C2002/4802, Transcript of Proceedings [2002] AIRCTrans 4021 (9 October 2002)

AUSCRIPT PTY LTD
ABN 76 082 664 220

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

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS


AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

COMMISSIONER FOGGO

C2002/4802

HOLDEN LTD

and

AUTOMOTIVE, FOOD, METALS,
ENGINEERING, PRINTING AND
KINDRED INDUSTRIES UNION and
OTHERS

Notification pursuant to section 99
of the Act of a dispute re alleged
refusal of entry to the shop floor
of AMWU official by Holden Human
Resources

MELBOURNE

9.06 AM, WEDNESDAY, 25 SEPTEMBER 2002

THIS HEARING WAS CONDUCTED BY VIDEO CONFERENCE
AND RECORDED IN MELBOURNE

PN1

MR A. ROELINK: I appear on behalf of Holden. Accompanying me today is MR G. CHRISTENSEN, HR director for Manufacturing Operations for Holden.

PN2

MR B. JOHNSTON: I appear on behalf of the CEPU, Electrical Division.

PN3

MS R. MARSH: I appear on behalf of the Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists, Managers Australia.

PN4

MS S. SCHLESINGER: I appear for the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union.

PN5

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Mr Roelink.

PN6

MR ROELINK: Thank you, Commissioner. Firstly in opening I would like to thank the Commission for bringing this hearing on at such short notice, and apologise for the inconvenience it has caused the Commission. However, Holden feels that it has exhausted all possible avenues to resolve this issue. In opening my submission I would like to draw the Commissioner's attention to clause 6.1 of the 2001 Holden Enterprise Agreement which is our issue resolution procedure. It is on page 29.

PN7

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you.

PN8

MR ROELINK: This clause reads:

PN9

Acceptance for special procedures as outlined in clause 5.5, implementation of change ...(reads)... Industrial Relations Commission for conciliation and/or arbitration.

PN10

That is why I have found myself here today. The issue that has led to our current difference of opinion occurred - appears to have occurred on Friday, 20 September. On Friday, 20 September 2002 the Holden Elizabeth Peak Enterprise Agreement Committee meeting was scheduled to commence at 8.30 am. The Peak Enterprise Agreement Committee is the peak company/union consultative committee for South Australian operations. It was formed as an outcome of the 2001 enterprise agreement, clause 5.5. This clause discusses the operation of a State consultative committee. And that is mentioned on page 26 of the agreement.

PN11

After a range of meetings and discussions earlier in the year, mutual agreement decided that in South Australia the State consultative committee would be given a nomenclature of the Peak EA Committee. Prior to this scheduled meeting occurring on Friday last, the FVIU held a caucus. The meeting was opened at approximately 9 am by Mr John Camillo as chairperson. On opening the meeting, Mr Camillo stated that the caucus had discussed Mr David Smith, assistant federal secretary of the AMWU Vehicle Division and the treatment he had endured at the hands of Holden.

PN12

Mr Camillo stated that Mr Smith had been denied access to the Holden site on Thursday, 19 September, and that Mr Smith could walk into any car manufacturers or supplies plant but Holden. As a result of this treatment, Mr Camillo stated that the FVIU would implement the following forthwith: not attend any future meetings with relation to the implementation of working parties arising out of our 2001 enterprise agreement; be asking Ian Jones to speak to Peter Hannenberger, the managing director of Holden Australia, regarding this issues; and not attend any further meetings with the company of any kind including existing committees such as our Trade Training Steering Committee, our Non-Trade Steering Committee and our Site Occupation Health and Safety Committee.

PN13

At this meeting, Mr Frank Wolfed, the Director of Manufacturing Operations for Elizabeth, explained his disappointment at this and asked if there could be an immediate meeting to discuss the issues to try and find a resolution. Mr Smith then spoke and stated that no meetings would occur, that Holden had been dishonest since the enterprise bargaining agreement, and any further discussions would be opposed. The meeting was therefore abandoned at approximately 9.15 am.

PN14

To provide a fuller understanding of this particular issue I feel it would assist the Commissioner if I summarised the events leading up to 20 September. On Monday, 16 September, a meeting was held at 1 pm to discuss two issues with regard to the finalisation of the closure of plant 1 press and weld. This has been an ongoing process for some months now and it is approaching finalisation. At the meeting were Wendy Grey, the Holden HR Business Partner for Manufacturing Operations, who was responsible for the press and weld closure; myself; Terry Miller, who is a senior shop steward for the Vehicle Division for press and weld; Paul Brown, the deputy senior steward Vehicle Division for press and weld; and John Gee, the AMWU Vehicle Division organiser for the Elizabeth site.

PN15

At the conclusion of this meeting, Mr Gee apprised that Mr David Smith, federal assistant secretary of the Vehicle Division, would be visiting the Elizabeth site on Thursday, 19 and Friday, 20 September. He stated the Thursday would comprise of meetings with all vehicle division shop stewards regarding the A2F3 clause in the enterprise agreement.

PN16

THE COMMISSIONER: I am sorry, which clause?

PN17

MR ROELINK: A2F3. It is under skills of competencies, Commissioner. The Friday would consist of a presentation to the non-trade steering committee regarding A2F3 clause. After discussions with Mr Gee regarding these meetings, it was agreed that the following would occur. On Thursday, Mr Smith would have a one hour meeting with the vehicle division senior stewards to discuss A2F3 and on Friday, Mr Smith would attend the non-trade steering committee as a guest.

PN18

Further, it was also agreed that any communication or contact with Berkeley Challenge employees who do our contract cleaning on Holden's site would only occur after notification to Berkeley Challenge management. Mr Gee agreed to this and undertook to supply Holden with a written agenda for the meetings and confirmation of this agreement. On Tuesday, 17 September, no contact or confirmation was received from Mr Gee. On Wednesday, 18 September, at mid-morning, as no confirmation - notification of any kind had been received from Mr Gee, I faxed him my understanding of the agreed position.

PN19

If I could draw the Commissioner's attention to a fax dated 18th of the 9th, addressed to Mr John Gee.

PN20

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, I have got a copy of that. Do the other parties have a copy?

PN21

MR ROELINK: Yes, they do in South Australia, Commissioner. Unfortunately I didn't know there was going to be any representation in Victoria.

PN22

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, we will make Ms Schlesinger a copy available.

EXHIBIT #H1 FAX DATED 18 SEPTEMBER
ADDRESSED TO MR JOHN GEE

PN23

MR ROELINK: Mr Gee phoned me shortly after he had received this fax and asked if I could reconsider the first point regarding the meeting to include all shop stewards as he had already informed a number of shop stewards of the meeting and their involvement. I explained to him, as we had discussed on Monday, that the - that it would seem inappropriate for a meeting of all shop stewards to occur regarding A2F3 as this had not yet been tabled with the non trade steering committee and the working parties had yet to be formed and have their first meeting.

PN24

After further discussion, Mr Gee agreed to the original agenda as per the fax. On Thursday, 19 September, Mr Gee phone me early in the morning, at approximately 8.30 am, and stated that the time he had arranged for the meeting with Mr Smith and the senior stewards was at the same time as his, Mr Gee's, regular meeting with plant floor shop stewards. Mr Gee stated that as he could not be in two places at once he had informed the shop stewards to attend the meeting with Mr Smith and the senior stewards.

PN25

I explained, again, that a mutual understanding and agreement had been reached and I expected Mr Gee to abide by it. I explained that his actions over the past few days had caused me concern about his genuineness regarding a positive working relationship and ability to abide by agreements. Mr Gee informed me that he had spoken to Mr Tom Taylor, the State Secretary of the AMWU Vehicle Division, and asked if I could call Mr Taylor and speak to him. I agreed to do this.

PN26

I then called Mr Taylor and he asked me to explain my perspective. I explained the background regarding the meeting we had on Monday. The lack of communication on Tuesday. The fax on Wednesday and the subsequent discussions with Mr Gee. I explained that Mr Gee's actions over the past few days had caused me concern and that I felt Mr Gee was not genuine in his endeavours to abide by the agreement that we had made. Mr Taylor stated that he was of the opinion that there may be issues with communication and he was willing to join a meeting with Mr Gee and myself and try and resolve the issue.

PN27

I agreed that this would be a good idea and we agreed to conduct the meeting early the following week which is this week. Mr Taylor asked me, in a rhetorical fashion, if I were to allow the stewards to join the meeting and stated that he understood when I declined. I then called Mr Gee and informed him that I had spoken to Mr Taylor and that the position was unchanged and Mr Gee accepted this and thanked me for calling him back promptly.

PN28

I would like now to move to the meeting that I had with Mr Smith on the Thursday. Mr Smith attended the meeting with the senior stewards as per the agenda that had been issued and agreed. At approximately 2 to 2.30 on leaving my office to go to a printer, I noticed Mr Cliff Hird, who is the senior shop steward for the Vehicle Division on afternoon shift, approaching me. Mr Hird stated that Mr Smith would be staying on plant to speak to the afternoon shift shop stewards. As this would be later in the shift, Mr Hird asked if it would be all right for Mr Smith to go on a plant tour.

PN29

I would like to pause here now to place this request in context for the Commissioner. Holden has recently commenced production of a new model, the VY, and as with any new model, this is a time of high intensity for the plant. Holden has placed an embargo on outside visitors to the plant at present and the plant was at the time at a standstill due to production problem solving. Also, as this was outside of the agreed agenda, I stated that I wished to speak to John Gee, Mr John Gee, regarding this new development.

PN30

I was informed that Mr Gee had left the site. I then stated that I would like to talk to Mr Smith regarding this. I went up to the room where Mr Smith was meeting. Knocked on the door and entered. I apologised for interrupting and asked if I could speak to him in my office after his meeting. Mr Smith came down shortly thereafter and joined me in my office and Mr Hird waited outside with the door closed. I explained the following to Mr Smith : the agreed position between Mr Gee, Mr Taylor and myself regarding his visit.

PN31

Further, I explained that the non trade steering committee had resolved at a previous meeting that the process for A2F3 would be the following: Mr Smith would talk to the non trade steering committee regarding A2F3, the working party would be formed and discuss A2F3, communications would occur out of the working party. It was on this basis that I stated that it would be inappropriate for Mr Smith to address the shop stewards on afternoon shift of that day.

PN32

With regard to the site tour, Mr Smith stated that he had identified some positions out of the Australian Automotive Training Authorities Report on the scope and focus of additional A2F3 qualifications for production workers. A copy of the report was held by Mr Smith which may qualify for an N33 pay level grading at Holden Elizabeth. Mr Smith therefore stated that he wished to inspect these jobs. My reply to this was that I had received no request for a plant tour at any time and this was new to me.

PN33

As Mr Smith would be entering production plants I would need to contact the Plant Managers to advise them who would be walking through their plants. I stated that if I did not do this and Plant Managers saw Mr Hird accompanying someone who was obviously an unknown union official and this would be identified by his distinctive union top they would approach Mr Hird possibly causing him embarrassment. They would also ask what was going on.

PN34

I then stated to Mr Smith that once these managers because aware that I had authorised the plant tour without receiving permission or the courtesy of advising them of what was happening the managers would, and I quote:

PN35

Bite my head off and shit down my neck.

PN36

And I apologise for the language. I then stated that a plant tour could be arranged but that it would take some time. At this point Mr Smith became quite agitated and stated that he:

PN37

... could walk into any vehicle manufacturers' site in Australia and be given access, but not Holden. Holden was always restricting him and being disruptive.

PN38

He stated that he was tired of Holden's obstructive approach regarding access to union officials and if it was too much trouble to give him a plant tour he would leave. Mr Smith then got up and left my office without further discussion. If we could now return to Friday, 20 September, after the meeting had been abandoned and the union had put their position forward. At approximately 11 am Mr Greg Christensen called Mr Camillo, the Secretary of the FVIU, and Mr Taylor, the State Secretary of the Vehicle Division, and left urgent messages on their voicemail requesting they call him.

PN39

Mr Camillo returned Mr Christensen's call at approximately 12.30. In the ensuing conversation of approximately one hour, Mr Christensen refuted the alleged denial of access. He further invited Mr Camillo to meet to discuss the issues to try and find a resolution and this was refused. Mr Camillo was requested to clarify the FVIU position and this was refused and Mr Camillo was urged to consider earlier stated commitments to Mr Christensen regarding their working relationship.

PN40

At mid afternoon, Mr Christensen, again called Mr Taylor and left an urgent voicemail. In the afternoon, Holden sent two communications to the FVIU through the Secretary, Mr John Camillo, and President, Mr Bob Johnston. The first of these, I would like to draw the Commissioner's attention to, is a letter dated 20 September, which is signed by Mr Greg Christensen, addressed to Bob Johnston and John Camillo.

EXHIBIT #H2 LETTER DATED 20 SEPTEMBER ADDRESSED TO BOB JOHNSTON AND JOHN CAMILLO FROM GREG CHRISTENSEN

PN41

MR ROELINK: This letter requests a meeting on Monday 23 September at 11 am at a choice of venue to discuss the implementation of the enterprise agreement and associated committees and seek clarification of the actions taken by the FVIU. The second exhibit which I would like to draw the Commissioner's attention to, is a letter addressed to Mr John Camillo and Mr Bob Johnston in their capacity in the FVIU.

PN42

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, just a moment, Mr Roelink. With the letter of 20 September that you have referred to and I said I would mark as exhibit H2.

PN43

MR ROELINK: Yes.

PN44

THE COMMISSIONER: Who was that addressed to?

PN45

MR ROELINK: That was addressed to Bob Johnston, Secretary FVIU, and John Camillo.

PN46

THE COMMISSIONER: No, President.

PN47

MR ROELINK: President, sorry. Yes. Now at the bottom of that letter it says Greg Christensen, HR Direct Operations. That was the first.

PN48

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, yes, I have it.

PN49

MR ROELINK: The second letter is signed by myself. I am sorry about the jumbled order I sent them.

PN50

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN51

MR ROELINK: And this letter, signed by myself, requests written confirmation of the outcome of the FVIU position which was put to the ..... Committee on the morning of Friday, 20 September. This would have allowed the company to work towards resolving the issues with the union.

EXHIBIT #H3 LETTER FROM MR ROELINK TO BOB JOHNSTON AND JOHN CAMILLO REQUESTING WRITTEN CONFIRMATION OF THE OUTCOME OF THE FVIU POSITION

PN52

MR ROELINK: If we now go to Monday, 23 September. The AMWU Vehicle Division distributed a bulletin on the shop floor which I have sent you a copy of. It says Vehicle Division News, to all members at Holden, and it is signed Tom Taylor, Regional Secretary.

EXHIBIT #H4 VEHICLE DIVISION NEWS BULLETIN TO ALL MEMBERS AT HOLDEN, SIGNED BY TOM TAYLOR

PN53

MR ROELINK: This release states that Holden refused Mr Smith entry to the Holden site and Holden refutes this allegation. On Monday, 23 September, Mr Christensen phoned both Mr Camillo and Mr Taylor again and left voicemails expressing disappointment at the release of the bulletin and stating that he had felt that the - that there had been a betrayal of the relationship between them. Mr Taylor returned the call soon after and a discussion ensued regarding the bulletin and the betrayal of the relationship.

PN54

Further requests to meet with Holden to resolve the issue were refused. Mr Christensen stated:

PN55

How can we fix the problem when you refuse to talk. We need to meet.

PN56

Further phonecalls were made during the day to Mr Camillo's voicemail but no reply was received. As no response had been received to the Holden request for a meeting on Monday at 11 am and I refer to exhibit H2 for that, a further request was sent to all FVIU officials in the form of an e-mail which you have been sent a copy of and the e-mail is dated 23.9.2002 with a time of 12.05.

EXHIBIT #H5 E-MAIL ADDRESSED TO ALL FVIU OFFICIALS DATED 23/09/2002

PN57

MR ROELINK: This latest note stated that as there had been no response to a request for the meeting at 11 am, Holden requested a meeting for - be set for 1 pm on Wednesday, 25 September, at a mutually agreeable venue to commence discussions aimed at clarifying and resolving this issue. At this point in time we had still received no clarification as to what the issues were which had caused the affront to the union. Shortly after sending this e-mail I received notification that the FVIU had called a stop work meeting for all FVIU shop stewards for 2.30 pm on Wednesday, 25 September.

PN58

I faxed Mr Camillo, the FVIU Secretary and all FVIU organisers requesting confirmation from Mr Camillo, as Secretary of the FVIU, that this meeting would not occur and that the organisers would meet to resolve the issues affecting the implementation of the enterprise agreement. A copy of this facsimile has been sent to you, dated 23.9.02 addressed to John Camillo.

EXHIBIT #H6 FAX FROM MR ROELINK DATED 23/09/2002 ADDRESSED TO JOHN CAMILLO

PN59

MR ROELINK: I have also sent you, Commissioner, a copy of the facsimile communications report bears delivery of the fax to the addressee's fax machine and the associated times.

EXHIBIT #H7 FACSIMILE COMMUNICATIONS REPORT

PN60

MR ROELINK: I then also e-mailed a copy by fax to all addressee's at approximately 3 pm. A copy of the e-mail has been brought to you, Commissioner. The subject of the e-mail is fax, it was e-mailed at 1511 hours, and actually says that:

PN61

I have attached to the fax that was sent at approximately 3 pm in case the fax is not received for this place.

PN62

THE COMMISSIONER: And is the attachment the letter from Mr Christensen?

PN63

MR ROELINK: No, the attachment is actually exhibit H6, Commissioner.

PN64

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

EXHIBIT #H8 FAX SHEET WITH MESSAGE

PN65

MR ROELINK: Late in the afternoon, Monday, 23 September, an FVIU news bulletin, which I sent a copy to the Commission - well, was released to the shop floor:

PN66

This bulletin calls for a stopwork meeting by all FVIU shop stewards at 2.30 pm on Wednesday, 25 September. This bulletin also alleges that Mr Smith was refused access to the shop floor. Holden refused to ..... Mr Smith was informed ...(reads)... .....

EXHIBIT #H9 FVIU NOTICE

PN67

MR ROELINK: I now move to Tuesday, 24 September, Commissioner. On Tuesday Holden sent an urgent communication via fax to Mr Camillo the secretary of the FVIU and to the organisers clarifying the issue regarding site access for Mr Smith.

[9.33am]

PN68

This communication was also e-mailed to the addressees in an attempt to ensure receipt. We have also provided a copy of this letter to our senior stewards, as they are a part of the addressee list. Holden has received no response to any effort to set up a meeting and no response to any of the communication it has sent to the union at this point in time.

EXHIBIT #H10 LETTER TO JOHN CAMILLO DATED 24/09/2002

PN69

MR ROELINK: In closing, Commissioner, I thank you for your forbearance with me. There have been a number of key meetings that have - union company consultative meeting which are regularly held and scheduled which have had to be abandoned since Friday morning as there has been a lack of attendance by union representatives to those meetings. If it pleases the Commission.

PN70

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you. Well I think in the first case it would be sensible to hear from the AMWU and then perhaps if there is anything else to be added by Mr Johnston, who may have something as the President of the FVIU, and also by Ms Marsh. Ms Schlesinger.

PN71

MS SCHLESINGER: Commissioner, our submission is simple. There is no industrial action occurring, we say there is no industrial disputation, there is nothing before the Commission for the Commission to deal with. If the Commission pleases.

PN72

THE COMMISSIONER: Are the representatives attending meetings which have been scheduled?

PN73

MS SCHLESINGER: I would need to seek instructions on that, Commissioner.

PN74

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Perhaps if we could just go through and clarify - it obviously was such a short submission, it is very difficult to understand some of the issues that have been raised by Mr Roelink. Perhaps if we go first to the last - the content of the last exhibit, which was exhibit H10, I think there are several issues in there. What does the union say then to the submission by Mr Roelink that there have been a number of meetings pursuant to the implementation of the enterprise agreement to which representatives should have been attended but they did not?

PN75

MS SCHLESINGER: Commissioner, I have got limited instructions in this matter. I am not clear on what it is that the company is seeking for the Commission to do and I haven't heard the requests for the Commission and under, you know, which basis of the Act that they are seeking the Commission to act.

PN76

THE COMMISSIONER: Did the AMWU send its elected people to the meetings that were set by the company?

PN77

MS SCHLESINGER: The ones subsequent to the Friday?

PN78

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN79

MS SCHLESINGER: I would need to check that, Commissioner.

PN80

THE COMMISSIONER: Is it the submission of the AMWU that Mr Smith was denied access to the site?

PN81

MS SCHLESINGER: There certainly were difficulties with Mr Smith's visit at the site.

PN82

THE COMMISSIONER: What were those difficulties?

PN83

MS SCHLESINGER: I don't have any further instructions today, Commissioner. In terms of the Act we say there is no industrial action that is occurring and there is no disputation.

PN84

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Well, there are two different issues there. One is disputation, the other one of course relates to industrial action and that industrial action as defined in the Act. If there is a problem in the implementation of the agreement, then that is an issue that, whether or not people have walked off the job or have failed to attend meetings, do raise issues of whether there is a dispute. Because if it is agreed, for example in the agreement that there will be meetings, and those meetings are not being convened because people are not attending them, then that is a matter rising from the implementation of the agreement and that is a matter that is properly before the Commission.

PN85

MS SCHLESINGER: I am not clear on what the company is seeking from the Commission.

PN86

THE COMMISSIONER: Perhaps you could assist, Ms Schlesinger, in that matter. My understanding is that you were asking that the representatives of the FVIU attended the meetings for the purposes of implementation of the enterprise agreement. Am I correct?

PN87

MR ROELINK: That is correct, Commissioner. There are a number of issues we would like the Commission to address today. We would like cessation of all current industrial action in the form of withdrawal of participation in all union company consultative processes, with regard to both the implementation of the enterprise agreement and current longstanding committees, such as our non-trade steering committee, our trade training steering committee, our occupational health and safety site committee and our current shift work - alternative shift work patterns meeting.

PN88

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, just a moment. Just a moment, please. Yes, that is the first issue then, in relation to participation of parties.

PN89

MR ROELINK: Yes. Second, Commissioner, we seek a cancellation of the notified stop work meeting, which is due to be held today at 2.30 pm and at this point in time, despite numerous requests for clarification, we have received no correspondence from the union stating that that stop work meeting has been called off. Further, we would request a direction from the Commission for immediate and continued adherence by the FVIU parties to the prescribed grievance and issue resolution procedures as per the Holden Consolidated Award and applicable enterprise agreements.

PN90

Adherence to these industrial instruments would have avoided us being here today. And lastly, Commissioner, if it pleases, we request a direction requiring a retraction bulletin from the FVIU to all Holden employees for the malicious statements published to our employees on Monday 23 September. Apart from being misleading and inaccurate, this document is seen as attempting to undermine the good relationships we seek to maintain with our employees and disrupt our ability to make process with the implementation of our enterprise agreement. They are the four points of remedy we are seeking, Commissioner, if they are of assistance.

PN91

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you. Ms Schlesinger?

PN92

MS SCHLESINGER: Commissioner, I have got nothing further to add to my earlier brief submission.

PN93

THE COMMISSIONER: So you have got nothing at all to say on those four issues.

PN94

MS SCHLESINGER: Well, without seeking instructions, I haven't, Commissioner.

PN95

THE COMMISSIONER: It is a very difficult situation for the union to put you in, Ms Schlesinger. Mr Johnston, have you got anything to add? You are the President of the FVIU.

PN96

MR JOHNSTON: Yes, I have, Commissioner. With respect to meetings and the decision of the FVIU, and that was for the meetings on the Friday and certainly meetings following that, but my understanding is, talking to our senior stewards and other senior stewards from other unions, there has been meetings between the senior stewards and the company to try and resolve this issue and to have explanation from the company as to the events that occurred on 19 and 20 September regarding Mr Smith. And that is all I can say, Commissioner, because I have had some conversations with Mr Camillo with respect to the direction that the FVIU should be taking and that the decision by himself was he could not attend any meetings and on that basis that was something that I supported. Because as a president and secretary, we do not have the decision making power on behalf of the other affiliates to say, "Yes, we will attend meetings".

PN97

There has been no meetings of the FVIU to make decisions as to whether we attend meetings that the company have arranged. With respect to the correspondence, exhibit H10, that was received late in the day because all the FVIU officials were attending a meeting at Mitsubishi which went from approximately 8.30 in the morning until around 2 - 2.30 in the afternoon. And I did have some conversations with Mr Camillo regarding the position and he had indicated that Mr Christensen rang him but there was a meeting planned for tomorrow at 3.30 at the AMW office, prior to the events of the 20th, Mr Camillo had indicated to me that that would go ahead.

PN98

Now I think that meeting was planned to follow through on some of the issues of concern by the parties with respect to the enterprise agreement. That was going to be a meeting between the president and the secretary and some senior management from Holden's, I think Mr Christensen and perhaps Mr Roelink.

PN99

THE COMMISSIONER: And that - I beg - excuse me, that was planned for tomorrow was it?

PN100

MR JOHNSTON: Sorry, Commissioner, the speaker is going off.

PN101

MR ROELINK: Excuse me, Commissioner, they are doing a fire drill test.

PN102

THE COMMISSIONER: I hope they are not trying to trick you, that it is still - that it is only a test and it is not the real thing. Just continue, Mr Johnston, but if you smell smoke and you disappear I will understand.

PN103

MR JOHNSTON: Thank you, Commissioner.

PN104

THE COMMISSIONER: Quickly, while there is a break. All right, so the meeting - there was an FVIU meeting planned for tomorrow.

PN105

MR JOHNSTON: Well, it was a meeting between myself, Mr Camillo, Mr Christensen - - -

PN106

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, yes, is it proceeding?

PN107

MR JOHNSTON: From the conversation I had last yesterday afternoon by Mr Camillo was that, yes, it would proceed. I am not aware that if Mr Camillo has contacted the company to inform them of that, but certainly the conversation at Mitsubishi yesterday was that we would go ahead. With respect to the shop steward's meeting this afternoon, I think there is some of the affiliates of the FVIU that have now - listening to the explanation given by Mr Roelink to the senior shop stewards, some of the organisations are leaving it up to the stewards to whether they attend or they don't attend. So it is not going to be something that we are going to force stewards to do.

PN108

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you. And is that the position of the CPU?

PN109

MR JOHNSTON: That certainly is.

PN110

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. All right. Is there anything else?

PN111

MR JOHNSTON: I would just like to say that, with respect to Mr Smith, Mr Roelink made a comment that Mr Smith would be a visitor to the non-trades steering committee, and now this is only from what Mr Camillo has indicated to me, he indicated that that was not the intention of the vehicle division, and obviously the vehicle division can speak for themselves, but the clear understanding that I have on the - during the corpus of the FVIU on the Friday the 20th, was that Mr Smith will be actually a participant to that committee for the AQF3N33. And that is something Ms Schlesinger would need to confirm with Mr Camillo, but that was relayed to us in the corpus that he would not be a visitor, but he would actually be a participant.

PN112

THE COMMISSIONER: That is in the non-trades group.

PN113

MR JOHNSTON: That is in the non-trades, yes. It only affects the non-trades area - - -

PN114

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN115

MR JOHNSTON: - - - of the vehicle division. That is all I can add to it, Commissioner.

PN116

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you. Ms Marsh?

PN117

MS MARSH: I have very little to add, Commissioner, but as Mr Johnston has advised, there has been no meeting of the FVIU post-Friday. So to a large extent we have been following this - awaiting I guess, a gathering that we could pursue developments. We are interested in seeing this matter resolved and we haven't as yet not attended any meetings, because those scheduled haven't come up as yet, and we have already concluded that our work site reps would not be attending the meeting this afternoon.

PN118

THE COMMISSIONER: I beg your pardon, what was the last thing you said?

PN119

MS MARSH: Our work site reps will not be attending the meeting this afternoon.

PN120

THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Braithwaite.

PN121

MR KANE: It is Mr Kane.

PN122

THE COMMISSIONER: Are you now announcing an appearance?

PN123

MR KANE: Yes, my apologies, I was just notified about 10 minutes ago that this matter was on.

PN124

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, all right, thank you. I notice that you have heard most of what has been submitted. Have you got anything else you want to add?

PN125

MR KANE: No, I don't think so, Commissioner. I think this whole affair has come out of a whole lot of frustrations with the implementation of the enterprise agreement and the working parties. There has been various correspondence from the vehicle division's national office, Mr Jones, and to the company in relation to a number of issues. And I think it is just pure frustration in relation to a number of issues within the enterprise agreement that don't seem to be heading anywhere in relation to ..... and some instances are outstanding from last year.

PN126

So if there was only two people in the room at the time with Mr Roelink and Mr Smith, I guess we don't know exactly what took place. It was reported to us and we decided to take some action in support of Mr Smith and I guess you know the rest from there, Commissioner.

PN127

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, what is the AWU's position in relation to the meeting?

PN128

MR KANE: Well we will attend - our delegates were attending the meeting this afternoon but, of course, if anything comes out of the Commission here this morning then we will review that, but that is the situation.

PN129

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. It seems to me from the submissions which have been put forward that this matter has got completely out of control. It should never have got to this stage. It is similar to several other matters that have come from the sector recently where people have acted in a manner that is not substantiated by the underlying reasons. Now there is no doubt that there is a view among some senior union officials, and I would include Mr Smith there, he is an extremely senior union official, that they have had untrammelled access to throughout the vehicle industry for as long as they can remember. And they have been free to come and go as they please.

PN130

Now, there is a different regime in more ways than one. The Act has been changed, as you well know, so that there are certain formalities which need to be entered into prior to site visits. Now, regardless of what happened in the past, and regardless of what sort of open access officials were given, there is a requirement under the Act that notice be given and the fact that the company has followed those provisions is absolutely open to them. Now, it is not surprising and, for example, I think this issue is probably heightened from the company's point of view because of the impending release of the VY.

PN131

And if there is an embargo on outside visitors then it is even more understandable why the company is concerned that they have people wandering around the plant. And they have not been able to provide a prior warning or advice to different sections in the plant that Mr Smith, in this instance, would be there. Now, Mr Smith is going to have to accept that the Act requires that notice be given and that the company is able to ask for that advice on what he is there for specifically. Now, in this case the company - and I am accepting what they say in this regard - indicated that they have no problem whatsoever in Mr Smith going into the plant to look into the issues that are associated with classification and with the possibility that there are some jobs which warrant the classification of M33.

PN132

Now, it probably would have suited Mr Smith to stay and do it then. There was no advice to the company that that was what he wanted to do. As far as they knew he was there to attend meetings, and perhaps with a little bit more thought next time, the union would be able to clarify the breadth of the issues that it wants its officials to look into. If that had happened we wouldn't be here today. Now, what - there is another element that concerns me here and that is that the FVIU is critical for the unions it represents and critical to the company with whom it deals in the implementation of the enterprise agreement.

PN133

And because of its history it is also critical that the relationship between the FVIU is an open one - with the company, is an open one. And that goes both ways. And that there is a productive relationship. Now, in this case it would appear that not all FVIU members are aware of the intricacies that have occurred and I don't think that that is a good thing for the FVIU. Now, it would seem to me, the most sensible thing to do is for the senior officers of the FVIU to meet with senior management of Holden tomorrow and to go through some of these issues.

PN134

Now, with regard to the meetings which are scheduled for this afternoon, I would ask the company's view on why they could not be deferred until Thursday.

PN135

MR ROELINK: One can choose - which meetings do you speak of? You are speaking of the stopwork meeting, Commissioner?

PN136

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, it is a stopwork meeting, I beg your pardon.

PN137

MR ROELINK: It is a stopwork meeting, Commissioner, that is why we are here. We don't want it to happen.

PN138

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, I beg your pardon. I have confused that issue. Well, it seems that some of the unions are not going to appear and I think that, consistent with the dispute resolution procedure, where, if the issue cannot be resolved with the local issue, there is the opportunity for other people to be involved. Then it would appear that if there is a meeting between the FVIU and Holden management that it would be more sensible for that to occur so that the FVIU senior officers can then advise the members of the FVIU what the situation is.

PN139

Now, what I am going to do as a result of this, I am going to direct that the parties confer, in other words, that the meeting scheduled between senior FVIU officers and senior management of the company for 26 September proceed. I am going to recommend that the stopwork meeting which is to be conducted this afternoon not proceed. But what I would think would be useful to resolve this particular matter would be if there was some opportunity for a meeting of the FVIU shop stewards on - later on the 26th or on the 27th.

PN140

And I don't imagine it would go for more than 15 or 20 minutes because we - report back from Mr Johnston and Mr Camillo on the issues that have been discussed between management and the FVIU senior officers. Now, that to me, is a reasonable outcome and would go a long way to resolving this dispute. There is the other issue that I should point out and that is that, on the basis of what the submissions for the company have been, it seems that they have done nothing more than follow procedures which are covered by provisions of the Act.

PN141

I am hamstrung to a certain extent, however, because of the paucity of information from the AMWUs submissions. But I think that there are other issues behind this. I think perhaps some of the issues raised by Mr Braithwaite perhaps have heightened the tensions behind this matter. And the sooner we can resolve this issue - oh, no, Mr Kane, sorry, sorry - - -

PN142

MR KANE: I have a little bit of hair.

PN143

THE COMMISSIONER: No, no, I mean, I could really try and worm my way out of this by saying you are much more handsome than Mr Braithwaite but I don't think I will even go there.

PN144

MR KANE: I will tell him that when I see him.

PN145

THE COMMISSIONER: No, I said I wouldn't go there. That was what I might have said but I am not brave enough. All right, that would be my recommendation. Now, I think that for the company to agree to no more than a half hour meeting for the purposes of report back on Thursday, is something that should occur and I am going to recommend that way. It may seem, perhaps, a burden on you, given that you are here because you don't want a stopwork meeting this afternoon to proceed, but I think, one of the problems has definitely been communication issues.

PN146

And I think that would be a useful way to start. All right, is there anything else?

PN147

MS SCHLESINGER: Commissioner, the only thing I want to address was the point about the discussions that were had with David Smith. We have heard the company's version on that. I am unable to enlighten you any further other than we didn't think that there was cause coming out of that visit for the company to bring the matter before the Commission today. We look at our enterprise agreement which talks about right of entry. Amongst things, it says, paid union officers can visit the plant as a matter of course. And that is all consistent with a good relationship - - -

PN148

THE COMMISSIONER: Which clauses does that refer to?

[10.02am]

PN149

MS SCHLESINGER: I am looking in the collective bargaining clause, Commissioner, 7.8 of the 2001 EBA. That talks about appropriate advice being given of the desire to attend the plant and obviously that had been arranged by Mr Smith through Mr Gee earlier in the week.

PN150

THE COMMISSIONER: But doesn't it come down to what the union advised the company? That is why we have gone through all these letters from Mr Gee?

PN151

MS SCHLESINGER: I am unable to respond on the exact nature of the conversations that occurred between the company representative and Mr Smith other than to pick up on the point that Mr Smith is a very experienced senior union official.

PN152

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, well, I think, given the provisions of 7.8 that that is why there would - the meeting should proceed tomorrow afternoon. You have got a senior representative there as a secretary of the FVIU. And that - the purpose I have asked the company for a report back. Now, that Ms Schlesinger has referred to a clause in the agreement - clause 7.8 certainly does say paid union officers can visit the plant as a matter of course. And that needs to be one of the issues that you talk about tomorrow. Right, I will get that recommendation out to you as quickly as I can.

PN153

I would be interested to - no I will go further than that. The parties will advise me whether in fact they accept the recommendation or they don't. But I am expecting, given it takes into account all the issues that have been raised, that the action that I am recommending will be proceeded with. Is there anything else?

PN154

MR ROELINK: One issue, Commissioner, which I believe has not been addressed in your recommendations is the cessation of all current industrial action with regard to withdrawal from meetings with regard to the implementation of the enterprise agreement. We have a number of plant committees on our site which meet regularly and have not been meeting under instruction from the FVIU; that their union delegates do not attend.

PN155

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. I am going to leave that issue for a moment because it is - I think it would be rather putting the cart before the horse to direct that now when in fact there are a number of issues that will be raised, and I imagine, resolved between you at your meeting tomorrow. All right, there being nothing further, these proceedings are now adjourned. Thank you.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [10.06am]

INDEX

LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs

EXHIBIT #H1 FAX DATED 18 SEPTEMBER PN23
EXHIBIT #H2 LETTER DATED 20 SEPTEMBER ADDRESSED TO BOB JOHNSTON AND JOHN CAMILLO FROM GREG CHRISTENSEN PN41
EXHIBIT #H3 LETTER FROM MR ROELINK TO BOB JOHNSTON AND JOHN CAMILLO REQUESTING WRITTEN CONFIRMATION OF THE OUTCOME OF THE FVIU POSITION PN52
EXHIBIT #H4 VEHICLE DIVISION NEWS BULLETIN TO ALL MEMBERS AT HOLDEN, SIGNED BY TOM TAYLOR PN53
EXHIBIT #H5 E-MAIL ADDRESSED TO ALL FVIU OFFICIALS DATED 23/09/2002 PN57
EXHIBIT #H6 FAX FROM MR ROELINK DATED 23/09/2002 ADDRESSED TO JOHN CAMILLO PN59
EXHIBIT #H7 FACSIMILE COMMUNICATIONS REPORT PN60
EXHIBIT #H8 FAX SHEET WITH MESSAGE PN65
EXHIBIT #H9 FVIU NOTICE PN67
EXHIBIT #H10 LETTER TO JOHN CAMILLO DATED 24/09/2002 PN69