboratory skill that is recognised under the competency structure, don't they?---Yes. We used to have dedicated day persons doing this work.
PN383
Under General, on page 2, those skills that you listed, did you know that they actually formed the basis of a TPM payment of 1.5 per cent under the second enterprise agreement?---All of those?
PN384
Yes. Down to lock-out and isolation procedures?---I don't see any relevance to TPM. TPM was - - -
PN385
I am just asking you if you remember whether that was the case, that those skills formed a basis for the TPM payment of 1.5 per cent?---No.
PN386
You don't remember?---I don't remember, no.
PN387
Level 3 first-aiders, there is an allowance paid for that, isn't there?---There is for certain people on shift.
PN388
Okay. And the job post rotation, that was a matter that was agreed in the first enterprise agreement, wasn't it?---I wasn't involved in the EAs, any of the EAs.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XXN MR DALTON
PN389
Now, none of these duties that you have listed could fairly be described as above and beyond the duties that are required of an owner/operator?---If you are linking it with TPM - - -
PN390
I am not linking everything with TPM; I am just asking you a general question. It is fair to say that all of these duties that you listed should be done by an owner/operator?---No. All these duties came about by restructuring of the workplace. People left and we had to pick up that work. This isn't part of that, what you are trying to say.
PN391
You are saying that there are some of these skills above and beyond what an owner/operator should be doing?---You may determine it as that now, but when these duties first came along it was to allow people to leave or restructure the workplace. TPM was not part of a lot of this work. TPM wasn't even in when we picked up a lot of this work.
PN392
Now, with the packaging going off-site, prior to it going off-site, people were required to set up the packaging machinery to the correct specification then load the product and - - -?---Yes, record what went out of the plant, virtually, yes.
PN393
Okay. And now the process is easier, isn't it, because you press a button to turn the chute on and it loads the truck?---No. When you were a packaging operator you had full control over your area. Now, when you are a compounding operator to perform those packaging duties you have to involve another person.
PN394
Just in relation to the loading function, right, it used to be done by a machine that people needed to operate, right?---Yes.
PN395
Now it is done, as I understand, as you told the Commissioner, by bulk loading, so, through a chute that sends the product directly into a plastic-lined contained, yes?---Yes.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XXN MR DALTON
PN396
That packaging function, leaving aside what other people might be doing in compounding area, is easier bulk handling than doing it through the bagging method. It is an easier process, isn't it?---Yes, instead of putting it into one ton pallets or 25 kg bag, you put it into a bulk container. But you are asking for extra involvement to perform that duty.
PN397
In relation to the panel operator, control panel role is required at each of the Qenos sites, isn't it?---It is, yes.
PN398
Yes. And the panel role at each site forms part of the skill base within SISS9?---At the moment it does, yes.
PN399
Yes. And so if what you were suggesting was to occur, plastics would be the only area in which an operator could advance beyond SISS9 if operating the panel skill, assuming they had all the other general skills; that is correct, isn't it?---Mm.
PN400
Yes. You will have to say "yes" for the transcript?---Yes.
PN401
You are not suggesting that the panel operator job at plastics is more complicated than the equivalent position at any of the other sites, are you?---I am saying that the hours require, training hours required as per the documents that I sourced are far greater than, just say the boiler house for instance, which has a SISS9 operator. The amount of nominal hours to get up to a SISS9 in the boiler house at olefins is only, is less than half of what is required for a panel operator at plastics, the training hours required.
PN402
Sorry, this is referring to these nominal hours that you have got attached to your statement?---Yes.
PN403
I will ask my question again. You are not suggesting to this Commission that the panel role in plastics is a more complicated job than the panel role at any of the other sites, are you?---I am not saying it is more complex, I am saying it has more co-ordinating duties than what co-ordinating duties are - - -
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XXN MR DALTON
PN404
Than on other sites?---You have got six posts to co-ordinate, six posts. How many posts do you have in the boiler house?
[12.10pm]
PN405
You are referring to the boiler house. That is just one area in olefins?---Well, just as a comparison, yes. You were co-ordinating I think it is three posts there, four posts, as against six at plastics.
PN406
Now, throughout your statement I think it is fair to say you are suggesting that it would be better if operators in plastics were able to advance beyond SISS9 as long as they accumulated the appropriate skills. Is that a fair assessment - - -?---Yes.
PN407
- - - of the thrust of your evidence?---Mm.
PN408
Yes. Did you know that Mr Harvey of Qenos has put forward a proposal to the workforce representatives that actually caters for progression to SISS10 and SISS11 - - -?---Yes.
PN409
- - - to appointed roles?---I have seen some documents to that effect.
PN410
Yes?---But what I am trying to make clear in this statement is that at plastics the training hours required to achieve SISS9 and the training hours to achieve SISS9 in the boiler house are not like for like. If you took up scale 1, going down the area for that, gaining the skills for that and the boiler house, that gives you two area skills and you would be able to be paid SISS10. That does not happen - that does not reflect the amount of hours that we actually do in training up in the floors at plastics. The training hours far exceed what is expected in the boiler house and another unit.
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE XXN MR DALTON
PN411
You would agree with me, wouldn't you, if I said that training isn't the be all and end all of working out the value of a particular task?---It should be competencies.
PN412
Yes. It is not the sole determinant of the value of a particular competency, is it?---I would have to think about that some more.
PN413
Well, what is there to think about, what - there are other things that you would need to take into account to work out the value of a particular competency. I will give you some examples. It might be the length of time it takes to perform the particular task. That would be another good indication of the value of the job when viewed against the overall duties required of the position; you would agree with that?---Well, we are different than what they are like at olefins. We - - -
PN414
That is not - I am not asking you about comparing plastics and olefins, I am just asking you a question - - -?---But you mentioned time to perform - for a competency, or time - - -
PN415
Time to actually do that job on your shift, for example?---To do that job. We have start ups and shut downs that involve a lot of time. Some days you can't scratch your backside for the amount of work that you have got. Other days you have hardly - it is just normal routine. If you paid us for the amount of work we did when we had start ups or shut downs, you would be paying us a lot more.
PN416
I don't have any more questions, Commissioner.
PN417
THE COMMISSIONER: Any re-examination?
PN418
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE RXN MS ANGUS
PN419
MS ANGUS: Mr McKenzie, just a couple of questions. Is it your evidence then that, given the duties - - -
PN420
MR DALTON: I object to the question. It is inevitably going to be leading.
PN421
MS ANGUS: Well, it is the same sorts of questions - - -
PN422
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, it depends on the summary that you put.
PN423
MS ANGUS: Yes, that is right. Perhaps - - -
PN424
THE COMMISSIONER: I mean, it might be possible that the summary of the evidence is unexceptional in the sense that it just reiterates something that has already been said by the witness. But I think, Ms Angus, on notice that if you say: well, is it your evidence that, you know, you work for the company called Qenos - - -
PN425
MS ANGUS: Yes, I think the question won't be contentious.
PN426
THE COMMISSIONER: - - - well that is not a leading question because that is his evidence. But if it is directed towards a conclusion on the part of the witness as opposed to a statement of his knowledge, then it will be leading.
PN427
MS ANGUS: Let us try the question. Given the duties that you have described, is it your view that there should be one dedicated person, whether day or on shift, to the utilities area?---Yes.
PN428
Yes, okay. And is that an - - -
**** DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE RXN MS ANGUS
PN429
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, I think he has already said that anyway, I think.
PN430
MS ANGUS: Yes, that is right. Is that - that is an area that comes from a different - it is a set of responsibilities. Does it come from a different area?---Yes, different part of the plant.
PN431
Would the adoption of those duties increase the monitoring role of the panel operator?---It would.
PN432
I have no further questions.
PN433
PN434
THE COMMISSIONER: It is Mr Harvey now, is it?
PN435
PN436
THE COMMISSIONER: Thanks, Mr Harvey. Please be seated. Yes, Mr Dalton.
PN437
MR DALTON: Thanks, Commissioner. Mr Harvey, can you state for the transcript record your full name and address?---Christopher John Harvey of 673 Hawthorn Road, East Brighton.
PN438
And you are employed by Qenos as the Elastomers Plastics Operations Manager?---I am.
PN439
And you have held that position for about 12 months; is that correct?---That is correct.
PN440
And you have prepared a statement for this proceeding?---I have.
PN441
Do you have a copy of that in front of you?---I do.
PN442
Are the contents of that statement and the attachments to it true and correct to the best of your knowledge?---They are.
PN443
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN444
MR DALTON: Could I take you to paragraph 15 of your statement. It is there that you are referring to what you described in the previous paragraph as the tie point rate for a fully qualified operator in the various plants, and you list them as E7 for elastomers, 03 olefins and P7R plastics. Could you elaborate upon that a little and explain to the Commission exactly why you say that there was a tie point rate in EA1?---Certainly. Historically the qualification structures for the three plants mentioned were expressed in terms of E, O and P ratings I guess. And with EA1, the decision was made that an operator who was qualified in all of the technical skills in any of the areas of any of those plants would be tie pointed at the same pay rate. And in EA1 that was expressed in the historic E, O and P terms that were previously used on each of the sites. So, in fact, an E7 at elastomers received the same pay as an O3 at olefins or a P7R at plastics.
PN445
THE COMMISSIONER: So the Es and the Ps moved towards the Os; is that it?---Yes, in the olefins historically - - -
PN446
That was the alignment?--- - - - had been paid at the highest rate.
PN447
Yes, that is right?---At the complex - - -
PN448
So it was the Es and the Ps that were aligned with the O?---Yes.
PN449
MR DALTON: Can I show the witness a document. Mr Harvey, have you seen this document before?---I have.
PN450
Could you identify it for the Commission?---Yes. Following the ratification of EA1, the company developed this document as a summary form of the agreement and distributed this document to the workforce by way of, I guess, communicating and educating the workforce on the contents of EA1.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN451
Okay.
PN452
THE COMMISSIONER: Do you want to tender this?
PN453
PN454
MR DALTON: Mr Harvey, could I take you to part B of that document, and specifically paragraph 15, page 23 of the document?---Yes.
PN455
I know you haven't attached clause 15 of EA1 to your statement but this explanation of that clause refers to defined levels, and then gives some examples of the defined levels. Are you able to explain what this excerpt means; take your time to read it if - - -?---Sure, thank you. The defined level is the competence level at which we expect all people within that career stream to progress to, as a matter of course. Our objective was to, for example, have all the operators at the olefins site working towards being qualified at the O3 level. Similarly on the other sites, as we mentioned before, we would have expected and planned for all the operators at the elastomers site to reach the E7 tie point level.
PN456
And for plastics?---And plastics for P7R level.
PN457
Okay, all right. Now, further on in your statement you talk about EA2. At paragraph 21 you say:
PN458
Part 5.2 of EA2 introduced two new classification structures.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN459
Could I take you to that attachment to your statement, attachment 2?---Would you be able to provide a copy of that attachment, please, Richard? Mr Dalton, I should say.
PN460
Yes, I have a spare copy of your statement with the attachments?---Thank you.
PN461
Attachment 2?---Right.
PN462
Okay?---Yes.
PN463
A couple of pages into that attachment, three pages to be precise, you have got clause 5. You will see in clause 5.2 it refers to these new classification structures?---Yes.
PN464
Could I hand the witness another document?---Thank you.
PN465
Do you recognise that document I have given you?---I do.
PN466
Yes. Can you explain what it is?---That is one of the appendices to enterprise agreement 2.
PN467
Yes?---It is the job description for the owner operator role which was the role referred to in the previous mentioned tie point, that is the E3 - sorry, E7, O3, P7R tie point.
PN468
THE COMMISSIONER: This is E7, is it, the E7 tie?---E7, O3, P7R tie point was - - -
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN469
Yes, I - but is this the E7 tie job description?---Well, it is the job description which applied to the fully qualified operator on each of our sites.
PN470
Right. So it is a common - - -?---Yes, Commissioner.
PN471
It is a generic job description of the tie point?---Yes, Commissioner.
PN472
PN473
MR DALTON: That was not attached to the statement which does attach excerpts of EA2, and this is just another of those excerpts. Was that QENOS3?
PN474
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, it was.
PN475
MR DALTON: At paragraph 35 of your statement you talk about the - I think the subcommittee which in the plastics area had to work out how the plastics skills would fit into the SISS structure that had been agreed under the bridging agreement. Are you aware of any agreement between the company and the union that the company would not use the skill set described as empty without providing further payment to employees?---No, I am not aware of any such agreement and I would have been extremely surprised if such an agreement had, in fact, existed.
PN476
All right. Now, at paragraph 37 you refer to the EA3 and you have got a relevant extract at attachment 4. Could I take you to that. Take your time, but I would ask you to take the Commission through that attachment and point out the relevant bits and explain what exactly is agreed there and how the plastics structure is to operate?---Okay. Just clarifying, Mr Dalton, I have got starting at 5.1 in attachment 4. Are you wanting me to start at page 35?
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN477
I think - do you see appendix 1 and 2 - it is reasonably bulky that is why I asked you to take your time - - -?---Okay.
PN478
- - - because to find the plastics parts might take a bit of sifting?---Right. Well, I will commence and maybe you can ask me questions so I will keep going.
PN479
Perhaps I can make it easier for you, and refer you to particular page numbers. You will see appendix 1 has various tables; have you got that?---These are the pay tables you are referring to.
PN480
Yes, the pay tables?---Yes. Yes, I have got those.
PN481
And it has got, you know, shift with post coverage, etcetera?---Yes, yes.
PN482
And different dates for the pay increases?---Yes, yes. Those tables relate right across the business in Altona, and the Commission will note that with - the bases of the classification structure is now what we call a single integrated salary system, or SISS level, and there is pay rates for our shift operators, for example, between SISS1 and SISS16 defined. And as the Commission will observe, the table actually breaks down the base component and the other components of the salary package.
PN483
And does that apply to each plant?---It does. Each plant as a part of EA3 was transferred across on to the SISS classification system.
PN484
All right. So appendix 1 has the common pay rate for each SISS level that applies across each site?---Yes, it does.
PN485
Appendix 2, there are some tables of skill levels?---Appendix 2 defines the classification stepping stones, if you like, for each particular plant.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN486
Yes?---And as you can see, what those tables do is they fill in the gaps as what is required within each plant between SISS1 and, for example, on the page in front of me, page 102, up to SISS14.
PN487
Okay. Now, I think your statement says this table in relation to plastics is the result of the key act accepting the recommendation of a subcommittee that had to put in the skills or fill in the gaps?---Yes, yes.
PN488
Now, I think you say - - -?---The relevant table, of course, is on page 104, the plastics low pressure classification system.
PN489
Yes. You will see actually on page 104 there is a reference in the table in H - - -?---Yes.
PN490
- - - on panel and/or lab?---Yes.
PN491
What is your understanding of that competency?---My understanding is that that has come around - come about when laboratory duties were incorporated into the low pressure classification system. And we currently have operating technicians who may have one, either the panel or the lab. Prior to reading Mr McKenzie's statement I was not aware that we had any operators who had both but, since reading Mr McKenzie's statement, it is clear that he does. There are not many. I am not aware of any other operators that do have both those skills. However, we have a need for people within our operating system to have both those skills represented within our operating group.
PN492
Yes?---There are similar competencies reflected in the competency table for other plants.
PN493
Yes. Now, at attachment C of Mr McKenzie's statement he listed a number of skills that he says that operators in low pressure plastics have been required to exercise since the contracting out of packaging. Have you had an opportunity to look at that list?---I had a very brief look at it this morning, Mr Dalton.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN494
Do you need another look at that - - -?---Yes, thank - - -
PN495
Because I would ask you to comment on the - - -?---Sure.
PN496
My first question is, looking down that list, are there any skills there that fall outside or beyond the general technical skills required of an owner operator?---No, not at - correction, there is one line which refers to first aiders and first aid support. My understanding is that we still actually pay an allowance for fist aiders which is separate from owner operator requirement. However, the remainder of the list are all within the bounds of the definition of owner operator job description.
PN497
Okay. The first part there I think is compounding?---Yes.
PN498
What do you say about that skill set?---The issue or the task that are listed here, I have no argument with them. The comment I make is that they will have been consistent since compounding was, in fact - or, sorry, my apologies. Some of our bagging operation was outsourcing - outsourced back in '96 so these tasks would have been done by our operators since that time.
PN499
Since 1996?---Yes.
PN500
Okay. Could you just go through each posting, because there are skills listed, and give the Commission your view as to their value and whether they are recognised under the existing structure?---Well, compounding - the task listed under compounding would be represented under the competencies D and E as defined on page 104 of the extract that Mr Dalton has been referring to. There is some task under laboratory on the attachment C of Mr McKenzie's list. My belief was that those would be represented under the lab skill, under competency H. Similarly the extra tasks or the tasks listed under gas area reactor, controller of panel, would fall within the gas area reactor and panel competencies on the table. There are some activities here which are more of a
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
general nature which Mr McKenzie has listed. Some of those will have been represented under what was called some TPM, total productive manufacturing, type skills which were introduced with EA2 and are now represented under competency B, advanced generic skills. I draw the Commissioner's attention to the letters TPM in that part of the page 104. So, and the other point I would make about those general tasks is that they are not unique at all to plastics; that those type of activities are, in fact, expected from our owner operators on all sites.
PN501
And at other sites do they receive additional payment for doing that type of work?---No, they don't. It is part of their classification system. In fact, the company as part of EA2 recognised through a pay rise at that time across the board some TPM activities, but that was across the board.
PN502
At paragraph 47 of your statement you say that in December 2000 you began to speak with low pressure plastics workforce representatives to work out how, one, the utilities skill and, two, the emergency liaison duties would be done at low pressure in light of the closure of the high pressure plant. So can I ask you this question: emergency liaison duties, you say they were previously done by the shift team leader on high pressure plastics?---That is correct.
PN503
What are you looking to have done in relation to that skill now that high pressure plastics has been closed?---We are looking to have that skill undertaken by our operators in the low pressure plant. It is a task that was required to be done should we ever have an emergency on the site. The task in summary is to attend the main gate during emergency, and to assist the combating authorities in terms of directing them to the appropriate place within the plant and acting under the direction of the actual emergency co-ordinator on the site who is the low pressure shift team leader.
PN504
So that could be ambulance or fire brigade or - - -?---That is correct.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN505
Okay. Now, it previously was done just by the shift team leader. Why does Qenos need everyone to have that emergency response liaison skill?---That gives us the flexibility of ensuring that we are going to be able to enact the role during an emergency. We only actually need one person per shift to enact it. However, if the emergency, for example, was in the area which they were responsible for, then they would need to respond to the emergency and we would want to find somebody else from our shift ranks to actually go and undertake the liaison role. Therefore, for maximising the flexibility we require all of our operators to have that skill, or we desire to have all our operators to have that skill.
PN506
Now, Mr McKenzie has given evidence talking a lot about how long it takes to train up on specific skills. Can you tell the Commission how long it takes to train up on this emergency response liaison job?---Yes. We have actually had - the high pressure shift team leaders have left our organisation and to replace them into part of that role we trained up the remaining high pressure operators in the skill. And my understanding that that took somewhere between one and two hours from the time of actually reading the requirements of the role to completing of the competency assessment for that task.
PN507
Okay. Now, it takes 30 hours to train the operators to do the after hours or night shift monitoring tasks that you want them to do in utilities?---That is my understanding, yes.
PN508
I think Mr McKenzie's evidence is that he is of the view that everyone on night shift should be training on waste water and utilities to the extent that he has been trained, 260 hours, I think it is; what is your view?---That is not the company's nor my own view as to the training requirements for the out-of-hours role. Mr McKenzie holds a specific role in the organisation with some responsibilities that we do not require to be enacted out of normal hours. So we have deliberately set up the structure of our, the creation of the day operator and the out-of-hours structure such that the out-of-hours requirements are minimal.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN509
Can I ask you a couple of questions about the way that you have set it up. What if something goes wrong on night shift in relation to the waste water treatment or utilities area?---Firstly, we have made some modifications to the plant to improve the reliability of the plant to minimise the potential for things to go wrong.
PN510
What have you done in that respect?---We have implemented or installed some new facilities. We have new air compressors and new air dryers; we have got some new facilities, as I understand it, around the chlorine dosing system for our cooling towers; we have brought some alarms and better instrumentation into the control room, basically to minimise the requirements for operators to attend in the field. If issues did arise - - -
PN511
So if something breaks down or something, how do you say someone who has received 30 hours training can deal with the situation adequately on night shift?---We have developed and reviewed and issued response procedures covering issues that they may need to attend to out of hours. Our philosophy is to take the plant to a point where the work can be done during normal hours.
PN512
Okay.
PN513
THE COMMISSIONER: Could I just ask you this about that. I am not sure what the consequences of it are for this matter, but as a matter of interest, at least. The person who is working on night shift has got limited training, obviously, somewhat significantly less than the 260 hours for the full training on the waste water processing plant, what if that person is confronted with a significant variance in the standards and norms of the operation of the system when they monitor it or conduct the test or something? What are the procedures? Do they - I mean, obviously some things may be capable of remedial action on their part within that 30 hours of training, but it seems logical that there may be some things that haven't been covered in the 30 hours?---Firstly, the are response procedures that we have issued cover what we believe are foreseeable events they may be faced with, like, at any time there is - there could be a need to call in additional resources and that is not unique to - - -
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN514
What would happen then? Let us say that a night shift operator was faced with a substantial variance from the norm in one of the required readings, reached a conclusion that the waste water plant wasn't operating as normal and that some action needed to be taken but doubted whether or not they had the competence to intervene?---Firstly, if there was a parameter that was not within normal range, they would approach the response procedures which clearly lay out the response requirements.
PN515
All right. There is a handbook of these?---Yes, the procedures form part of our operating procedure manual and system.
PN516
So they go to the manual?---Yes, they do. We believe that covers, as I have mentioned, foreseeable circumstances. Consistent with the rest of the plant there is out-of-hours support available. this is not just unique to the waste water, it across the whole plant. So if someone - - -
PN517
Who provides that?---Engineers.
PN518
Who are employed by the company?---Yes.
PN519
So that they would have at their disposal the opportunity to telephone an engineer, discuss the problem, and if necessary that person could attend the plant; is that right?---Correct.
PN520
MR DALTON: That may answer my second question which was what happens if Mr McKenzie is on annual leave or rostered days off?---That is an issue that we haven't finalised at this point in time. We do recognise that we have to have Mr McKenzie able to take his annual leave. We certainly would be most likely calling upon that expertise of the engineers to help you in those circumstances, help the operator who happened to be on days. We do not require all of our operators trained up to the level of Mr McKenzie just for the purpose of covering his annual leave.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN521
All right.
PN522
THE COMMISSIONER: Can I just ask you a question about Mr McKenzie's circumstances that has just occurred to me. He is a day operator. Is his remuneration the same as the shift operators?---Clearly he doesn't attract shift allowance. He is represented on the SISS classification system. My understanding is that he is classified as a SISS9 on the day operator scale.
PN523
Yes, I understand that, on the day operator scale. Was he a day operator before he was allocated these waste water treatment - - -?---No, he was not.
PN524
He was a shift operator?---That is my understanding, yes.
PN525
Was there any discussion about his transfer at that stage as to whether or not he wished to do so or did not wish to do so?---My understanding was that there was and my understanding - I was not directly involved - my understanding was that he was keen to do so.
PN526
MR DALTON: Mr Harvey, you have read Mr McKenzie's statement?---I have.
PN527
I don't propose to go to the detail of it, but do you remember that he listed a number of duties performed in the waste water treatment and utilities areas?---Yes.
PN528
Of the duties that he lists, do you recall whether any of those are required to be done by the operators who are training at 30 hours to do the monitoring tasks on night shift?---Some of the tasks listed are required, some are not.
PN529
Well, just being a bit more specific, what tasks do you need operators on night shift to do in the waste water treatment and utilities areas?---Okay. Well - you wish me to go through the list one at a time?
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN530
No, you don't need to go through dot point. I didn't realise you had a copy of his statement handy, but - - -?---Okay. The type of thing we require is basic monitoring of the process, recording some observations and some results on a sheet, recorded sheet, and ensuring that certain pieces of equipment are running.
PN531
Okay. Now, the chlorine test, what is your understanding of what is involved there?---My understanding is that once per 12-hour shift we need to take two samples and run the chlorine test, and my understanding is that takes of the order of roughly 20 minutes.
PN532
Okay. Paragraph 54 of your statement, you list a number of things that the operator in the silent hours is required to check?---Yes.
PN533
Firstly, silent hours, I take it that means night shift?---It means the - and weekends.
PN534
And weekends, okay?---Yes.
PN535
Now, you have listed a number of those things they are supposed to check?---Yes.
PN536
The list looks reasonably lengthy. What sort of checking is required?---Fundamentally it is a walk-by observation to ensure, for example, that a pump is running or an air compressor is running, perhaps taking a reading of the dial and recording it.
PN537
How long do you think that would take, or are you aware how long it takes?---Some of them, as I understand, are very nominal, basically, as you walk by the piece of equipment you can pretty much do the check.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN538
Okay. Now, just to get some clarification, historically, I think you said 1996 that there was in fact someone doing this work in a day operator capacity back in the days when high pressure was responsible for this area?---That is my understanding, yes.
PN539
And some time after that you dispensed with that day operator role?---That is my understanding, yes.
PN540
And high pressure people then took care of all of the work on their shifts?---Yes, they did. They took the full responsibilities for utilities within their shift role.
PN541
So that incorporates all of the duties that Mr McKenzie is now doing plus the work that operators were required to do on night shift?---It incorporated all the responsibilities that Mr McKenzie has in the waste water and utilities areas.
PN542
Okay.
PN543
THE COMMISSIONER: That was just spread across the operator posts, was it?---It was done by - my understanding is it was done by the post in high pressure and gas area, so it was - - -
PN544
Right. Incorporated into one of the posts?---Correct. That is my understanding.
PN545
MR DALTON: Now, in your statement you say that those skills that were being done by the operators that were doing all of that waste water and utilities work was tacked onto a mix of skills in gas area?---Yes.
PN546
Why was that? Why was it tacked on?---My assumption is that the skills were not deemed to be a complete competency, so they were incorporated with the gas area, other gas area skills.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN547
Now, back to Mr McKenzie's statement. He talks about the training and he tries to draw a comparison between the amount of training that is required in plastics area and the training that is required to cross-skilled in more than one olefins plant, and I think that if you are cross-skilled in more than one olefins plant you get paid SISS10?---That is correct, there is a position called cross-skilled operator.
PN548
All right. That is - the paragraph numbers are a bit out of wack, but on his statement, page 4, paragraphs 13 and 14, that is where this comparison is done?---Yes.
PN549
Have you had a chance to read that and consider that?---Yes, I have.
PN550
Are you able to comment on that part of his statement?---Yes, I can. I guess I would also like to refer to attachment B which is an extract from what was called the chemical operations training manual.
PN551
I think that is attachment A?---Is it? My apologies. The first thing that struck me was the date on the extract from the manual, as being June 1995.
PN552
Well, is this manual still applied at Qenos?---My understanding is that this manual has been - is not required and has actually been withdrawn. The reason for that is it was developed at a time when the national training regime was one where certification was granted based on hours of training, and at the time Chemcor became accredited for delivering its own certificate 4 in the consumer process operations, to become accredited Chemcor had to show that the training was higher than a hurdle rate, a certificate for hurdle rate, so this manual was developed and you will notice that the hours and the tables are deemed to be nominal duration.
PN553
What does that mean?---I am assuming that someone has - - -
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN554
To the extent that you know, back in 1995 when this manual was done under the Chemcor system, are you able to say what the hours, what the references to the hours meant?---It would have been an estimate of the number of hours required for particular training.
PN555
All right. Well, what is the current approach of Qenos to training?---Well, the current has moved on. We are now operating under a competence system which is - the important elements are the assessment of competence as distinct from how long it took to reach that level of competence. Hence the - - -
PN556
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, how long people had been trained in the competence as opposed to achieving competency?---Yes. So that is the reason why the manuals - well, I have been back at Chemcor and Qenos for four-and-a-half years and I haven't sought the need or I haven't had the need to look at the manual, I haven't seen one in that time.
PN557
So there is a definition of the achievement of the competence now, as opposed to a definition of the training required to be classified as competent?---Correct.
PN558
And do you have a competency proving procedure, do you?---Yes, we do.
PN559
And so the way that a person is classified now is to successfully prove their competence?---That is correct.
PN560
And whether they have been trained for a long time or a short time, provided they prove their competence, they achieve the level of classification?---That is correct. And in fact we recognise that competence can be achieved via number of different routes.
PN561
Means, right, yes.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN562
MR DALTON: You will see at paragraph 14 of Mr McKenzie's statement he is suggesting that there is a close comparison to be drawn between the amount of time it takes to train someone in SCAL1 and SCAL2, for example, at olefins, which would then give rise to a SISS10 claimant, and the total amount of time it takes to train an operator fully in the basic technical skills in plastics. What do you have to say about that?---I am actually surprised at the number of hours that were allocated to plastics training, they don't feel right to me. My expectation is the operators at plastics, in my experience, is that the area and the equipment of plastics is not significantly more complex, if at all, than the areas at olefins. In fact my judgment would be the other way round.
PN563
Have you worked at olefins before?---I have.
PN564
How long did you work at Olefines?---Eleven-and-a-half years.
PN565
Right. Can I take you to another paragraph, 13. This one is at the top of page 5 of Mr McKenzie's statement, and it is here that Mr McKenzie sets out in some detail what he regards as - - -
PN566
THE COMMISSIONER: Just a - it might be a convenient time to take the luncheon adjournment now. We will come back at 2.15
LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT [12.58pm]
RESUMED [2.17pm]
PN567
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Dalton.
PN568
MR DALTON: Thanks, Commissioner.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN569
Mr Harvey, just before lunch I was about to ask you a question that related to some of Mr McKenzie's evidence regarding the panel operator job. Mr McKenzie believes that the panel operator job at plastics is such that it is really a specialist role and should attract a SISS10, assuming that the operator has all the other generic skills in plastics. What do you say about that?---The panel role is not unique to low pressure plastics, in fact each site has a requirement for panel tasks to be undertaken, and they are regarded as duties which fall within the owner/operator remit, therefore I do not see it as being a specialist role.
PN570
I think you said you had worked in olefins for 11 years or so?---Yes, I have.
PN571
And you work in plastics. Have you worked in any of the other sites?---Elastomers as well.
PN572
Okay, well, based on your experience of those various sites, do you think that the panel operator job at plastics is more complicated than the equivalent position at the other sites at which you have worked?---No, I don't.
PN573
Can I take you back to the owner/operator job description that I handed you? I think it is Qenos 3?---Yes.
PN574
You identified that as appendix 10 to EA2. I just have one question to clarify whether that still applies, because it is not attached to EA3?---Yes, that is correct. It is not attached to EA3. The job description has not been superseded, however. EA3 does outline the requirement for the chairman of the ACT committee to hold a manual of all current job descriptions, and I am the chairman of the ACT, and as yet I have not fulfilled that requirement, but that is stated in EA3, so in terms of has this job description been superseded, it has not.
PN575
Now, in your statement you talk about the matter going into dispute in about August 2001?---Yes.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN576
What was your reaction when you realised that the AWU members at plastics refused to do the waste water and utilities tasks on which they had been trained?---I was surprised.
PN577
Why were you surprised by that?---I arrived on the site probably towards the end of the first quarter of that year and was briefed by the department leader, upon my arrival, of the changes that were being made to incorporate the high pressure, remaining high pressure tasks into the low pressure systems, and at that point in time he described the actions that were under way, things like new equipment being installed, training being developed and about to be undertaken, commitment to create the day operator role, and his opinion was it was running smoothly at that time. So, yes, we were both surprised when this obstacle was put in our way.
PN578
Okay. Now, in subsequent discussions with the workforce representatives, there were two proposals put by the AWU, is that right?---Two formal proposals were put to us, that is correct.
PN579
Yes. could the witness be shown a copy of the letter from the AWU to the Commission, and it is copied to me. This is the facsimile letter of 10 January. You have seen this letter before?---I have.
PN580
Yes, and you have read it?---I have.
PN581
You note that there are two proposals attached - - -?---Yes.
PN582
- - - to that letter. Do they fairly represent the formal proposals that have been put to Qenos by the AWU?---They do.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN583
PN584
MR DALTON: All right. Could you firstly deal with proposal one. Now, that was rejected by Qenos. Can you explain what the proposal involved and why Qenos rejected that proposal?---Certainly. The proposal suggested that we train six existing low pressure operators in the full day operator competence for - - -
PN585
So that is to get up to Mr McKenzie's level of training, yes?---And that these people would then be used to cover absences of Mr McKenzie. It also suggested that we retrain an additional five low pressure operators in the out-of-hours duties for the utilities plant and that we pay those people SISS10 rate from the time they enacted those skills. The final part of the proposal was that this - the proposal suggested this would allow us to release the remaining high pressure operators.
PN586
So that proposal, under that proposal, who was going to be paid SISS10; is that the people who were trained up to Mr McKenzie's level or the five LPPE operators who were to be retrained for the monitoring role?---The proposal as I read it was that the five LPPE operators retrained would receive the SISS10 rate. It wasn't clear what was the situation for the six people fully trained. The reason why we rejected the proposal was the principle that we require all of the technical skills for an area to be done within the SISS9 owner/operator level and the proposal was not consistent with that requirement.
PN587
All right. Proposal 2, I just have the same questions in relation to that proposal?---Yes, again the key issue for us was that the proposal had a payment of SISS10 applying to people who had the list of skills listed and our position is that those list of skills were all consistent with what our requirements of an owner/operator at SIS9 were, and therefore we could not accept the proposal on the same principle.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN588
Okay. Now, in your statement, towards the end of it, you refer to a proposal that you put to the AWU that would enable operators upon appointment to progress beyond SISS9?---Yes.
PN589
Could you elaborate on that and explain the basis upon which people would be appointed and give an indication of how many people you would require and the nature of the role that are the subject of the job descriptions at attachment 9 of your statement?---The company has a desire to create some new roles within our businesses at a level which is higher than SISS9, so higher than the owner/operator level, and we have a business need for those roles. And coincidentally, we have some slots available for SISS10 and 11 to be able to fill in our classification system. The sorts of tasks and competencies that we need to include in those roles are consistent with our business needs of undertaking routine competency testing of all of our operators, that is associated with the requirement within the EA3. And also we recognise that that programme may generate the need for additional training, so we are wanting to recognise that we need training skills within our workforce. And also we would like to incorporate allowing people to develop towards higher level roles by incorporating tasks like the emergency co-ordinator task on the plastic site into these SISS10 or 11 roles. So the important competencies we would like to start to build into the roles are more people-focused and leadership-focused competencies, developing people into the available career streams at SISS12 and higher levels. We see it as natural stepping stones into those higher level roles. We have developed some position descriptions and they are attached to my statement, for those roles.
PN590
Can you just briefly summarise what the position descriptions are? What functions do they involve?---At SISS10 we see that there will be - our proposal is that there will be two roles. One is focused around training and training assessment. The other is focused around some leadership tasks such as the emergency co-ordinator role. And at SISS11 we see the person at this level having a combination of those skills, so having the training and assessment skills plus the emergency co-ordinator skills at that level.
PN591
Don't you have people who are paid to train your operators? Why are you moving towards this proposal?---We do have a process trainer within our structure, in plastics.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN592
What is that paid at?---That is a day role that is paid on a broad-band scale between 12 and 14, SISS12 and SISS14, so there would be ability of people working through the system of 10 and 11 roles to potentially move into a process trainer role at those levels or to move into the shift team leader career stream at the same levels, SISS12 through to 14, or in fact to move into something like a safety, health and environment co-ordinator role which we also have at higher SISS levels.
PN593
Just on the question of training, why do you need people to do the training at - what is it, SISS10 or SISS11?---SISS10 would be the trainers plus SISS11 would have the same skill with the combination of the two. The reason is because the training assessing load has increased significantly as part of the requirements of running our business of needing to show that we are assured of the competence of our people and that was, I guess, one of the recommendations coming out of the Longford Report from the fire at that location; competence of the operators was one of the issues that was highlighted in that report.
PN594
So that is regular checking of people's competencies?---That is correct. So the workload is the issue, and one process trainer on days would not be able to handle the workload required. So we have a real business drive to incorporate these skills within our shift structure.
PN595
Now, I don't want to put you on the spot here, but are you able to give the Commission a rough indication of how many people you are looking to appoint in plastics in these SISS10 and SISS11 positions?---We are envisaging that it will be at least 15, of our population which is currently about 39.
[2.30pm]
PN596
That is for SISS10 and 11 combined?---11, yes.
PN597
Yes, okay. All right, could I take you to paragraph 67 of your statement and it is there where you talk about the approximate weekly cost of retaining the five redundant high pressure operators to do the waste water and utilities tasks and presumably the emergency response liaison tasks - - -?---Yes.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN598
- - - while this dispute is progressing. You quote a figure of $10,000?---Yes.
PN599
How did you come to that calculation?---Simply by looking at their rate of pay on the table in enterprise agreement three and multiplying it by five and dividing by 52 to give you a weekly wage.
PN600
Yes?---At $10,000 a week.
PN601
And that is at SISS9?---Yes, at SISS9.
PN602
Okay?---I probably - - -
PN603
THE COMMISSIONER: That obviously includes your on costs, does it?---I was about to say, I can't recall, Commissioner, whether I have included on costs or not in that number.
PN604
Sounds like it. SISS9 is in the 80s, isn't it. That would give you around 100 - - -?---Yes.
PN605
- - - so you probably put 20 per cent on - - -?---The burden is roughly 30 per cent, something of that order.
PN606
Yes, so you put some on costs on?---Yes.
PN607
MR DALTON: Right, in paragraph 69 you quote another figure. This is for the potential on cost if a push by the other sites for parity with, you know, plastics people being paid at SISS10 was to flow on. You quote at one point, 2 million dollars per year. How have you arrived at that estimate?---By looking at the difference between SISS9 and SISS10 pay rate. That is approximately $4000 from memory and applying that across our operator population in Altona, roughly, 250 operators and then adding on some on costs as well.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN608
THE COMMISSIONER: So that calculation assumes that if all SISS9 employees currently so classified were successful in moving to SISS10 - - -?---Yes.
PN609
- - - the cost would be 1.4 million dollars per annum?---Yes.
PN610
Thank you?---My personal opinion is that - - -
PN611
Well, your view is that there would be expectations - - -?---Yes.
PN612
- - - at least of that order generated?---Yes.
PN613
MR DALTON: Just two more questions, Mr Harvey. The first one is, why shouldn't operators - plastics - be paid something more than SISS9 if they are to be required to do the emergency response liaison task?---Because we see it as a very, very small increment of competency, as I have described already. It takes between an hour and two hours to obtain level of competency. It is a very simple task. We don't think it is justified anything other than within the SISS9 structure.
PN614
And the - a related question, just generally in relation to waste water and utilities. I understand what you are saying in relation to a move in the classification structure from SISS9 to SISS10, what is your view if the Commission was to award some form of allowance for doing this skill which was previously done in high pressure?---My fear would be that for any future change in the requirements of - the owner operator would end up having similar claims before us and specifically the owner operator job description was written out of EA2 to try and prevent that from happening.
PN615
No more questions, Commissioner.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN616
THE COMMISSIONER: Could you just elaborate on that, written out of EA2?---Sorry, written in EA2 - the owner operator - - -
PN617
Written in, yes, that is what I thought. Could I just ask you this then. Given that owner operator is a generic description and covers quite a large number of personnel, several hundred in fact, and does not detail the technical competencies which make up the generic description in each and every plant, or indeed, in each post, is it not possible that changes to the task profile within a post or in a work area or within a plant which involved more complex technical skills and competencies which could fall within the generic description, could lead to a situation where work value could increase without any prospect of increased remuneration. It is a long question. If you want me to, sort of, break it up or to summarise it - what I am really saying to you is that - you are saying these descriptions are constant, and anything that falls within this description - - -?---Yes.
PN618
- - - whatever it may be, on the form of an increased level of technical complexity, responsibility, understanding, is inappropriately rewarded by additional remuneration?---You are asking me - I am interpreting that as you are asking me to give my opinion on that.
PN619
Well, yes, I mean, it is a conceptual thing, really, isn't it?---Yes, it is.
PN620
It is that, somehow or other, whatever happens in the plant generally - quite apart from just low pressure plastic - but it is a principle, is it not - - -?---Yes.
PN621
- - - that if this description can be said to apply - - -?---Yes.
PN622
- - - whatever the change in the value of the work it is - - -?---Assuming that the - - -
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN623
- - - encompassed by SISS9?---Assuming that some of the bases remain the same. You know, if we - you know, it talks about the plants, for example, in the description of area 1, 2, 3 and 4 olefins, BR elastomers, etcetera, but that is basically what - I agree with what you are saying, Commissioner.
PN624
Yes, so that the SISS9 rate of pay is constant provided that any changes that occur to the work of an operator - - -?---Yes.
PN625
- - - can be said to be reasonable described within these descriptors?---Yes.
PN626
It follows from that, does it not, that unless the matter falls outside the descriptions in Qenos 3 there can never be an increase in remuneration for operators based on changed work value?---I guess the opportunity is for that to occur at the time of negotiating enterprise agreements.
PN627
All right. So that would be an opportunity for issues of work value changes, in particular plants to be raised?---Yes.
PN628
Would there not be a difficulty in acknowledging any particular plant or any particular post in the sense that the integrity of the owner operator description and therefore the SISS9 classification would be put in question by any allowance or variation for a post or a plant?---Any allowance over and above SISS9, yes - - -
PN629
SISS9?--- - - - does put - - -
PN630
It would put the whole system in jeopardy?---Yes, it does.
PN631
And isn't it really your submission, in this case, that to, for example, to provide some sort of allowance if the Commission were persuaded there was a significant net addition to then work in low pressure comprised of the waste water processing plant - would threaten the integrity?---Yes, it would.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XN MR DALTON
PN632
So the situation facing me is the situation which would face the negotiators of an enterprise bargaining agreement?---In that sense, yes.
PN633
PN634
MS ANGUS: Mr Harvey, can we start with some history and work back through your attachments and the various processes of the developments of the various enterprise agreements. You point out in your statement - you refer to a number of clauses in the first enterprise agreement and you point out that in fact that was the first certified agreement that united all the sites. And you say in your statement at clause 11 that it outlined the principle skills based pay; yes?---Yes.
PN635
And Mr Harvey, there is really two clauses that you refer to from your statement. You refer to two clauses in that initial, that EA1?---Yes.
PN636
Clause 2, yes, and clause 8. It is in those clauses that the idea of skilled based - - -?---Yes.
PN637
- - - classification system is - - -?---Yes.
PN638
- - - committed to the other parties?---Mm.
PN639
So it is fair to say on the basis of those two clauses we - the parties have agreed in the enterprise agreement to a skills based classification structure; yes?---Yes.
PN640
To pay being linked to the responsibility of a position?---Pay being linked to the skill classification.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN641
Well, at clause 2 of EA1, there is a payment within Chemcor that will be based on skills being used and the responsibility of the position; yes?---Okay.
PN642
So it is responsibility - it is pay linked to responsibility; correct?---I am trying to find clause 2 out of EA1 so I can read it.
PN643
I will give you a moment. Is that attachment - - -
PN644
It is attachment 1 of your statement?---Yes. Yes, okay, I am with you, thank you.
PN645
So the parties were committed to a skill based classification structure?---Yes, yes.
PN646
We have committed to pay being linked to the responsibility of the position; correct?---Yes.
PN647
And we have committed to - over in clause 8 to a career based employment structure?---Yes, we have.
PN648
These are themes that have developed across all of the various agreements; correct?---Agreed.
PN649
Yes, okay. They are important themes to Qenos?---Yes.
PN650
Is that a yes?---Yes.
PN651
Yes, okay. Can you show me where with - see you concluded in your witness statement at clause 14 - I am happy to read it to you that:
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN652
The parties agreed that the tie point would be retained as the requirement of a fully qualified operator changed in accordance with operational requirements.
PN653
Can you show me where we have agreed to that in writing?---I can show you that in EA2, the 100 per cent relative mark between E703 and P7R was set at the same 100 per cent relative position and people moved to the same pay scale - the tie point pay scale.
PN654
So in EA1, that commitment hasn't been - there has been no agreement to the notion of a tie point? You say:
PN655
The parties agreed that the tie point would be retained as the requirement of a fully qualified operator changed in accordance with operational requirements.
PN656
?---Yes.
PN657
And can you provide us with where that agreement is in writing?---EA1 also has - I am checking through - attachment 1. EA1 also shows the base pay relativity of P7R being 100 per cent. And I have only got the P scale in front of me but E7 and O3 would have been similarly at a 100 per cent relativity point.
PN658
All right, so that is where you form the basis for your view that we have agreed that the tie point would be retained as the requirement of a fully qualified operator. It is the fact of relativity is being included in this classification structure?---There is that and the standard practice within the organisation. It is commonly understood.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN659
I see, but it is not included, at any rate, in EA1. We will work through all of the agreements so if you want to say that it is included in 2 or 3 - and we can get to that. In terms of the first agreement, it is not a commitment that has been provided in writing. Is that correct?---Not that I can find in the first three pages - or the pages - 2 and 5 of the attachment.
PN660
Okay. All right, let us, while we are at EA1, let us have a look at the classification description that occurred - that existed at plastics at that time?---Yes.
PN661
Okay, and can you just let us know then what the - what you would have seen as the tie point?---I have seen the tie point as the, what is described, as new classification, P7R - - -
PN662
P7R?---Base pay relativity, 100 per cent.
PN663
So I am on page 3 there of 18. Is that where you are?---That is right, yes.
PN664
And is it correct for me to interpret the classification descriptions there. Is there essentially four ways that someone can reach that, what you call, a tie point. Can reach that base pay relativity, that P7R?---Yes.
PN665
They are someone who is a safety co-ordinator?---Yes.
PN666
Someone who is a trainer?---Yes.
PN667
Someone who has some QA functions and lab?---Yes.
PN668
Or someone who is shift operator level 7 and is defined as:
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN669
Performs all duties and competent in all area equipment.
PN670
?---Yes.
PN671
Completed panel or lab.
PN672
?---Yes, that is what it says, yes.
PN673
Okay, now, at that time then, how would someone move then beyond what was, what you refer to as a tie point, or beyond P7R?---If we look at page 2 of 18 it shows that there are three positions which applied at P8R at 104 per cent relativity, safety co-ordinator level 4, step up team co-ordinator or a shift trainer, level 4.
PN674
So they are - so the step up team co-ordinator, I am looking at at the moment. That would be a shift operator level 7 who has panel or lab, performs all duties, competent in that area and we are talking here about low pressure plastic; yes?---Yes.
PN675
So if they have got panel or lab and they have leadership/planning skills, that would be the way they could progress beyond, at the time, was P7; correct?---It appears so, yes.
PN676
Yes, all right. And you have got no reason to doubt at the time that was a fairly sort of accurate description, presumably of - - -?---I have no reason to doubt - - -
PN677
Right, okay?--- - - - that that is not an accurate reflection of what actually was in place.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN678
That is all we have got to rely on really, isn't it. It is the classification as detailed in written agreements. You probably need to say, yes, for the record, but - - -?---No, I have other means - I can ask people for example, what actually occurred at the time - - -
PN679
I see. But?--- - - - to clarify that that was in fact the case.
PN680
But you are not disputing that - - -?---No, I am not disputing what is written down here, no.
PN681
Good, okay. All right, then a couple of years later the parties agree to enterprise agreement number two?---Yes.
PN682
And you say at paragraph 19 of your statement that one of the central features of EA2 was the in-principle agreement to go further than a common tie point and to extend commonality to a skill based pay structure; yes?---Yes, I do.
PN683
Can I just talk you through a couple of clauses in EA2. Have you got your excerpt there?---I do.
PN684
Attachment 2. The enterprise agreement purpose clause, that appears to be the first time that clause has appeared in any of the agreements in place between the parties. That is a clause - are you with me. It is on the first page, isn't it?---Yes, look, I don't know because I haven't got the full EA1 in front of me.
PN685
All right, well, it is - the company:
PN686
In the interests of all Chemcor employees the company becomes viable and internationally competitive.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN687
?---Mm.
PN688
Presuming that is in light of the fact in the preceding paragraph that the company is losing some money. S there is a commitment to becoming competitive - internationally competitive?---Some of the businesses forming Chemcor, as I said in paragraph 2 of background, we are losing money, that is what it says, yes.
PN689
Right. And there is a commitment between the parties that the way to achieve that is then described:
PN690
We jointly commit to achieving this objective. The objective is becoming internationally competitive - - -
PN691
?---Yes.
PN692
...offering secure employment and scope for career development.
PN693
?---Yes.
PN694
Okay, and it is still your view as a manager at Qenos that career development is an important - - -?---Absolutely.
PN695
Absolutely?---It is important.
PN696
It is important, okay. All right. So is it true to say then in the second enterprise agreement that there is a commitment made that:
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN697
...equivalent skills and responsibilities in each plant will be paid the same.
PN698
?---The commitment was that there be a tie point at the fully qualified level - the 100 per cent relativity level.
PN699
Well, okay, let us go back a bit. Can I just point you to clause 2 of EA2?---Yes.
PN700
And I will:
PN701
Payment within Chemcor will be based on skills being used and the responsibilities of the position. We are committed to a common pay system which will provide an opportunity to all employees to reach their potential. This will be received by a single integrated pay structure.
PN702
?---Yes.
PN703
Is it fair to say that what that means is a commitment to - a commitment that equivalent skills and responsibilities in each plant will be paid in a comparable manner. Will be paid the same? That is the notion of a common pay system; yes?---Yes.
PN704
Based on skill?---The skills would be represented on a common classification system, therefore, a SISS3, for example, at one site, would be equivalent pay to a SISS3 on another site. The - - -
PN705
And it would be based on the skills that each of those SISS3s possessed?---Broadly speaking, yes. What actually occurred was that the sites agree to tie point at 9 and each site developed the stepping stones between 1 and 9 individually on their own site. There was not an attempt to tie point at every step along the way. It wasn't deemed to be of any benefit in actually undertaking that activity.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN706
But the written commitment that is provided in enterprise agreement is to a skills and responsibility based pay system; correct?---Yes, yes.
PN707
And the way to achieve that was to develop a tie point - - -?---Yes.
PN708
- - - across the different sites?---Yes.
PN709
Correct?---And develop the stepping stones to the tie point on each site.
PN710
Okay, so in terms of the written agreements between the parties, right, which of the following two have we committed ourselves to. I am going to give you two options here?---Mm.
PN711
Then you can respond. Have we committed ourselves to a skilled based pay system with common employment conditions across the site or have we committed ourselves to retaining a fixed tie point of a full operator in each of those sites?---Both.
PN712
Do you want that question again?---Both.
PN713
Okay, we have committed ourselves to both. Can you show me in this agreement where we have committed ourselves to the second of those two, that is, to the retention of a fixed tie point of a full operator at each plant?---The 100 per cent relative mark plus - no I would say the 100 per cent relativity mark is the commitment.
PN714
Well, isn't that just a measure of the skill of that position? You are saying that is a commitment to the retention of a tie point?---Well, it is the - I mean, I am assuming that we commit that once we have written an enterprise agreement we commit to see it through for the period of time and certainly all the parties involved in the negotiation and agreement will have had that understanding, that the 100 per cent relativity, is the tie point.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN715
Well, can I put to you, Mr Harvey, that what we have committed ourselves to is a skills based classification structure and that you might be of the view - - -?---Yes.
PN716
- - - that both parties are bound by this notion of retaining forever a fixed tie point across the plants?---Mm.
PN717
But that can't be found anywhere in this agreement?---On the time that I have got available, you know, I can't - and the extract I have got, I can't find it in a single sentence.
PN718
You can't find it, okay?---But my belief is that the understanding about that tie point was common on the site.
PN719
It is a verbal agreement?
PN720
THE COMMISSIONER: I think that is what he said.
PN721
MS ANGUS: All right.
PN722
THE COMMISSIONER: I think you said there was an understanding. An understanding - it may well be taken for granted by both parties.
PN723
MS ANGUS: Mr Harvey, would you - - -
PN724
THE COMMISSIONER: Was there any verbal discussion - the details of this matter, to your knowledge?---There has been ongoing verbal discussion around the equivalence of the tie point for years.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN725
MS ANGUS: Can I put to you that the verbal understanding that exists between the parties was that the creation of a tie point was a transitional way of developing a common skills based classification structure?---You could put it but I don't agree with you.
PN726
Okay, right.
PN727
THE COMMISSIONER: Can I just ask you then. When I read it, it seems to me that EA2, although silent apparently in its text, insofar as we have got a level of documentation extracted before us, about the role of the tie point established in EA1 for the future, seems to concentrate particularly at part 5 in clauses 5.1 and 5.2 on a change in the classification structure rather than a retention of it. And whilst I can understand and make sense of your implication that that change of itself does not mean the abandonment of the logic of the tie point because of the perpetuation of the 100 per cent relativity band, it does seem to suggest that the existing classification structure is to be superseded. Would that be right?---We were moving towards a common classification structure at this time in EA2, yes.
PN728
And what you say is that it is an implication because of the retention of the 100 per cent relativity?---Yes, yes, that the parties have - - -
PN729
That it was to be based on the owner operator principle?---Yes.
PN730
Did the owner operator - - -?---Remembering also that the owner operator was the job description attached to the enterprise agreement.
PN731
To EA2?---Yes.
PN732
Right.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN733
MS ANGUS: Do you see, Mr Harvey, a potential conflict between a skills based classification structure and the retention of a tie point across each of the plants?---In the extreme which is I guess where, Commissioner, you were coming from before, that may be the case but we are talking about an agreement amongst parties that for the interest of the business and the parties' position, that the tie point be maintained.
[3.00pm]
PN734
Let me, for the sake of argument, put a scenario to you. Let us say that plant A requires - has ten posts, ten sets of competencies, and requires roughly - and we will get to the issue of training, but roughly 3000 hours of training. And plant B has six posts, six competencies and requires 1000 hours of training. So plant A has ten competencies, 3000 hours; plant B has six competencies, 1000 hours. Would you in that situation say that the retention of a tie point across those two plants would still be true to this commitment to provide a skills based pay and classification system?---We don't have that example so let me give you one we do have. We, in fact, do have some areas that have more operators, more posts than others. And they are still - the fully qualified rate is the same. For example, the boiler house area at olefins has got three people involved in that area, whereas low pressure has got six, yet their fully qualified rate of pay is the same.
PN735
THE COMMISSIONER: What seems to be inferred from that is that Mr McKenzie's evidence that there are some parts of the plant that don't align absolutely symmetrically in terms of the competencies required in order to have SISS9 pay is true?---To some extent, that is right, yes.
PN736
So that - - -
PN737
MS ANGUS: And is that - - -
PN738
THE COMMISSIONER: So that your evidence is that the principle is not strictly based on the concept of equity arising from like with like comparison on the volume - of the volume of competencies in a particular plant?---When it was first put together, it was deemed to be close enough.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN739
Yes, roughly. So there would be some people who would on a more stricter accounting or reckoning of the volume of competencies they were required to discharge would be advantaged by the system, as opposed to those who exercised the highest volume of competencies of a technical nature?---Mm.
PN740
So some plants would be staffed by people with higher volumes of competencies than others, but that broadly speaking it was considered by agreement - - -?---Yes, that is correct.
PN741
- - - to achieve an outcome - - -?---Correct.
PN742
- - - a designated outcome across the board?---Yes.
PN743
Acceptable that those differentials existed?---Yes, yes.
PN744
MS ANGUS: Do you accept that that designated outcome across the board maybe inconsistent with the principles of a skills based classification structure?---Perhaps in a purest sense, but we are talking about a business sense.
PN745
Okay, and is it also your view then that where a fully competent operator in one area, ie an operator possesses all the skills, is that that tie point that you refer to, all the skills in one area develops additional competencies they could never progress a SISS9?---The skills, if it was part of our enterprise agreement in - rather, in a negotiating period once the agreement was set, in fact, we have demonstrated deletion or additional requirements of owner operators throughout periods of the enterprise agreements. And we have a number of examples where we have done that within the bounds of the - now SISS9 tie point.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN746
THE COMMISSIONER: That is as long as you hang on to the SISS9 tie point owner operator concept, there always exists the possibility that if an additional competency is purely technical and if it is a significant net addition to the work of the operator, there is a barrier to that person working in that position being rewarded over and above SISS9?---Yes.
PN747
MS ANGUS: But that is actually not what is written in this agreement, Mr Harvey. If I can dig up the - we are now in EBA2?---Yes.
PN748
If I can take you to the classification structure at the back there. It is appendix 4, attachment B, and this was the structure in place - - -
PN749
THE COMMISSIONER: I think Mr Harvey has already conceded that these extrapolations of the effects of the agreement are not reflected in its text and that insofar as there is any material before us, the only thing that he can rely upon is the 100 per cent relativity benchmark.
PN750
MS ANGUS: Yes, there is a - I think there is more to be said though. I think there is material in - - -
PN751
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, but I am putting a question to him that that is not - what has just been said isn't written in the agreement.
PN752
MS ANGUS: Right.
PN753
THE COMMISSIONER: I think he has already conceded it is not what I just said to him that certainly isn't written in the agreement.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN754
MR DALTON: Commissioner, perhaps I could just foreshadow an objection just in terms of the line of questioning because it really does seem that this is the subject of submissions. The agreement is there, the words are there. As you have pointed out, Mr Harvey has I think answered that line of questions as best he can. If Ms Angus is just simply putting to him things that are already there on the face of the document, I am not sure how that is relevant and how it is going to assist the Commission in deciding how to interpret the agreement.
PN755
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, with respect, I think that Mr Harvey has said that he said that there was an understanding,and I think Ms Angus is testing that understanding. I said to her, well, look, an understanding can be a group of people taking something for granted. There was quite a lot of those a long time ago; they used to take it for granted that the earth was flat. They didn't have to actually discuss it to have an understanding that they shared in that respect. And it may be that the hangover from the A1 was that the tie point would roll along and the business would be conducted according to that situation. Now, what Ms Angus is clearly going to argue is that that may have been Mr Harvey's understanding but she is trying to establish that he had no grounds, I think, upon which to base it except the hundred per cent relativities. I have already put that to her so I am asking her to try and confine it and just sharpen up the sort of questions to him. There is no point in just - - -
PN756
MS ANGUS: In repeating those - - -
PN757
THE COMMISSIONER: - - - going round and round with the idea that, show me it is not there, sort of thing. He has already said it is not there in the text - - -
PN758
MS ANGUS: No.
PN759
THE COMMISSIONER: - - - that there was a common tie point or anything of that nature. What he said is: on the basis of the papers that are before us, the only documented evidence of the tie point is its potential inclusion as an appendix or an attachment, or whatever is EA2, from which inferences may be drawn and, secondly, the 100 per cent relativities based on the EA1 tie point.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN760
MS ANGUS: Commissioner, I do want to ask a few more questions - - -
PN761
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, go ahead.
PN762
MS ANGUS: - - - in relation to the classification structure though at this point, and it is - - -
PN763
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, that is fine. It is just that what I was addressing myself to was, it is hard to examine a witness when what you are trying to do is say that something is not there - - -
PN764
MS ANGUS: Yes.
PN765
THE COMMISSIONER: - - - when they have already conceded that it isn't.
PN766
MS ANGUS: You mentioned earlier, Mr Harvey, that you have got extensive experience in the olefins plant, is that correct?---Yes.
PN767
And presumably you are, therefore, familiar with the classification structure at that site?---Yes, yes.
PN768
Can I just refer you in appendix 4, attachment A then to the classification descriptions for olefins?---Is this in EA2?
PN769
In EA2?---Appendix 4, attachment A, yes.
PN770
That is right. At the time classification O3 was the hundred per cent?---Yes.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN771
Yes, and so there was - it was commonly referred to, was it, as a qualified area technician or - - -?---Yes.
PN772
Yes, okay. In order to progress beyond that hundred per cent at olefins, can you talk us through then the ways that an operator could progress beyond the hundred per cent point in olefins?---At the time of EA2 or now?
PN773
Let us start with EA2?---Yes. Well, I will read the document with you and hopefully my memory is correct but there was - - -
PN774
So we are looking at O4 presumably, yes?---O4, yes, 104.2. There was obviously a step up position, a refinery co-ordinator, utilities, technician grade 4 which was a - was someone who was able to fulfil the role of a head operator: for example, a head operator was absent or on annual leave.
PN775
That is the training program position that you are looking at; is that right?---Refinery co-ordinator, technician grade 4.
PN776
Yes, okay. So that is the co-ordinating position, okay?---Yes.
PN777
So that is one way that a person - - -?---Yes.
PN778
- - - could progress beyond a hundred per cent. Another way?---Cross-trained SRT utilities technician, technician qualified in one field unit, the second area, and trained for the remaining field units in the second area:
PN779
Qualified in one field unit of a second area trained with a -
PN780
and training for the remaining field units in the second area. I think that is - should read:
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN781
Technician qualified in field units of one area and training for the remaining field unit...
PN782
Okay, no, they are actually - it is a pathway position, it is a - it is somebody who is in the process of up-skilling on their second area. So they are fully qualified at O3 and they are starting to achieve competencies in a second area. That is the way I read that at that time.
PN783
All right, and obviously there has been some changes since?---Yes, there has.
PN784
EA2?---Yes.
PN785
But is it fair to say that in olefins, and it is actually - presumably it is a matter of record, but in olefins someone can progress beyond SISS9 by developing competencies in more than one area?---Yes. If I could get to EA3 attachment we can clarify that.
PN786
Page 105 of the agreement; is that what you are looking at?---Yes. So it is possible, Commissioner, that at olefins site someone can be classified at SISS10 by being an owner operator in two complete areas.
PN787
And they are technical skills?---They are technical skills, that is - - -
PN788
In two areas?---That is correct.
PN789
Constitutes a SISS10 now?---That is correct.
PN790
At olefins?---At olefins. That is correct.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN791
All right. So that is another example, if you like, of how someone could, in terms of the generic classification structure, progress beyond what you see as the tie point; beyond that hundred per cent?---Applicable only on the olefins site. It is only - it is defined on the olefins site, it is within the olefins classification structure.
PN792
Well, hang on, I thought the principle that we have committed ourselves to was a single integrated classification structure?---Yes. You will see it is referred to the same SISS scale so it is actually reflected at SISS10 on the scale. So there is - the SISS levels are consistent across the sites but there are - and this is a position that is unique to olefins.
PN793
And I mean this is a difficult question in the same way as the Commissioner's questions to you earlier, but have you got any evidence that there is a sort of quarantine, a ringing of - a ring around the arrangements at olefins that don't apply anywhere else?---Well, it is only written into the enterprise agreement in the olefins table.
PN794
All right, but is it the case that we have a common skills based classification structure across all of the sites?---We have a common scale of - a common classification scale 1 through to - I think it goes to 16.
PN795
And it is also the case - - -?---And the tie point is at 9.
PN796
All right. Well, obviously there is a bit of dispute about this notion of tie point between us, but I understand that that is the evidence that you are giving. But we have a commitment to - well, what does SISS stand for, single integrated - - -?---Integrated salary system.
PN797
Okay, okay. So we have a single integrated salary system. And it is also the case, is it not, that it is possible to progress within that single integrated salary system from SISS9 to SISS10 by possessing technical skills in two different areas?---On the olefins site that is the case.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN798
Right, okay. And just jumping back a bit, a moment, if you have still got the appendix for attachment A there was - least at the time there was a third possible progression beyond that hundred per cent?---Yes.
PN799
A specialist technician. Do you remember anything about that position?---My memory is that it was - we had a couple of people who were qualified at that level who had some specialist skills. It might - again my memory is it might have been someone who had some specialist training skills or had some specialist occupational health and safety type skills that, over and above, just need a representative. Again I think it was a position that was there for a period of time and we either didn't want or see a need to continue it.
PN800
Well, it is replicated in the following agreement between us, between the parties?---EA3?
PN801
Well, at least in the bridging agreement?---The bridging agreement was pretty much a rollover of EA2 for pragmatic terms. So we deliberately set out not to make wholesale changes to the bridging agreement, even though we knew there was a lot of elements within it that were going to be changed as part of EA3. It was - as the Commission may be aware, it was a short agreement. I think if my memory serves me about nine months agreement. So it pretty much just put some new pay rates in and rolled that over.
PN802
And is the specialist technician or a specialist operator, from your memory is that someone who - that is - just so that we are clear, that is someone who possesses specialist technical knowledge and skills; is that right?---That is when it was in existence. I am not - I don't believe we currently - we have anybody still classified in that way, and I noticed the olefins classification structure in EA3 doesn't refer to it in any way. So based on that knowledge, I assume that we have eliminated that position.
PN803
All right, but - okay. On the face of that classification structure, at least at the time it would appear that it is - it was possible to progress beyond what we now call SISS9?---Yes.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN804
By developing particular co-ordinating skills; yes?---With the - by - if - in reference to the refinery co-ordinator utilities technician, you - - -
PN805
Well, it is - we have pointed out - - -?---There was a - - -
PN806
We agreed that - - -?---It was actually - that position was a step-up head operator, as I said, and at the time the title of a head operator at olefins was a senior refinery co-ordinator. So that was a title reflecting his role, rather than saying you co-ordinate - using the word co-ordinator as a specific competence as such. It was a role title.
PN807
Okay. That is the name of the position?---Yes.
PN808
But certainly on the face of it, in terms of the olefins classification structure we have and the plastics classification structure we have, there are two - in each of them, there is a path, if you like, from SISS9 to SISS10 through a co-ordinator's role; yes?---Currently, or in the - - -
PN809
Well, in the classification structure that you have in front of you, both of them, that is one thing they have in common; would you agree?---In terms of a team co-ordinator, in terms of a shift team leader type position - - -
PN810
All right?--- - - - the answer to that is, yes.
PN811
Yes, okay. So, for example, at olefins O4 is one part, that is the refinery co-ordinator, yes, and there is a similar position available in the classification structure at plastics?---Well, please remember though that that structure has been superseded by EA3.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN812
Yes?---And if we look at the olefins table for EA3 it shows us, Commissioner, that one position is available at SISS10, that is the owner operator with two working areas, as we have already discussed. And, in fact, there is no other position at SISS10. And SISS11 is, in fact, vacant; there is no position there. The next one up is the - is, in fact, the first leadership position of owner operator - - -
PN813
You are racing ahead of me there, Mr Harvey?--- - - - team co-ordinator.
PN814
You are looking at EA3 there, are you?---Yes, I am.
PN815
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, I think what Ms Angus is exploring with you with these questions is the historical development of the classification system and, in particular, one phase of it that - - -?---Right.
PN816
- - - follows on from EA2 which is the rollover agreement; is that right?
PN817
MS ANGUS: That is right, that is right.
PN818
THE COMMISSIONER: And what I think she is really trying to establish is whether or not there were classifications which were beyond SISS9 which - - -?---And the - - -
PN819
- - - remunerated employees in respective technical competencies; is that right?
PN820
MS ANGUS: That is correct, Commissioner. That is my line of questioning.
PN821
THE COMMISSIONER: And you say that the document actually indicates that there were at that time - - -
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN822
MS ANGUS: Yes.
PN823
THE COMMISSIONER: - - - such positions at SISS10?
PN824
MS ANGUS: Yes?---Well, they weren't SISS10 at the time. They would have been O4.
PN825
THE COMMISSIONER: O4?---Yes.
PN826
MS ANGUS: O4 or - - -
PN827
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, to put it another way, beyond the common tie point?---Yes.
PN828
But which were nevertheless classifications of employees by reference to their technical competence. And I take it you accepted there were such classifications?---Yes, I do recall that there were.
PN829
And that there seemed to be several of them. I think you have identified three so far.
PN830
MS ANGUS: That is right.
PN831
THE COMMISSIONER: Some of them on your evidence were only temporarily occupied?---Yes.
PN832
And your view of the situation now is that to the extent that any such position still exists, there is only one and it is in the olefins plant, and it is confined to an owner operator of two areas?---Yes, that is my position.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN833
And I anticipate what you are going to say to me is that - - -
PN834
MS ANGUS: Yes.
PN835
THE COMMISSIONER: - - - that is inconsistent with the proposition that the tie point was irrevocable.
PN836
MS ANGUS: Well, do I need to ask that? Just so that we are clear, Mr Harvey, so it is the case we agree that at least then, at least for this period of two agreements that exist between the parties there was the ability to develop beyond the hundred per cent rate through the use of - through the development of technical competencies at the time?---At the time, that is correct.
PN837
All right, okay. And is that consistent with your notion of a tie point?---I think it is - it is because it is important to understand that we did not expect for these positions everybody to be undertaking these skills. There was a few individuals that were selected to have higher technical skills which we no longer require. They have been written out of our classification structure.
PN838
THE COMMISSIONER: So they were - - -?---But it wasn't - - -
PN839
- - - temporary appointments?---And the whole population wasn't given the opportunity to progress to that level.
PN840
Is it your understanding of a part of what is being put by the AWU is that, in essence, at low pressure plastics it is appropriate to elaborate the classification structure by one further classification and that all employees within low pressure plastics can follow a skills acquired based path to SISS10?---That is my understanding, yes. That is what has been put to us.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN841
And at the very least, if that is not quite explicitly what is being proposed, any avenue which opens up the opportunity for low pressure plastics employees to progress to SISS10 on the basis of acquired technical competency, even if that be confined to a limited number of those employees, would have the consequences you have outlined in relation to other claims?---It would, and the fear that I have expressed is the reason why we have been eliminating some of these - - -
PN842
Yes, yes?--- - - - issues and anomalies, if you like. We are trying to - - -
PN843
Well, I anticipated that was what you were saying. I just wanted to try and put it in a nutshell, so to speak.
PN844
MS ANGUS: And is the fact that olefins plant provides for a classification structure that you can develop technical competencies in two plants and get to SISS10, has that resulted in claims in other plants for parity until this point?
PN845
THE COMMISSIONER: That is an important qualification?---Not to my knowledge. I will add though that the olefins plant in total tends to be more of an integrated arrangement than some of our other sites; particularly the elastomers in the plastic site effectively had two separate businesses on the site whereas olefins is a much more integrated arrangement. For example, they all sit in the same control room, whereas on the other sites they have separate control rooms and physically separated. So it is sort of - there is geographic and psychological barriers associated with picking up a second area, or have been I think in some of the other businesses.
PN846
Could I just interpose there. In relation to this position at olefins, do you know whether or not there is a number of establishment positions of that kind designated as part of any agreement at olefins?---I am not aware that there is a defined number. I am aware that there is only very few people who are qualified at that level.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN847
Right. So you can't tell me whether, in fact, it is a skills acquired or whether it is an appointed position?---I would have to research that.
PN848
I mean, it may be a slight variant of that in the sense that there may be a nominated number of such positions available and people are nominated to train for it?---I would have to look up EA3 to confirm that.
PN849
You don't know whether that is the case or not?---It will be detailed in EA3, Commissioner, if there is, in fact, a set number. I don't believe there is. In fact - and, in fact, to operate two areas is - it is a fair sort of call and, therefore, the company certainly would want to have a say in people who were training - selected and training towards that position.
PN850
MS ANGUS: It would appear - if I can take you to page 105 of the EA3, it would appear on the face of it, given that where the positions are by appointment - for example, at 106, resins, the SISS9 is by appointment?---Yes.
PN851
It is identified in the agreement. Process granulation at SISS8 is by appointment. And the olefins SISS10 which is the full operator for two work areas doesn't say by appointment?---Yes. However, the other - - -
PN852
Is it possible to conclude that - - -?---The other roles higher than SISS9 are by appointment. For example, the shift team leader role and the owner operator team co-ordinator roles, they are by appointment. So in a general sense the roles higher than SISS9 are by appointment.
PN853
All right?---I am not - - -
PN854
So it is not possible to tell on the basis of - till we have further information, is that - - -?---Is the - the section I think we need to look at in EA3 is section 4 where there is some tables of defined numbers at the commencement of the agreement and it will - if there are requirements to have a number of people at that level, it will be defined at that point in the enterprise agreement. I don't have that section in front of me.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN855
And so subject to any of those sort of parameters, if you like - - -?---Yes.
PN856
- - - or caps on numbers, subject to that, it is still possible to say that at olefins the career path for technical skills extends to SISS10?---It does.
PN857
Okay.
PN858
THE COMMISSIONER: Can I just ask you a question about your proposal in relation to low pressure plastics at this point. I am sorry, it may seem like a distraction but I think it will become clear that it is not. You propose that - you think there are roles above SISS9?---Yes.
PN859
But they are not necessarily what you think are described in the tie point, but rather they are something else?---Yes.
PN860
I haven't looked at the tie point in depth but I thought that some of the general preamble might actually describe some of these activities but, nevertheless - and that something like 15 of the 39 employees would, therefore, move towards 10 and 11?---Yes, assuming that we - they were able to demonstrate competencies required at that level.
PN861
So will they have to undergo training?---They would have to undergo training, yes.
PN862
And do you know what the scope of that training would be?---Some of it is internal, some of it is actually external. For example, they need to become qualified workplace assessors. So there is a combination of competencies, the internal elements of the emergency response elements.
PN863
So the distinction is twofold. The competencies you say are not technical, they are otherwise described?---Yes.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN864
And secondly, those positions would be by appointment?---They will be, yes.
PN865
So that unlike the movement to SISS9 which is a process whereby the employee simply proves competence and is reclassified upwards to a SISS9, in low pressure, these 15 employees would be the subject of some sort of selection process, would they?---They would. We would advertise the roles, go through some sort of selection process and commence training.
PN866
And have we given any consideration to the requirements for selection?---The position descriptions define some of the competencies - person type competences that we would be looking for.
PN867
Would they have to be SISS9?---We would like them to be SISS9.
PN868
So it is most likely that they would be required to be SISS9?---Yes.
PN869
And you would identify the particular competencies that they will achieve?---Yes.
PN870
For the purpose of classification at either SISS10 or SISS11?---Yes, we would.
PN871
And you would select those who are going to undergo the training?---Yes, we would.
PN872
All right, thank you.
PN873
MS ANGUS: Mr Harvey, the exhibit Qenos3 is the appendix 10, job description for the owner/operator, was an attachment, yes, to the enterprise agreement at the time?---It is one of the appendices to the EA2.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN874
Right, okay. And you - your evidence was earlier that this hasn't been replaced with a subsequent generic definition?---No.
PN875
So it still stands, is that - - -?---yes.
PN876
Okay. Can I just take you to clause (d) of that explanatory statement. And you point out halfway through that, the incumbent - the incumbent is the owner/operator:
PN877
The incumbent is mainly engaged in applying their skills and knowledge to all aspects of a relevant process area being one of -
PN878
and then there is -
PN879
olefins, areas 1, 2 3 or 4.
PN880
So one of those 4 areas in olefins, for example, would be that they applied their skill and knowledge to all aspects of one of those areas, that would be a SISS9, correct, at olefins?---Yes.
PN881
At elastomers BR, if an owner/operator applied all their skill and knowledge to all aspects of either BR or SBR, is that right?---Well, it would be somewhat difficult to do in SBR right now because it has been shut down.
PN882
It has been shut down, that one, all right, so now it is just BR?---yes.
PN883
Then they would be a SISS9?---Yes, they would.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN884
Okay. And likewise in plastics, again we are in a situation like olefins, yes, where it is either you have all the skills in plastics high?---Mm.
PN885
Or all the skills in plastics low?---Yes.
PN886
This presumably, provides some evidence about your point about a tie point. I will withdraw that. It wasn't a question, it was an aid. So if an incumbent in any of these three identified areas is engaged in applying their skill and knowledge to all aspects of more than one of these areas, what would happen?---The only plant that applies to is the olefins plant where you have, as we have just explored, a cross-trained operator who is competent in two of the four olefins areas.
PN887
Well, you say that there is only one place that it applies to?---Mm.
PN888
Right. Aren't we precisely dealing with the dilemma now of additional duties from high plastics, that is skills and knowledge of all aspects of one area now being picked up by people in another area?---Yes. We are dealing with the very small remaining competencies from high pressure which are associated with the utilities plant area and incorporating that into the plastics low pressure classification structure.
PN889
It is a key point that you want to make about this notion of tie point, that a full operator is someone who, and it is in your words, has all the technical competencies in one plant. Now, that is what you have defined, it is the definition you have given us, the definition of a tie point?---Yes.
PN890
All the technical competencies in one plant. Now, we have a situation at olefins where if you have technical competencies in more than one plant you have SISS10.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN891
THE COMMISSIONER: No, more than one area in the plant?---That is right.
PN892
MS ANGUS: More than one area in the plant.
PN893
THE COMMISSIONER: And all these references shifts around in the way in which it describes a lot of these things, but isn't the essence of this matter, it is not all that complicated, is it, Mr Harvey doesn't dispute that some of the competencies from high pressure plastics have come across to low pressure. What he has said, however, is that they are not so significant, particularly those, that level of the total competency of managing the utilities and the waste water pressure plant exercised by the night shift operators, as to warrant a move to SISS10. Because the general principle is that SISS9 is meant to cover the level of technical competency for a plant and these competencies have got a generic similarity with the run of what is performed by operators in low pressure, such that it doesn't - apart from perhaps workload - work intensity doesn't actually require them to, you know, become geniuses in something, technically the knowing that in fact they work within these particular parameters, observe gauges levels, conduct tests which are generically not dissimilar to the sort of role that they perform throughout the plant. Isn't that the essence of it, and why break the SISS9 rule?
PN894
MS ANGUS: Because there is a whole lot of - my response to the company's argument: yes, the company is arguing that it is on the basis of it is a minor set of competencies that are being adopted and therefore why break the SISS9 rule. I simply want to put a pile of questions to him. My response to that would be it is a matter for submissions.
PN895
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, that is right.
PN896
MS ANGUS: I want to understand how it is that Mr Harvey explains the inconsistency with that position, the inconsistency with what it is that we have agreed to in writing. I am asking for an explanation - - -
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN897
THE COMMISSIONER: I was worried that there was some suggestion that there was more than just a part of the total picture of high pressure coming across.
PN898
MS ANGUS: I missed that, Commissioner, sorry.
PN899
THE COMMISSIONER: I thought the way you were putting it at the time was that the characterisation of the area of high pressure which was travelling to low pressure, and the levels of competencies which travel with it, particularly for the night shift operators, was more significant than Mr Harvey is suggesting.
PN900
MS ANGUS: Well, I haven't come to that point in my questioning.
PN901
THE COMMISSIONER: Because I would have thought that that, the scope of those additional competencies, if any additional competencies do actually travel with the work, as opposed to familiarity with the area, is very much at the heart of the matter.
PN902
MS ANGUS: Yes, there is clearly disagreement about, as it were, the value of those competencies.
PN903
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, I think there is the significance of them and any value which should be attached to them. Those are discrete questions. I understand the company is saying it doesn't matter how significant it is, the SISS9 rule says don't do anything to upset the apple-cart. Then Mr Harvey has made it clear that that is a matter that only negotiators at the end of an enterprise bargaining agreement should confront. I don't know whether I accept that as yet. And looking at it from a position where that is yet to be adopted as a principle for the purpose of the determination of the matter, the question still remains, what is the significance of the competencies which are required in order to discharge the responsibilities of the night shift operators.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
Mr McKenzie has shown me around the plant, we have got a detailed job description from him. He is the day operator. There is a bit of a blank here about the night shift operators and I am trying to establish what - I thought you were putting something to him about that.
PN904
MS ANGUS: No, I am not at this stage, and I will get to it, but can I follow a natural path for me.
PN905
Can I take you now to the bridging agreement, Mr Harvey, which, as you pointed out, it contains an identical classification structure with the earlier one, and I think we can move quickly through this one. At page 16 of that bridging agreement, are you with me; it is an attachment?---Yes, okay.
PN906
You say actually of the bridging agreement, I will just refresh your memory, at 28:
PN907
The skill classification structure was still based on the old system.
PN908
That is, each side had its own structure through the common tie point:
PN909
However, in pursuit of a common pay system, the parties agreed to the introduction of a single integrated salary structure that set the structure for an operator to progress through common pay levels across all sites based on the attainment of relevant skills required to be exercised by the operator in their particular plant.
PN910
Okay. Now, can I just get your account then of how that new classification structure or the new skills, if you like, were developed. Are you with me on page 16? That is the old classification levels, as it is headed?---Page 16. Yes.
PN911
So it says there that:
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN912
New classification levels have been developed and agreed which replace these old levels. However, the skill requirements to achieve the new levels have not yet been fully defined or agreed.
PN913
?---Yes.
PN914
And your statement points out that that process occurred - the process of developing the skills for each of the levels occurred in sub-committees of a consultative committee?---Yes.
PN915
Can you tell us how was it - how did we know at the time, how did you know at the time, or the parties know at the time, that skills that were developed and included in the respective classification structures had some sort of parity across the different plants?---Okay. Well, as I have attempted to explain, the tie point was the key, at SISS9, and each plant understood that they needed to fit the competencies required to run their areas within the SISS9 limit. Each plant then individually, if you like, created the stepping stone sequence to move from SISS1 to SISS9 and these individual working were then brought to the key ACT, as I understand it, for review and approval. That is my understanding of the process that occurred.
PN916
So whatever the competencies in each plant, they have to be, as it were, compressed so that they all fit into, they all came under the SISS9 level; is that right?---Well, it was consistent with the previous enterprise agreements. That is effectively what - it wasn't anything new to have a tie point, we just nominated the tie point position as SISS9 and then each plant had to go and create the stepping stones to SISS9.
PN917
But was it your understanding that the exercise was also about, if you like, loosely, and in lay terms, about setting up not just a tie point between SISS9, but more or less a tie point at each of the levels?---No, it was not about that.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN918
Oh, okay. So how was it different?
PN919
THE COMMISSIONER: Quite the opposite, as I understand it, was it not, that each plant would establish its own relativity scale below SISS9?---Correct. That is correct.
PN920
MS ANGUS: Below SISS9?---That is correct.
PN921
Yes, okay, right.
PN922
THE COMMISSIONER: And that is why, as I understand it, you took exception with the proposition earlier when reference was made to the text of EA2 at the outset that the idea was that each SISS step in each plant would have to be aligned?---Yes, that is right, we didn't do that. We deliberately - we didn't see any reason to go through that complex process. We preferred to let each site sit comfortably themselves between SISS1 and SISS9.
PN923
Right.
PN924
MS ANGUS: But there was a concern to maintain under SISS9 a commitment to sort of parity of skills used in different plants, as a principle?---Well, the principle was a tie point at SISS9 for all the generic skills required to run a particular area, or the technical skills; that was what the principle was.
PN925
All right. Well, it was around this time that packaging was sent off site?
PN926
THE COMMISSIONER: And you low salaries, you mean. Are you referring to - - -
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN927
MS ANGUS: No, the packaging was sent off site in plastics?---My understanding was that occurred round about 1996.
PN928
So if there was - there was a concern about achieving some sort of parity for anyone below SISS9 in different plants, would that then explain the footnote contained in EA3 on page 104; can I take you to that?---You can.
PN929
And I will read out.
PN930
THE COMMISSIONER: Is EA3 in the marked exhibits?---It was attached to my statement, Commissioner.
PN931
MS ANGUS: And it should be - yes, it is.
PN932
THE COMMISSIONER: It is an attachment.
PN933
MS ANGUS: It is attachment 4 of Mr Harvey's statement and I am looking at page 104 of that attachment?---Yes, I am with you.
PN934
I will just read that out for everyone's benefit:
PN935
The position of packaging was absorbed by the compounding operator loading the bulk containers. Due to the number of skills required to be a SISS9, there was one position in the SISS level integration where the operator would increase by two SISS levels. This was selected to occur at SISS6 where attaining the necessary skills would result in the progress to SISS8 not SISS7.
PN936
What do you understand that the first part of the sentence then means:
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN937
Due to the number of skills required to be a SISS9 -
PN938
in plastics low pressure?---They didn't subdivide up the competencies into, what is it, 8, or whatever the number is, to get a complete run between 1 and 9. Therefore, they had the dilemma of not being able to provide a step at each stage between SISS1 and SISS9, so they chose to keep one of the steps empty and as people progressed through the competencies at one point they got lucky and got a two-stage pay rise rather than a one-stage pay rise.
PN939
Well, hang on a minute, Mr Harvey, since you are actually addressing the second part of that sentence there which is the - how it occurred that you were jumping a step, as it were, from SISS6 to SISS8. Can I just get your explanation of how you interpret the following phrase:
PN940
Due to the number of skills required to be a SISS9 -
PN941
there is one position which will be increased by two levels? What do you think that means, that notion of a number of skills required to be a SISS9?
PN942
THE COMMISSIONER: Isn't that the question that Mr Harvey just answered?
PN943
MS ANGUS: Well, I didn't hear his answer matched my question, but - - -
PN944
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, I understood it. He said that if you want to divide 9 classification possibilities into 8 areas, for example, or 8 competencies, then there is a gap in there somewhere, so you leapfrog one as you go up from 1 to 9.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN945
MS ANGUS: So is that to say then, Mr Harvey, that the competencies are retained, but the steps, if you like, were rearranged to get to SISS9; is that the same, that you are saying that?---Well, the arrangement of the steps is documented here for us and presumably by discussion by the people at the plastics site at the time they decided as it says, that the two stage, two step promotion would occur from SISS6 to SISS8. I don't understand the logic of why it happened there; it could have happened at some other point in the tree, but it doesn't actually bother me because, you know, it was agreed at the time and I have no reason to say that it is not a good idea.
PN946
And you are not of the view that either party should retreat from what it is that we have agreed to in that footnote?---Well, I think it just describing - it is an explanation, explanatory note, as it says, as why there is this thing called "empty" at 7. I am not clear on what you are actually asking me.
PN947
Well, would you see - presumably you don't see the feeling of, the creation of a SISS7 as including for example the utilities competencies as inconsistent with what it is that has been agreed to as an outcome of the moving of packaging off site?---Well, what this dispute is about is attempting to reach agreement that competency C be filled by utilities and emergency liaison skill; that is what this dispute is actually about.
PN948
So you don't agree then that at the time there was agreement recorded in writing that there would be no requirement to occupy SISS7?---I don't agree that that footnote says that we will never fill that position.
PN949
Do you accept that that footnote says that we will never fill that position for the life of the agreement?---No, I think it is an explanatory note saying why it happens to be why it is laid out the way it is. It says: explanatory note.
PN950
Well, it says that there is one position on the level of progression where the operator will increase by two levels. Presumably that was agreed to between the parties?---Yes, we - - -
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN951
THE COMMISSIONER: Can I just make an observation about this because I am not quite sure whether, when you have the chance to reflect on it, it actually takes us very far because I don't think there is any suggestion that anybody will be prevented from going to SISS9 if they don't have the full competence on the waste water processing plant, and that is the current situation. The night shift operators for example do not have the 260 hours training and they only have to prove partial competence in relation to the waste water processing plant, but nevertheless they go to SISS9. And the day operators don't have to do anything, as I understand it, is that right?---In relation to - - -
PN952
The waste water processing plant, because Mr McKenzie does all of that?---Oh, sorry, the day shift operators during normal hours, yes, Mr McKenzie - - -
PN953
They don't have to concern themselves with it at all, because Mr McKenzie is there?---Yes.
PN954
But nevertheless, they will progress to SISS9 unimpeded by that?---Yes, yes.
PN955
So - - -
PN956
MS ANGUS: But the position that the company has put to us, though, Commissioner, is that those people who fulfil what you refer to as the partial competencies, the monitoring role, if you like, would do so by filling the "empty".
PN957
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, so that there is a partial competency included in the SISS9 which could be nominally attributed to level 7; is that right?
PN958
MS ANGUS: Yes.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN959
THE COMMISSIONER: For some of the employees, namely the night shift employees.
PN960
MS ANGUS: That is the position as I understand it, as we understand that the company has put to us.
PN961
THE COMMISSIONER: The point that I am making is that to the extent that there is any additional requirement to get to SISS9, apart from Mr McKenzie's circumstance which is somewhat unique, it is, I think, 30 hours training; is that right?---That is correct.
PN962
For how many employees?---For the 39 employees.
PN963
The whole 39?---We want the whole 39 to, yes.
PN964
All right. In due course?---Yes.
PN965
Because I take it there has only been a partial number of the 39 trained so far?---My understanding is that roughly two-thirds were deemed to be competent at the time the training was done.
PN966
Competent to perform the waste water processing plant monitoring and testing to the level of 30 hours as opposed to 260 hours of training?---Correct. The out-of-hours requirements.
PN967
MS ANGUS: In order that - to follow on from the Commissioner's question - in order that those silent hours people can perform those monitoring role, you agree there needs to be one dedicated person doing it, one dedicated person constantly, well not constantly, hang on - - -
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN968
THE COMMISSIONER: On day.
PN969
MS ANGUS: Yes. Is it your evidence there is no requirement to have one dedicated person on each shift; is that your position?---Oh, no, no, no, we must have someone on each shift who is - in fact you need more than one because you have to cater for - - -
PN970
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, I think we need to just unravel this a little bit. What do you mean by dedicated?
PN971
MS ANGUS: Drained up to the level of Mr McKenzie?---No.
PN972
Okay. But it is your view that there needs to be one dedicated person trained up to the level of Mr McKenzie on day?---To fulfil Mr McKenzie's role, that is correct.
PN973
In order to then, in order that Qenos can feel comfortable about having the sort of a monitoring role, less trained up, partially competent, if you like, people, performing that work on the night shift?---Yes. We saw that the creation of the day operator role was one of the enablers to set in place to enable us to achieve what we are trying to achieve.
PN974
And the Commissioner asked you earlier about what would happen in circumstances where there was someone - and I will adopt the Commissioner's terms - someone partially competent on night and there was a problem. There was a reading that was outside of the parameters. Your evidence was that an engineer would be called in. Is that the?---We will train our people to be competent to handle the foreseeable situations they will need to deal with out of normal hours, in terms of abnormal conditions.
PN975
So that would require more training than the training that has been identified?---No.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN976
Are you saying that there would be no possibility, no likelihood of in the event of any problem being identified during those silent hours of requiring somebody to come in?---There would be an engineer would have to come in, for example. As I explained previously, Commissioner, we have a support system for our entire plant.
PN977
THE COMMISSIONER: They have an on-call engineer?---Yes. And part of their responsibilities is to respond as they deem fit, based on the circumstances they are presented with.
PN978
MS ANGUS: And it is also your evidence that that engineer could be the relief person, if you like, for Mr McKenzie on day; is that the evidence you gave? Or there would need to someone dedicated trained up?---I said that to cover Mr McKenzie's annual leave period we had finalise how we are going to do that, but it is one of the possibilities is that we have the engineering people giving support to the people who are trained to out-of-hours level competence. That hasn't been finalised at this point in time. There are other possibilities.
PN979
What do you mean by support?---Giving guidance, providing additional technical expertise. If necessary, getting instructions, researching problems, that kind of - those processes - decision making processes.
[4.00pm]
PN980
All right. Is it fair to say that there is a site practice where the engineers wouldn't actually perform the work, they would provide an advisory role?---Yes, that is correct.
PN981
So would you envisage problems then if the engineer, for example was acting in a relief capacity - - -?---I didn't say they would act in a relief capacity. Let me clarify that.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN982
Well, you better clarify it then?---They would act in a supporting function. So they may be required - and I will reiterate again, Commissioner, I believe that we cater for all foreseeable circumstances through our training and our procedure systems as we ought to do. We are talking here about unforeseen type circumstances where an engineer may be called for advice or may be called to come and help explore a problem and help in making a decision and the engineer will decide whether they will do that from home over the phone or they will come into work to help explore, gathering more date, and they will work with the people who are on the shift at the time to find a solution. And the solution would be enacted - - -
PN983
You have just described a situation in the silent hours, correct, in the night shift?---Yes.
PN984
Okay. It is not clear to me then what the company's position is in terms of the relief person for - when Mr McKenzie is on annual leave?---We haven't concluded that - finalised how we are going to do that yet.
PN985
Can you - would you accept thought that it would be difficult, given an engineer provides an advisory role - - -?---Mm.
PN986
- - - would be difficult for the engineer to be doing that on day shift, to be the dedicated person on day shift when their role is one of advising rather than operational?---I am not - I would not intend that they actually form part of the shift crew and actually do hands on work but they would have at their disposal people who are trained at level - out of hours competence - who they can work with to resolve any unforeseen type problem.
PN987
But do you agree that there would always need to be one dedicated person, at least on day, who was operational and had responsibility, not just advisory - - -?---Yes.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN988
- - - but doing it?---At the out of hours level of competence.
PN989
THE COMMISSIONER: I think the proposal is for instance, if Mr McKenzie went on leave, somebody who has had the 30 hours of instruction would take over his position and - but they would be provided explicitly with a designated engineer?---That is one option. Another option would be to train a like for like, Mr McKenzie, for example. We haven't finalised our thinking in that regard, yet.
PN990
That is an option that is under consideration, is the use of - - -?---Yes.
PN991
- - - partly trained, partly competent employee supported by an engineer as an adviser for the period of leave.
PN992
MS ANGUS: And do you agree with Mr McKenzie's evidence that the training requirements to make someone fully competent in that area amount to 260 hours?---I - as I mentioned before I would rather talk around level of competence, but on my understanding, it was approximately that many hours it took Mr McKenzie to get competent.
PN993
And that is roughly equivalent to, and in some cases, longer than the training undertaken by people in other posts?---I would like to refer back to how the waste water and utility plant was handled in the classification system of high pressure. The Commissioner will remember that it was not defined as a stand alone competence, it was in fact part of the gas area competence. So it was recognised then that the full utilities set of competencies was not equivalent to one step in the classification system. In fact it was combined with the other gas area - - -
PN994
THE COMMISSIONER: So gas would have been one step in the SISS system, would it?---High pressure gas - - -
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN995
In the high pressure SISS system, 1 to 9, the gas area would have been one step of which waste water processing plant formed a part?---That is correct. That is defined on page 103 of EA3.
PN996
MS ANGUS: Mr McKenzie gave evidence about the amount of training hours required - is perhaps the wrong term to use given the changes - but the amount of training hours that have gone into each of the various posts and he - the material that he uses as the basis for that view is the - what he says is the latest training manual that exists. Is there a more recent training manual?---Probably, no, not to my knowledge. We are working on - and I am pretty sure we have actually finished at plastics - developing what is called area profiles - area competence profiles and they are being used for both people progressing first time through training of a particular unit and for routine assessments - competency assessments. And so they are structured differently to an old fashioned training manual in that they are structured such that the, if you like, the objective is described plus reference out to where you actually find the information. So instead of gathering all the information in one place in the training manual this profile actually points you - maybe it is to an operating procedure, a drawing from that central profile, as it is called. So, we don't actually have, you know, the traditional training manual that we might have at one stage.
PN997
Is this new system that you have just described in place yet?---As I said at plastics, my recollection is that it is - we have finished all the area profiles. I know we have started to use them so I am assuming that they are complete.
PN998
You assume that they are complete?---Yes.
PN999
All right. So in the move to this sort of - and we loosely refer to it as a competency system rather than a training - - -?---Yes, please.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1000
- - - notion. Is it correct - if I can just summarise it in lay terms. So that means, for example, someone could come in from the outside and not perform any training and be assessed as competent to pick up some tasks. There is an assessment process involved?---There is an assessment process. Someone from the outside would not be able to pass a competency because the questions are asked in relevance to the equipment that is specific to one of our plants.
PN1001
So they would still require a certain period of training before they could undertake a competency assessment?---They would require a period of training before they had done a competency assessment. The period of training will vary based on their background. Someone coming out of one of our traineeships, for example. Now, they have demonstrated ability to attain competence far quicker than someone perhaps without that background, for example. So, we are finding the time is varying significantly.
PN1002
Okay, varying significantly, but it is still the case though that someone from the inside who is perhaps SISS6, SISS8, would need to perform a certain number of training hours before they then undertook a competency assessment?---They would need to perform some training time, yes.
PN1003
And can we agree that the number of training hours provides some measure of the complexity of a task or a competence?---I think it is very much individual base - I think that people's learning rate is a major factor.
PN1004
Is a major factor. So if, for example, the whole - the earlier system, the earlier training manual that described a certain minimum or nominal number of training hours - - -?---Yes.
PN1005
Some people would be fast, some people would be slower?---Yes.
PN1006
Had no value in indicating the degree of complexity at that post?---I didn't see it that way.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1007
You didn't - there are too many negatives in that sentence. So, how did you see it then?---It was in - I am not clear in my mind how those hours were actually put together other than- I can only assume that someone estimated the number of hours required. And, as I say, we had another agenda associated with showing that the training would take more than a designated period of time.
PN1008
What was that other agenda?
PN1009
THE COMMISSIONER: I would say qualifications?---We were wanting to show that we were - we were wanting to show that we could be accredited to deliver certificate 4 in chemical operations or whatever the - - -
PN1010
An ISO.
PN1011
MS ANGUS: Right, okay. But those normal training hours were widely used and people were aware of them as describing some sort of value to each of the posts?---I am not sure that they were widely understood actually.
PN1012
They were documented?---They were documented, that is so.
PN1013
Right. Does the nominal training hours required of different posts provide some sort of useful comparison between posts of the competency involved in each of them?---As I have already expressed my view today, I don't place a lot of credibility in them because they don't match with my own experience.
PN1014
Yes, you said - your evidence is that you don't feel right about the documented nominal training hours?---That is correct.
PN1015
Attached to each of the plants?---That is correct.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1016
But you have got no basis, no evidence, for why you don't feel right, or what is wrong with it?---My own experience is a valid basis.
PN1017
Well, how do you explain though, that according to those nominal training hours, to get fully competent in two areas in olefins, amounts to roughly the same amount of training hours as someone fully competent in one area in plastics?---I can't because in my own mind the complexity of running two areas in olefins far, far outweighs the complexity of running low pressure.
PN1018
Okay. I have no further questions.
PN1019
THE COMMISSIONER: Just before you do close off. I mean, I did intervene at one stage to indicate an issue which I think is rather central to the matter which, with all due respect, I don't think has been covered in detail in terms of cross-examination of Mr Harvey, and I don't want you to be taken by surprise if it turns up in due course as a significant issue. The current work organisation arrangements - although Mr McKenzie has some doubts about the desirability of them - have Mr McKenzie working as a day relief operator with full 260 hour training and proven competence across the whole of the waste water processing plant.
PN1020
And all other employees in low pressure undergoing 30 hours of training and therefore, presumably, only partial competence in the full range of potential operational requirements for the waste water processing plant. Putting Mr McKenzie's circumstances to one side, and particularly given that he was the person who conducted the Commission around the site and the other parties as well to understand his role and function - what he does - we don't have any evidence as to what the employees other than Mr McKenzie do in the sense that, do they do everything he does. Do they do a part of what he does.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1021
Except Mr Harvey is saying that they do a monitoring role and the more substantial management of the facility is Mr McKenzie's responsibility. And presumably the logic of this is that during the course of the daylight hours Mr McKenzie's oversite and maintenance means that it is probably safe to leave the plant in the hands of these partially trained employees overnight. And it is unlikely that emergency situations, which they cannot respond to by reference to the procedures manual, or by ringing an engineer or having an engineer come in, will need to be dealt with in Mr McKenzie's absence.
PN1022
Therefore we have got a picture here of, if you like, a number of tasks which are performed by the other employees, other than Mr McKenzie. At the moment it is proposed that they be night shift employees which are said to be of somewhat less onerous responsibility and requirement to those which Mr McKenzie performs. What we do no have is a scope of those tasks in detail and what those employees would do. And in particular Mr Harvey hasn't been pressed on, well, why do you say that they are limited.
PN1023
Monitoring activities, etcetera, one test, taken on the basis of two samples. And the reason why I think this is important is because, as I understand it, it is suggested that by virtue of the discharge of these responsibilities and competencies up to the level of 30 hours training, these employees should be reclassified as SISS10. It doesn't follow that what Mr McKenzie does automatically knocks on to them. So that what I am looking at - and I have got a picture of Mr McKenzie's role and function and therefore his claim, if you like, to be classified SISS10.
PN1024
What I have is a very limited picture of everybody else's role and function in relation to waste water processing plant. And it seems to me that whilst this is an application to vary an award, and in some respects one has to, sort of, approach the matter with some flexibility, nevertheless the long standing notion that underpins work value enquiry type considerations that there needs to be a significant net addition to skills, exercise responsibility, etcetera, is necessary in order to justify some additional remuneration either by way of an increase in the employees' wage or salary or a reclassification or an allowance.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1025
Then I would need to be persuaded, I would have though, that not only Mr McKenzie could be said to have a significant net addition to his work value as a SISS9 operator fully trained at 260 hours and proven competence across the whole WPP - W-W-P-P plant, but also the other employees. And I am finding it difficult to grasp on the way in which this matter has been presented to me. What the level of additional work value is for those employees. Now, what I propose to do is to adjourn and allow you to reflect upon that overnight without releasing Mr Harvey. Obviously, there will probably be some re-examination, I take it, Mr Dalton, in any event.
PN1026
MR DALTON: No, there will not be at this stage, Commissioner.
PN1027
THE COMMISSIONER: There will not be, right. Well, if there is not going to be then it might be appropriate for us to consider now whether or not you want to pursue that because we may be able to finish today; if you do or you don't. I just want to put you on notice that that is on my mind.
PN1028
MS ANGUS: Yes, well, my preference is to take - - -
PN1029
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.
PN1030
MS ANGUS: - - - the first of the options that you provided and reconvene tomorrow morning and we can, I imagine, then on the basis of that being - - -
PN1031
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, no, no, I thought I made it clear that I was anticipating some re-examination, in any event.
PN1032
MS ANGUS: Yes.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1033
THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Dalton said to me that at this stage there will not be any. I am just wondering whether or not - maybe you might not like to consider it now. I mean, Mr McKenzie is here now. Presumably, he has some idea of what the employees do during the night. I don't know; he might not. But it just seems to me that you might find it dearth of reference in the evidence to the role and function of the employees during the night or what these partially trained employees would actually do and what their level of additional responsibility and skill would be.
PN1034
Could I just make another observation to you. In the principles - the long standing principles that govern the determination of work value, it has been recognised that a job can involved additional work without involving additional work value. And I don't think there is any dispute that this particular plant presents an additional part of the parameter of the low pressure plastics plant and that tasks will be performed there that have not been performed by operators in low pressure in the past. However, these employees are all trained up to a level of skill and responsibility, to some degree a generic kind, in these types of operations.
PN1035
They are generally familiar with the concept that a plant operates according to a set of tolerances. They are generally familiar with the concept that all of those tolerances have relationships with one another and that one has to be aware of those relationships. They are generally trained up to understand that the whole is often bigger than the sum of its parts. But that, in each case, there are discrete functions which each part of the plant performs and that there is a process, if you like. And it has to be monitored, not only discreetly, but also from the beginning to the end.
PN1036
And they are also familiar with instrumentation and they are also familiar with the idea of parameters and norms, alarms, those sorts of things. When I was taken around the plant it seemed to me that a lot of those fundamental and generic competencies were called upon to be exercised in relation to the waste water processing plant but in a different context. And that different context involved an understanding of some - of differences between what was going on in the low pressure plastics plant - when I looked at it - and what was going on in the waste water processing plant.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1037
What is not clear to me is where the significant net addition of skill and responsibility actually lies in any detailed sense for persons other than Mr McKenzie. What proportion of his level of skill, responsibility and competence on the waste water processing plant is exercised by employees trained to 30 hours and how significant is that in the context of their already existing skills and competencies insofar as it represents a significant net addition to the value of their work. That is an issue that I find it difficult to actually refer to in the evidence so far too.
PN1038
So perhaps, given that I have proposed that additional dimension now as well, I will give you the opportunity overnight to give some consideration as to whether you want to cross-examine Mr Harvey further on that because - - -
PN1039
MS ANGUS: Would it be convenient, as an alternative, to stand the matter down temporarily, for say, 15 minutes.
PN1040
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.
PN1041
MS ANGUS: It could be that we could finish with the whole matter today.
PN1042
THE COMMISSIONER: All right, very well.
PN1043
MS ANGUS: And if not, I will let you know after that adjournment.
SHORT ADJOURNMENT [4.24pm]
RESUMED [4.44pm]
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1044
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Ms Angus.
PN1045
MS ANGUS: Commissioner, I have a number of questions to ask Mr Harvey. Can I just indicate that it may be in fact that Mr Harvey is not the expert to address the questions I am about to ask and that if that is the case that it might be that we would be looking to file a further statement that goes to the issues you have identified. Obviously, Mr Dalton would then be in a position, if necessary, to call the witness and cross. That is entirely at his discretion. But if it was - I would imagine - - -
PN1046
THE COMMISSIONER: That is effectively a re-opening though, is it not, because, you know, we have got to a point now where I think you - you know, without me, sort of, thinking there is some exceptional circumstances, you put the evidence you wanted to call. And there is some evidence about what the full range of the duties would be and you have got a witness here who said that, well, there is a limit to what people do. He was examined in-chief on that. I think you should really take what I was putting to you, as saying, look, I think you have got to cross-examine this witness on those subjects or you run a serious risk that the proposition will be put against you.
PN1047
Well, Mr Harvey, testified to what the employees other than Mr McKenzie do and he said that what they do is not a significant addition to the value of their work and that was never contested. It was never cross-examined.
PN1048
MS ANGUS: So, now allow me to ask a few questions to contest that.
PN1049
THE COMMISSIONER: I think - it wasn't an invitation to say, well, look, I think you better re-open your case, it was before you finished cross-examining.
PN1050
MS ANGUS: Right.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1051
THE COMMISSIONER: You better be aware of this because it is on my mind.
PN1052
MS ANGUS: Mr Harvey, can you explain to us what the need for cool water is in the plastics plant?---I guess we have got a cooling water system that provides cooling through the entire plant. Fundamentally, that is a number of reasons for that one, one is a safety related issue to ensure we are operating within metallurgical specs, for example, and also for, you know, manufacturing quality emissions. We need to get - - -
PN1053
THE COMMISSIONER: Temperature control?---Temperature control, correct.
PN1054
MS ANGUS: And what would happen if there was a problem with the cooling - with the cool water. What would be the flow-on consequences for those - - -
PN1055
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, there could be lots of problems. One of the problems could be that the water might be out of spec for reasons than other to do with its ability to assist the operation of the plant.
PN1056
MS ANGUS: Yes, that might be so - - -
PN1057
THE COMMISSIONER: For external and environmental reasons, so what sort of problem are we talking about here?
PN1058
MS ANGUS: Let me ask a more specific question.
PN1059
THE COMMISSIONER: A loss of supply of cool water?
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1060
MS ANGUS: Yes. What would happen in circumstances where there was a loss of supply of cool water?---The question is asking me to regurgitate our utilities failure procedure for loss of cooling water. I can't do that. However, I am confident that the operators who would need to enact that procedure and the shift team leaders who would need to lead it could do so.
PN1061
THE COMMISSIONER: Is there an alternative - - -
PN1062
MS ANGUS: Mr Harvey, I haven't been clear in my question then. I wasn't asking what would happen procedurally - - -?---Right.
PN1063
- - - following on from the loss of water. I am asking you in terms of the effect on overall production at the site. What would be the consequent effect in the plant?---Yes. I can't describe, for example, the effect on the reactor effluent and, you know, how many safety valves we would blow in the plant, for example.
PN1064
THE COMMISSIONER: What would you do to maintain temperature control?---We have got a series of control valves in our cooling water circuit which regulate the flow to the various parts of the plant. And the actual - in terms of the supply cooling water temperature, it is a case of either switching on or off available fans, cooling water fans. There is fans on the top of the towers and you can actually turn one of them off and not run the lot of them.
PN1065
MS ANGUS: Well, let me give you a scenario. In the case of, say, an emergency where water was required to be diverted to, for example, for fire purposes, water would automatically be diverted away from the plant into the electronic fire pumps in that instance?---Yes, that would be typical of the design for our sort of plant, yes.
PN1066
And in that situation an alarm would go off on the panel?---Yes.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1067
And how long - do you know the answer to this question - how long would it take before - in the absence of cool water, before the consequences were dire, before an emergency actually in terms of, say, the reactors?---I am not - I don't know the answer to that question but I would imagine that it is no more than minutes. However, I am not clear on the background of the question because if you have a utility failure like that, you are into a special circumstance of - which is a - you know, you take your plant to its fail-safe position.
[4.50pm]
PN1068
MS ANGUS: Is a failure in - a utility failure, would you say is it on par with failures in other posts in terms of the implications for the rest of the plant?---In the hierarchy of events, I would place something like a major vapour release or major fire as probably higher up in the hierarchy. Fortunately at the plastic site the extent of those sorts of events is fairly small because of the inventory of hydrocarbon within the whole process is not that large and mostly it is vapour. So in the plastic site I would think I would still regard those as more significant events.
PN1069
All right. Well, in the scheme of emergency situations you have identified vapour as being a nightmare, if there was a problem with vapour being released?---I didn't say it was a nightmare or - it is obviously an undesirable event.
PN1070
All right?---We have procedures to handle that situation and I am confident our operators can respond according to those procedures.
PN1071
In that situation, in a situation of vapour, would someone be responsible for dealing with and responding to that emergency situation?---Of course.
PN1072
And would it be fair to say that in that situation that you have described, that that person would be - have undergone the proper competency assessments?---Absolutely.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1073
And that those responsibilities attached to that emergency response form part of their competencies and their skills?---Absolutely.
PN1074
They form part of the post?---Yes.
PN1075
All right. So is it then fair to say that someone responsible for responding to an emergency situation in the absence of cooling water, if the cooling water - cool water breaks down would have at least the same or like responsibilities?---As what? The same as what?
PN1076
As the last example that you gave for - in the case of an emergency with a vapour release?---Yes. I haven't explained myself clearly obviously. In an emergency - in a cooling water failure, the effort is applied in the plant. Because you are unlikely to have time to work in the utility area before you have got a huge plant problem. So the effort is - I am sure of this - is to actually take the plant to its fail safe position, then go and worry about what is going on in the utilities area.
PN1077
THE COMMISSIONER: So that would accrue as a panel operator responsibility in the first instance?---Primarily, that is right.
PN1078
MS ANGUS: Would a panel operator be the person who responds to the alarm that they see on the panel?---Yes, the panel operator is now equipped with automatic plant shutdown facilities from the control room. He can shut down and depressure the plant from the control room.
PN1079
Well, they could do that in the instance of, say, a failure in the reactor from the panel; correct?---Yes.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1080
But it is the case, is it not, that for a failure in the water cooling facility that someone would actually have to go to the site and address the problem?---To - it may require going to the site to recommence cooling water flow but, as I have said, that may - it is likely to be a secondary response. Your first response is the security and the safety of the plant. You take the plant to its cooling water failure position.
PN1081
In the instance of an emergency, would a person responsible for waste water utilities have time to read a manual?---No.
PN1082
And - - -
PN1083
THE COMMISSIONER: That assumes for purposes of this matter that the emergency could evolve in the time between the last patrol - between patrols to the level to create a loss of cooling water, otherwise this is all fairly questionable, isn't it?---Yes, I am not clear where this is going because, you know, we have got a number of cooling water - - -
PN1084
Is it possible that a loss of - - -?--- - - - pumps, for example.
PN1085
Well, could you outline to us what the level of failure is which is possible between the patrol duties of persons other than Mr McKenzie; what level of failure is possible - - -?---Yes.
PN1086
- - - within those intervals?---Yes. With respect to the waste water plant, I am informed, Commissioner, that effectively you can walk away from the plant and that if any of - if the levels exceed their normal parameters and they are not addressed, then the plant automatically goes on to divert from the inlet to the plant, and the inlet water actually accumulates in what is called a fire retention dam. And there is a couple of shifts worth of retention time so, in fact, you can not pay the plant attention for that period of time.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1087
All right. So you are saying that there is a buffer - - -?---Yes.
PN1088
- - - between failure and crisis?---Yes, yes. With respect to the air supply system, we have two compressors. One starts automatically if the - if for unforeseen reasons the first one stops. The air supply driers are also automatic function - switch automatically so - - -
PN1089
MS ANGUS: Well, that is your evidence in relation to the air compressors. But the evidence that you have just supplied in relation to, say, the loss of cool water is that it could move to an emergency situation in a matter of minutes?---If, for example, we had someone run a crane through the cooling water supply pipe, for example, yes, we would have an emergency in a couple of minutes.
PN1090
Well, you say that with a smile on your face. Are you suggesting that there are not important considerations that - you know, that there are not risks attached to and responsibilities attached to making sure that there is always cool water operating in the plant?---Yes, and we have monitoring techniques in place to - so that we can monitor the state of the cooling water system.
PN1091
Now, all the evidence you have brought has focused on the amount of time that are occupied in those monitoring duties?---I have set out some tasks that are required during that monitoring.
PN1092
Can I just get you to focus though not on the time component - - -?---Yes.
PN1093
- - - but on the responsibilities associated with maintaining cool water primarily?---Yes.
PN1094
Maintaining a constant water supply?---Yes.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1095
Is it fair to say that the consequences of a loss of water, of not maintaining that water supply - well, what are the consequences of not properly maintaining a cooling water tower?---Maintaining the supply of the cooling water - - -
PN1096
Correct?--- - - - or maintaining the tower?
PN1097
The supply of?---The supply of the cooling water. If you don't maintain the cooling water flow, you cannot run your plant.
PN1098
All right.
PN1099
THE COMMISSIONER: Really does that take us very far though? I mean, it is a very general proposition that without a critical component of the plant's operation, it can't function. That is fairly elementary. That would apply throughout the plant. There are a whole lot of critical factors to the plant's operation.
PN1100
MS ANGUS: Well, it would - - -
PN1101
THE COMMISSIONER: Isn't it more relevant and pertinent to this matter as to what these people do in order to sustain the supply of the cool water and what the level of skill and responsibility involved in doing so is?
PN1102
MS ANGUS: Well, I would have thought that line of questioning establishes the degree of responsibility. If there is a person who is - - -
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1103
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, I know. But somebody driving a truck, whether it be a three tonne truck or a six tonne truck, could negligently drive through a school crossing at 3.15 in the afternoon and kill a lot of school children. That is the - you know, that is a tragic consequence of the lack of responsible exercise of being a driver of a truck. It doesn't add significant weight to the value of the work, but it is just an act of negligence. What is at stake here is that these are reasonably well trained people who have a job of monitoring this particular plant and it is the skill and responsibility they exercise in performing those tasks, as one would reasonably expect them to do, that we have to measure, is it not?
PN1104
MS ANGUS: Well, with respect, Commissioner - can I put this as a question. Is it the case, Mr Harvey, that it would only be through an act of negligence that there could be some breakdown in, in the case of say the cooling - the supply of water?---Not necessarily so.
PN1105
No. There are a number of reasons - - -?---We - - -
PN1106
- - - an infinite number of reasons why there might be - - -?---We may have a pump problem, for example, and need to start one of the spare pumps.
PN1107
And is what is unique to the utilities waste water area is that someone actually physically has to - unlike say the panel control person, someone actually physically has to go and address the problem?---I am not familiar enough as to whether that function, for example, I have just used is done from the control room or from the field. Many of the functions are done from the control room as I understand it.
PN1108
Well, can I put to you that when an alarm goes off on the panel, that it is linked to the utilities waste water area?---Yes.
PN1109
It is the only area that someone actually physically has to go out and - it can't be addressed from the panel?---I understand that not all the functions can be addressed from the panel.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1110
Right, okay. And is it fair to say that the person who does respond to an emergency situation would need to be properly assessed in terms of their competency to do so?---Yes.
PN1111
And that there is inherent in those emergency response capacities a greater responsibility, or a particular responsibility because of their ability to deal with an emergency situation?---Well, it is part of their role, it is part of their function to respond to abnormal situations.
PN1112
All right. Can I ask you then finally, how important is it to Qenos to maintain the waste water treatment plant in the utilities according to licence requirements?---Very important.
PN1113
Essential, would you say?---The only priority that is higher than that is safety.
PN1114
And is it fair to - the only priority that is higher than that is safety?---Yes.
PN1115
Okay. Is it fair to say that, given it is essential, given it is second only to overall plant safety, that the positions, the people who do that on a dedicated basis and the people who do that on an ongoing maintenance basis are, therefore, crucial to ensuring that Qenos falls within those licensing requirements?---Which is why we have people trained in out of hours response, I mean out of hours monitoring role in those parts of the plant. We don't leave them without anyone who can respond.
PN1116
Okay. No further questions.
PN1117
THE COMMISSIONER: Very well. Do you want to re-examine, Mr Dalton?
PN1118
MR DALTON: Nothing arising.
**** CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY XXN MS ANGUS
PN1119
PN1120
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Well, perhaps you might like to confer with one another and let me know what your timetable for the written submissions will be. Very well, thank you. I will reserve my decision.
ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [5.03pm]
INDEX
LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs |
DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE, AFFIRMED PN190
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS ANGUS PN190
EXHIBIT #AWU1 STATEMENT OF DAVID RAYMOND McKENZIE PN204
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DALTON PN311
RE-EXAMINATION BY MS ANGUS PN419
WITNESS WITHDREW PN434
CHRISTOPHER JOHN HARVEY, AFFIRMED PN436
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR DALTON PN436
EXHIBIT #QENOS1 WITNESS STATEMENT AND ATTACHMENTS OF MR C.J. HARVEY PN444
EXHIBIT #QENOS2 DOCUMENT: SUMMARY FORM OF AGREEMENT DISTRIBUTED TO WORKFORCE PN454
EXHIBIT #QENOS3 GENERIC JOB DESCRIPTION OF E7 TIE POINT PN473
EXHIBIT #QENOS4 FACSIMILE LETTER OF 10/10/02 FROM AWU TO COMMISSION PN584
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS ANGUS PN634
WITNESS WITHDREW PN1120
AustLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/AIRCTrans/2002/276.html