|
|
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 1114J MELBOURNE Vic 3001)
DX 305 Melbourne Tel:(03) 9672-5608 Fax:(03) 9670-8883
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
O/N VT585
AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL
RELATIONS COMMISSION
COMMISSIONER SMITH
C2002/4394
THE COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC SECTOR
UNION AND OTHERS
and
TELSTRA CORPORATION
Notification pursuant to section 99 of the Act
of a dispute re alterations to shift payments
MELBOURNE
10.36 AM, WEDNESDAY, 30 OCTOBER 2002
Continued from 10.10.02
PN457
THE COMMISSIONER: Now, a number of materials have been filed but I note also from the materials put in by Mr Bourke, raising again - or re-agitating the (111)(1)(g) point.
PN458
MR BOURKE: That is correct, sir.
PN459
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Was there any discussion between the parties as to how the day should progress?
PN460
MR BOURKE: No, there hasn't been.
PN461
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, do you think you ought to agitate that 111(1)(g) point to begin with?
PN462
MR BOURKE: I think that is really for final submission after all the evidence is in because it crosses over their material.
PN463
THE COMMISSIONER: On the evidence.
PN464
MR BOURKE: On the evidence.
PN465
THE COMMISSIONER: I see, all right.
PN466
MR BOURKE: I don't think it can be quarantined as a discrete point without an assessment of the material.
PN467
THE COMMISSIONER: Okay.
PN468
PN469
MR BOURKE: Sir, can I just point out tabs 5, 6 and 7 which indicate outlines of evidence, they were served in accordance with the direction but we have now placed behind those tabs witness statements which we propose the witnesses to adopt. Save for Geoff Bancroft who - we just propose to rely on the statement. He is in Western Australia and given the content of the material in his statement we don't see it warrants going to the trouble of a hook-up.
PN470
Sir, can I just also say we don't make complaint because we have only just provided lengthy statements to the CPSU this morning but we have only just been provided - I think it came through around a quarter to nine - a very lengthy statement of Mr Jamieson and an Anna Ward. I currently have not read the Anna Ward statement. I am still reading Mr Jamieson's statement and I would need an hour to take instructions on many of the matters that have been raised in that statement.
PN471
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Thanks, Mr Bourke. Mr Waters.
PN472
MR WATERS: In terms of how the hearing proceeds, we follow your lead.
PN473
THE COMMISSIONER: Do you have any objection to adjourning for an hour so that - - -
PN474
MR WATERS: No, no.
PN475
THE COMMISSIONER: All right, we will do that. But in the first instance I want to have a brief conference with those at the bar table. So I am going to adjourn into conference and, regrettably, our guests are going to have to leave briefly. I will adjourn the matter into conference.
SHORT ADJOURNMENT [10.41am]
RESUMED [12.26pm]
PN476
MR WATERS: Commissioner, we would like to proceed directly to witness evidence, particularly given that our first witness, Anna Ward, has a reasonably significant time constraint and needs to be away by 4 o'clock if that is at all possible. We would just like to clarify that submissions regarding the existence of a dispute will also be dealt with at the end after the evidence.
PN477
MR BOURKE: Can I just say, well, in our submissions we conceded there was a dispute.
PN478
THE COMMISSIONER: Do you wish to cross-examine Ms Ward?
PN479
MR BOURKE: Yes, sir.
PN480
MR WATERS: Call Ms Ward. Could I ask that Telstra's witnesses who are present are removed?
PN481
THE COMMISSIONER: Are what?
PN482
MR WATERS: Are asked to leave the Court.
PN483
MR BOURKE: Well, sir, I would ask that Ms Borg, who is one of the key players, be allowed to stay in for the sheer convenience to be able to get instructions during running.
PN484
MR WATERS: We will concede; that is all right.
PN485
THE COMMISSIONER: Very well. You have other witnesses then?
PN486
MR BOURKE: No, sir.
PN487
PN488
THE COMMISSIONER: Please sit down, Ms Ward.
PN489
MR WATERS: Could you please give your name and occupation?---Anna Terese Ward and I work for Telstra Mobile.
PN490
Commissioner, could I hand up a witness statement?
PN491
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you. Do you have a copy of your witness statement with you?
PN492
MR WATERS: Anna, have you read the witness statement?---Yes, I have.
PN493
And is it a true and correct statement?---It is, yes.
PN494
Is there anything you want to correct in it?---No.
PN495
Okay, thank you.
PN496
THE COMMISSIONER: Do you have any objection to me marking it?
PN497
PN498
MR WATERS: Anna, could you tell us how long you have been working at Telstra?---Since November 2001.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XN MR WATERS
PN499
THE COMMISSIONER: I don't need you to go through the witness statement.
PN500
MR WATERS: Okay.
PN501
THE COMMISSIONER: I have read it.
PN502
MR WATERS: All right. Anna, attached to your witness statement is a fair treatment form. Could you take us through the grounds of your fair treatment request.
PN503
THE COMMISSIONER: Just a moment.
PN504
MR WATERS: At 3, the last page.
PN505
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Thank you?---The first part was that the shift payment was to be based on the projected requirements of the job and the way that - how this change affects that is that I will be paid for the work that has been done as opposed to what my projected requirements actually are is the first point. The second one was that it may be reviewed if my work arrangements change. My work arrangements haven't changed and the preferential based rostering has not altered my working arrangements because that was already in place when I signed my contract with Telstra, so that hasn't altered my working situation.
PN506
Do you just want to keep on working through number 3?---Yes, sure, okay. Now, there is clause 7.5, my AWA states that remuneration reviews are subject to my performance and prevailing my conditions this change has not been made on this basis, so all that is normal basically. And the clause 7.2 of my AWA defines my TEC as including salary and superannuation and benefits of flexible remuneration arrangements, not as compensation for benefits foregone. In Telstra's information pack it states that the shift payment is an entitlement.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XN MR WATERS
PN507
And number 6?---And - yes, so this will effectively reduce my - the amount that I am going to be getting paid quite substantially.
PN508
How much will it reduce it by do you think?---Well, we were getting paid $9000 as a yearly amount. I have just received what it is going to be calculated for for the next - or for the next two months of this quarter and that is $2500 as an annualised amount.
PN509
Ms Doris Borg in her statement says that at the briefing given on or about 4 or 5 July that she can't recall whether she raised the capacity for employees to utilise the fair treatment review verbally. Do you recall whether she raised that?---I don't recall her raising that, no.
PN510
At paragraph 28 of Ms Borg's statement she indicates that the meetings you attended, both with Will Russell and Amber Lutz, and a later meeting with Ms Pecora and Ms Borg, occurred on 2 October?---I believe it was the first.
PN511
Do you remember which day of the week that was?---A Tuesday.
PN512
Okay. And why can you be sure that it was a Tuesday?---Well, my birthday is on the 4th so I sort of - I can work it back from there. The Tuesday - I was away the Wednesday, Thursday, Friday so I recall it being on the Tuesday.
PN513
Commissioner, I would like to hand the witness a document. I believe it may have been marked Telstra 3. It was an e-mail. I think we raised some objections at the last hearing.
PN514
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XN MR WATERS
PN515
MR WATERS: I would just like to show that to the witness. Anna, could you please look at the message that is set out on the bottom third of that page. Do you recall receiving an e-mail from Telstra in those terms?---I don't recall receiving it. I couldn't be a hundred per cent sure but I certainly don't remember receiving it.
PN516
Thank you. I have no further questions at this time.
PN517
PN518
MR BOURKE: Ms Ward, I first want to take you to a team meeting you attended on 4 July 2002. Do you remember that?---Yes, I do, yes.
PN519
I suggest to you that Ms Borg never said that other centres had accepted the changes. I suggest you are incorrect when you suggest that she said to the meeting that other centres had accepted the changes?---I do recall her saying that our centre was the only one who was making a fuss about the changes that had been made and that this disappointed her.
PN520
Well, are you aware that, in fact, the changes had only just been implemented prior to that meeting? Did you know that?---I was aware of that, yes.
PN521
And it would be obvious to everyone at the meeting that there was no time to assess the reaction of other sectors, would there?---I don't know.
PN522
I see. And I suggest she did not say that you were the only other centre making a fuss?---I was there and that was stated.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN523
Okay. Do you have a copy of your statement there now? Could I take you to paragraph 8 and the last sentence. You see where you emphatically say:
PN524
At no time neither Ms Borg nor any other Telstra management representative advised us that we could request a review of the decision through Telstra's fair treatment process.
PN525
?---Yes, I see that.
PN526
Now why did you put that into your statement?---Because I don't have any memory of anyone explaining to me that I could use that.
PN527
But you didn't say you had no memory. You said at no time was this done?---As far as I am aware at no time it was.
PN528
MR WATERS: Excuse me, Commissioner. It doesn't say at no time.
PN529
MR BOURKE: I see. Before you filed your application, you were well aware of a number of communications where Telstra had said you had the right under the fair treatment process, weren't you?---Up until that time - up until the time that I actually filed it?
PN530
Correct?---I filed it first when I was told by a union representative that that was the process that we needed to go through.
PN531
I see?---I wasn't aware before then that that was the process that we were required to follow.
PN532
You weren't aware from any communication from Telstra that you had an entitlement under the fair treatment process?---I wasn't aware of one, no.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN533
I see. Are you - early on in your statement you give some detailed evidence about what is in your AWA?---Yes.
PN534
You read your AWA before you signed it?---Yes, I did.
PN535
And are you the type of person that does read documents that come across for your attention?---Yes, I am.
PN536
Okay. And one of the things - going back to the 4 July meeting, were you concerned about this issue at that stage of shift penalty changes?---The elements of the contract that stated that some things were variable and some things weren't, I wanted clarification on and we did discuss that at the time.
PN537
And you would have read the documentation that was provided to you at that meeting?---Yes, that is right.
PN538
So is there a copy available of TELSTRA1 for the witness?
PN539
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.
PN540
MR BOURKE: Now could you go please, Ms Ward, to tab 5. You see there, there was some Q and A document there?---Yes, yes.
PN541
And you were provided with that document at the meeting on 4 July weren't you?---Yes, it was on that day, yes.
PN542
And you read that document?---Yes, I did.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN543
Right. Can you just go to question 17 please. You will see there is a question:
PN544
What if a staff member does not accept the change or wishes to dispute the change in their shift allowance?
PN545
Can you see that?---Yes, I can. Yes, I can, yes.
PN546
And it says in the second paragraph:
PN547
If an employee has concerns about the payment of their shift allowance they can discuss it with their team leader in the first instance. If the issue is not resolved they may request a fair treatment review. This involves a formal review of the decision or action which an employee believes has unfairly affected them. Staff members should request a fair treatment review if they have tried and failed to resolve the issue with their supervisor or manager.
PN548
Did you read that?---I am sorry, I must have missed that. Yes, I can see that now.
PN549
Yes. So the fact of the matter is from the very first meeting you were aware of the availability of the fair treatment process, weren't you?---I am actually not sure that this was given to us at the time of that meeting. I couldn't be sure of that. It may have been given to me afterwards.
PN550
I have just - you have earlier said it was the document. Do you want to retract that now?---I couldn't say definitely either way that it was given to us on that day or whether it was given to us a little bit later.
PN551
Right. But you agree you did receive that document?---I did receive it.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN552
Before you filed your request?---Yes, I did.
PN553
Yes. And so do you agree now that your evidence was incorrect that you hadn't been informed of your rights by Telstra?---Yes, I do.
PN554
And in fact do you recall that there was a second question and answer package given to staff?---I do recall another one sent to us, yes.
PN555
And can you go to tab 9 in the folder please? You see, just going back a step, when you had that meeting involving Ms Borg, they were using butcher's paper weren't they?---Yes, they were.
PN556
To put on the board issues that were being raised by staff. Correct?---That is right, yes.
PN557
And there was already in place a question and answers form - sorry, question and answers document which you were given at the meeting. Correct?---I am not sure if I was given it at the meeting as I said before.
PN558
Right, okay. And you then subsequently around the 15th received a combined questions and answers document, didn't you?---I couldn't be a hundred per cent sure on the date again.
PN559
But around that time?---Around that time, yes.
PN560
And you would have read it like you do as a matter of practice read documents?
PN561
Sorry, you have to answer because it is being recorded?---Sorry, yes.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN562
And did you notice that in fact the combined question and answer had included additional questions that had been raised at team meetings. Did you notice that?---Yes, I understood that, yes.
PN563
Right. And can you go to question 17 again?---Is it at tab 9?
PN564
Sorry, tab 9, page 5. You see there is another reference to the right to the fair treatment review process?
PN565
You need to answer?---Sorry, I am just reading it.
PN566
Sorry?---That is okay. Well, yes, evidently it is there.
PN567
Right. Now have you got in front of you the document you were shown dated 10 September, exhibit TELSTRA3? The e-mail from Mr Fox?---Yes.
PN568
And do you recall that e-mail also indicated you could take any issue regarding this change to the fair treatment process?---I don't recall receiving the e-mail.
PN569
Is it possible, given your lack of recall of the reference to the fair treatment process in both of those question and answer packs, you may have received that e-mail?---As I said, I couldn't be a hundred per cent sure. I may have received it.
PN570
You see that it was addressed to all staff at Como?---Yes.
[12.46am]
PN571
THE COMMISSIONER: I propose to sit through until 1 o'clock.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN572
MR BOURKE: Yes. Thanks.
PN573
We have provided you with a copy of attachment 16 of the union materials. You see that - an email from Ms Borg to staff, 25 September 2002?---Yes.
PN574
And do you recall getting an email for that effect?---Yes, I do.
PN575
And you see that second last paragraph is a reference to a cut off of 30 September for going the Fair Treatment process?---Yes.
PN576
And, in fact, that was another statement by Telstra indicating your entitlement to invoke the process. Correct?---It is. This was actually sent to me after I decided to file. I don't know I actually handed it in at that stage, but it was - - -
PN577
But before you handed in your request, this is another communication you received from Telstra. Correct?---Yes, that is right. Yes.
PN578
Yes. And in fact you were well aware of the deadline, weren't you, 30 September?---I was aware of it from - from this email.
PN579
Right. And in fact you responded to that email. You put it - your request in on the day of the deadline?---That is correct. Yes.
PN580
Do you think, in hindsight, it would have been fairer to indicate that there may have been other communications from Telstra about your rights under the Fair Treatment process, they should have gone into your statement?---
PN581
Or was it just that you forgot about those matters?---Well, I don't - as I said, I - I don't believe I was informed at the initial meeting that it was a step that we could take. And I apologise, that I must - the later - the later material.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN582
Have you gone out of your way in making this statement to put a bad spin on it towards Telstra?---No, I don't believe that at all.
PN583
No, okay. Were you - do you have - sir, could the witness be provided with TELSTRA5, the bulk of TELSTRA5. Would you go, please, to tab 24. You see - that is the email that you received, dated 1 October 2002, from Ms Borg. Correct?---That is correct.
PN584
You have dealt with her over a reasonable period of time?---Yes.
PN585
Yes. Is she the sort of person that you have dealt with in the past that makes veiled threats?---Doris Borg - I actually haven't dealt with Doris on a personal level. I have worked with her.
PN586
Yes. Is she the sort of person, from your experience, that makes veiled threats?---I couldn't make a comment on whether or not - on her personally.
PN587
Yes?---I - I have never struck that from her in the past and I didn't expect to.
PN588
Yes?---But that was how the statement that I am assuming you are referring to struck me.
PN589
Well, are you the type of person that tries to draw the worst inference when something occurs or do you give people the benefit of the doubt?---I think I am - I am pretty fair on giving them the benefit.
PN590
Okay. Right. Let us just have a look at this - and you described this email as a "veiled threat" didn't you, in your statement?---I described one of the points in it as striking me as a veiled threat.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN591
Yes?---And that was my reaction to it.
PN592
Yes. You thought that was a fair thing to put in your statement that would go into this proceeding?---That was the way - that was the impression it had on me. Whether or not that was what it was intended to do, I don't know.
PN593
Well, you have only made your statement recently. You were satisfied, it was a fair enough comment for you to put it in your statement and for it to be tendered?---Yes.
PN594
Yes. Let us just have a look at it. It refers to you, "Hi Anna" - it refers to your request, right , and then deals with the Fair Treatment Review and the availability of steps in the internet access point and that - then talks about resolving the matter with the supervisor/manager. See that?---Yes.
PN595
And then it says:
PN596
If you have not resolved the issue by talking it over with Amber Lutz, you may request a Fair Treatment Review.
PN597
See that?---Yes.
PN598
Your request must make it clear exactly what your particular concerns are and I encourage you to think very carefully about the grounds of any Fair Treatment Review that you are seeking.
PN599
See that?---Yes, I can.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN600
Can you understand that it could be very useful for the effectiveness of the Fair Treatment Process to formulate what your concerns, to give that some thought?---What I - what I was - - -
PN601
Sorry, can you just answer my question?---Yes. Yes, I do. But what - - -
PN602
That is - so, the way this works, and you will get a chance when Mr Waters asks you further questions, at this occasion if you could just confine your answers to my questions if that is possible. Do you agree that it would be very useful for the process that people think carefully about it, the formulation of their concerns?---Yes, I do.
PN603
And in fact one of the matters you complain about in your statement is that you didn't have enough time to prepare when you initially met with your team leader, Mr Russell, correct?---Not so much complaint but more of a statement.
PN604
Well, you recognise that you wanted to do some preparation?---Yes, that is correct.
PN605
And can you understand that someone may urge you to focus your mind on the issue?---This email I received on the same day that I had that meeting.
PN606
But can you understand, it is perfectly explainable, that someone would ask - suggest, when you invoke the Fair Treatment Review, to carefully articulate your grounds?---I can understand that.
[12.55pm]
PN607
Yes. But you drew the very worst inference possible that it was a veiled threat, didn't you?---That was my reaction to it at the time.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN608
Yes. You were looking at - your attitude was one of fault finding, wasn't it?---No.
PN609
Fault finding.
PN610
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Waters.
PN611
MR WATERS: The witness is entitled to her opinion.
PN612
THE COMMISSIONER: There is no objection raised.
PN613
MR BOURKE: Let us go to another opinion. Ms Pecora, you know her; she acted out of line, correct?---Yes.
PN614
Yes. That occurred on a Friday, 9 August, right?---That is correct.
PN615
She gave a public apology by the Wednesday, 14 August, correct?---An e-mail apology for language, yes.
PN616
Yes. And she has also said - and in fact can you go to the folder; it is at tab 22. She has given a public apology across the e-mail system, correct?---Yes, that is right.
PN617
And she said she will endeavour to uphold "all my values, including Telstra's code of conduct"?---Yes, that is correct.
PN618
Correct. Part of that code of conduct is you shouldn't be threatening employees, correct?---That is correct, yes.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN619
Yes. Now, one of your complaints is that you felt that you should - she should have made a personal apology to everyone at the meeting. Not good enough to publish an apology. That is your view, isn't it? You felt she should be humiliated more?---No, not at all. That was the least thing that I wanted. I did not at all want that. I don't have anything against Trish, I just - my concern was that we had received an apology for the language in that meeting but I had nothing to indicate that anything that was said was incorrect and that did worry me that Telstra's position were the things that were said in that meeting. And I did not necessarily - some people may not have needed a one on one apology. I know that - I appreciate the fact that I was given one.
PN620
You asked for one, didn't you?---It was offered to me.
PN621
You were asked for it?---I didn't actually ask for it, but - I asked that it be given to me that the information - it was told to me officially that what was said in the meeting was incorrect. I didn't necessarily need to sit down with Trish and it was great that she did but I didn't ask to sit down with Trish and have a personal apology from her.
PN622
And you complain in your statement that other people did not get a personal apology, don't you?---I state that.
PN623
Yes. You level that as a complaint, don't you? You think they should have got a personal apology like you?---I don't know whether they should or shouldn't because I haven't spoken to them and asked them whether or not they would like one or whether it would be of benefit to them.
PN624
But you made a point - at paragraph 11, the bottom of page 2, do you have that?---Yes, I do.
PN625
From what I have been told by other staff I believe I am the only staff member who has been apologised to in this manner.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN626
?---That is correct.
PN627
Why did you put that in?---Because it is true.
PN628
You put that in because you considered everyone should have got one and Telstra has failed in dealing with the issue by only dealing with it by way of requiring Ms Pecora the humiliation of making a public apology?---I said a number of times at the meeting with Trish that I did not want to make her grovel and that that was not my intention, all I really wanted was to have the information that was given to me confirmed that that wasn't correct. I did say that a number of times at the time.
PN629
You know also she was reprimanded, don't you?---I was aware of that, yes.
PN630
Yes. And the incident has occurred on the Friday, you have the apology by the 14th, within five days of a weekend intervening, and within that period she was reprimanded, correct?---I don't know when she was reprimanded.
PN631
Yes?---I don't know the circumstances of that.
PN632
Well, if you thought about it you would appreciate it is probably before she has issued the apology, wouldn't you?---I don't know.
PN633
But you complain about the way Telstra dealt with that issue, don't you?---Initially. I feel that it has been dealt with now.
PN634
Do you say that anywhere in your statement, that it has been dealt with properly now? Is there anywhere in your statement where you say that?---I thought it was probably indicated by what I put about having received an apology.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN635
So where did you indicate, can you just read that out?---Sorry, I thought that that would be indicated by that but it may not be clear that is what I was trying to - - -
PN636
What are you referring - what sentence are you referring to?---I am referring to the - part 11.
PN637
Yes. Can you just read that part out?---To say that I - the whole - would you like me to read it all?
PN638
Well, you are talking about the whole paragraph?---Yes, I am just - I thought that in that it would have indicated that I had received an apology. I don't know if I - I probably didn't actually put that I accepted the apology but I did at the time.
PN639
Do you think if you wanted to be a little bit more balanced you would indicate that you now felt it had been adequately dealt with?---I could have put that in there, yes. I could have put that in there.
PN640
Yes. Is it just that you forgot to put that in?---No, it is not that I forgot to put that in. As I said, I thought that that was indicated but it is not, clearly enough, sorry.
PN641
Can you understand - - -
PN642
THE COMMISSIONER: Is that a convenient - I am sorry.
PN643
MR BOURKE: Sorry.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN644
THE COMMISSIONER: I was going to ask whether it is a convenient time.
PN645
MR BOURKE: No, a convenient time.
PN646
THE COMMISSIONER: Is it, very well. We will adjourn till 2 o'clock. Now, Ms Ward, you are currently giving evidence; I ask you not to discuss your evidence or your statement with anybody over the luncheon adjournment?---Okay.
PN647
Thank you. We will resume at 2 o'clock.
LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT [1.02pm]
RESUMED [2.07pm]
PN648
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Bourke.
PN649
MR BOURKE: Ms Ward, do you recall I asked you some questions about Ms Pecora's apology to you?---Yes.
PN650
Am I right in saying that you gave evidence that you felt paragraph 11 of your statement indicated that you felt the issue had resolved?---Yes and I am sorry, I have re-read it since then and realised that that probably wasn't clear.
PN651
Right. You would improve it, in hindsight, would you?---Yes, I probably could have.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN652
Could you understand, in fact, that - do you understand that this case in part is about the fair treatment process? Do you understand that this hearing is in part about that?---Okay.
PN653
Sorry?---Yes, okay, I do, now that you have stated that.
PN654
And can you understand that it could be very important in assessing the fair treatment process, the responses Telstra take, if someone is acting inappropriately, undermining the process?---Right.
PN655
Do you understand that could be quite important?---I do understand that. I didn't realise that this was so much, sorry, about the fair treatment process.
PN656
And that if Ms Pecora inappropriately made statements, it could be very important to see to the degree to which Telstra management respond to that issue. Could you appreciate that?---Yes, I can. I appreciate that.
PN657
You have that big folder there, TELSTRA5. Can you open it again at tab 23. Do you recall you were taken through, I think, items 1 to 6, in your evidence, this morning?---Sorry, yes, yes.
PN658
Right. And is it fair to say, when you went and spoke to your team leader, you weren't really articulating points 1 to 6 - - -?---That is correct.
PN659
- - - in the way they were articulated. Is that correct?---That is correct, yes.
PN660
And you weren't really commenting about clause 7.5 or 7.2 and other types of constructions on the contract?---That is correct.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN661
And would it be fair to say that your main concern, the first meeting you had with the team leader was, in fact, your concerns about Ms Pecora's behaviour?---That was one of my concerns. As I said in my statement, I, because I didn't really have much time to prepare I didn't feel confident in expressing those other things.
PN662
Well in terms of what she spoke about, you tended to devote the vast majority of your time to your concerns about Ms Pecora, didn't you?---That was part of it. I don't know if I could say it was the majority of the time.
PN663
Right, okay. Now could you go to tab 25, please. These are notes that were made of a meeting you had with Mr Russell and Ms Lutz. Do you see that?---Yes, I do.
PN664
And I don't want to get into an argument whether it is 2 or 1 October 2002 but just going down about 3 inches down the page, you see you raise very negative experience through management?---Yes.
PN665
She used the example of Karl and of the team brief, with Trish Pecora and Hal. In this team brief Trish had sworn and had been warned of disciplinary action. You see that?---Yes, I do.
PN666
Can you see that then Amber pointed out to you that she had apologised and been reprimanded?---Yes, I do.
PN667
And you felt the apology wasn't satisfactory. Do you see that:
PN668
Anna felt it was not a satisfactory apology.
PN669
?---That - by that I was referring to the email, not the - - -
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN670
Yes, I understand that?---Yes.
PN671
Yes. And do you agree that those matters were discussed at the meeting?---At the later meeting with Trish?
PN672
No, no, no. At the meeting on, you say, is 1 October - - -?---Yes.
PN673
- - - with Mr Russell and Ms Lutz - - -?---Yes.
PN674
- - - those matters were discussed?---They were briefly, yes.
PN675
Right. Now, just going down, a bit over half way down the page, you see where it says - it starts with:
PN676
Look at the whole picture -
PN677
do you see that?---
PN678
And then it has got:
PN679
Anna says she thinks she is being paid well.
PN680
Do you have that, it is about - if the page was points 1 to 10, it is about point 7?---Yes, I can see that, now. Thanks.
PN681
Anna said she thinks she is being paid well and she was always thought we are paid well.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN682
You said a comment to that effect, didn't you?---I did. Yes.
PN683
And then:
PN684
Will asked -
PN685
that is Mr Russell -
PN686
if Anna thought this was good. "Do you have any issues with overall pay?"
PN687
He asked you that question?---Right.
PN688
And you said:
PN689
No, I don't.
PN690
Agreed?---I do agree. My - - -
PN691
No, just concentrate on my question. And then you said - and then Mr Russell referred to your first concern regarding the - regarding Ms Pecora, correct?---
PN692
Do you see that reference there?---Yes. I can see that now, yes.
PN693
Sorry. I think that might have been a reference also to Carl?---Yes.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN694
And then, later on:
PN695
Mr Russell apologised and said, "If you have any concerns like that please speak to someone. Please don't think Telstra is like that. This was one person."
PN696
Do you agree he said that to you?---He did, yes.
PN697
Right. And then can you move further down to about another inch further down:
PN698
Amber said that we can't control what people say all the time. People's own opinions can come into what they advise other people.
PN699
Can you see that?---Yes, I can.
PN700
And that was - that was discussed, wasn't it?---That was also discussed. Yes.
PN701
Right. And then, just further down about point 8 of the page, you said:
PN702
I would like an apology or told what was said wasn't right for personal closure.
PN703
?---That is right.
PN704
You said that, didn't you?---Yes.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN705
And Mr Russell said:
PN706
We would organise that.
PN707
?---That is correct. Yes.
PN708
Right. You never suggest in any way that you felt that other people should be told personally, given a personal apology, did you?---No. But - but because the meeting was about my experience as opposed to other people's I didn't bring it up.
PN709
Yes. And then can we go into the last two lines:
PN710
There was a raising of outgoing head with the fair treatment. And Mr Russell then said, "The union can't talk for you, they can just give you advice."
PN711
Remember he told you that?---Yes.
PN712
And you said:
PN713
That is okay.
PN714
?---Yes. In the - in the sense that I understood that.
PN715
Okay. Now, I suggest at that meeting you never said that you wanted the old penalty shift system reinstated?---I did say that.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN716
I see. And I suggest it was never suggested to you that it would not be reinstated?---I was told that that was unrealistic.
PN717
I see. And then you had a meeting the same day, whether 1 or 2 - can you go to tab 26, please - whether 1 or 2 October. You had a meeting the same day about an hour later involving Ms Pecora?---Yes.
PN718
And Ms Pecora discussed with you why she had reacted the way she had?---She did, yes.
PN719
And can you just go to the document, about line 2:
PN720
She said, "I usually have my team only. I am used to dealing with just my team and they are used to my approach with things. I was just trying to get things across. I didn't mean to be offensive."
PN721
She said that?---She did, yes.
PN722
And moving about point 4, down, it was pointed out to you that she had been reprimanded for upholding Telstra's standards?---Yes.
PN723
And going down to the bottom of the page, about the third line, she told you she was sorry she defended you and that she apologised for not addressing you personally, earlier, and asked you to accept her apology?---Yes. That is correct.
PN724
And you said you would accept the apology?---Yes.
PN725
You then - could you go to tab 27 - you then got a letter dated 16 October 2002. Correct?---That is correct, yes.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN726
And there is a reference to your "second concern" regarding Ms Pecora and the fact that there was an apology given to you. Correct?---Yes.
PN727
And your other concern, going back to the front page, was that you said that Carl at the initial interview had told you that your shift allowance would not change?---That is correct.
PN728
Right. So that essentially summarised the concerns you had been raising?---At - at the initial meeting, yes.
PN729
Right. And there was a meeting involving Mr Russell and Ms Lutz, when this letter was provided to you?---That is correct. Yes.
PN730
And they went through the letter and discussed your concerns and the responses?---That is correct.
PN731
And can you got to tab 28, please. You essentially indicated at that meeting you were now satisfied with - there had essentially been closure of those issues, didn't you?---Yes, that is right.
PN732
Yes. And you then - can you got to the second last paragraph. Although you were essentially happy that things had been dealt with, you then said you had new issues?---Not so much new issues but the issues that are raised and my Fair Treatment request - that I didn't bring up at the initial meeting, as I mentioned.
PN733
Well, you hadn't brought them up in any of the meetings you had been involved in, had you?---
PN734
You essentially had two concerns, Ms Pecora and what Carl had told you at the initial interview - correct?---Those were the two things that I brought up at the time.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN735
And you hadn't raised really, essentially, any of the matters that had been raised in the pro-forma request?---No, I didn't at the time. No.
PN736
Yes?---As I mentioned, I didn't feel confident speaking about them at that time.
PN737
I see. And some - over two weeks later you said, "I have not got new issues"?---Not that I have new issues but there are other things that I want to discuss.
PN738
Right. Well, they were matters that you had not entertained in the past, at any meetings?---Not at the meeting.
PN739
No?---Through my - on my actual form for the - - -
PN740
Sorry?---On my Fair Treatment request, they were there.
PN741
Well, I know they were on the request but you hadn't raised any of them when you met personnel, correct?---Yes, that is correct.
PN742
Fine. And you were asked - you were asked:
PN743
What are these issues that we haven't discussed, that you now want to raise?
PN744
You were asked about those, weren't you?---I was asked:
PN745
Do you want to discuss this now?
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN746
Yes?---And:
PN747
Or do you want to continue with it and go through it with Doris?
PN748
And I chose the option to go ahead and do it with Doris.
[2.20pm]
PN749
Right. You showed no inclination to discuss what were the issues you now wanted to proceed to the fair treatment process with?---I thought that it would be best to go to Doris rather than - from the experience of other people that I had spoken to I felt that it was not likely to be resolved then, and because I was given the option of going straight to Doris that was the option that I took.
PN750
Were the issues that you set out in the pro forma document, genuine concerns of yours?---They are genuine concerns, yes.
PN751
And have they always been genuine concerns?---They have always been genuine concerns.
PN752
But you didn't choose to articulate them at any of the earlier meetings?---No, I wanted to have a look through things like my contract and be fully familiar with them myself before I brought them up in that environment.
PN753
Well, you see, you did not - would it be fair to say you are quite forthright in raising Ms Pecora's issue? The issues relating to her?---Yes.
PN754
Correct?---Yes, yes.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN755
And insisting for a personal apology. Correct?---I didn't insist for a personal apology. What I asked was for confirmation that the information I was given was incorrect.
PN756
Right. You knew that may involve a personal apology to you?---It did, yes.
PN757
But you were comfortable raising that type of issue but not any of the issue in the pro forma document?---No, nad as I have mentioned before I didn't have much time to prepare. In fact, I didn't really have any time to prepare and the particular day that we had that meeting I was very tired, as I mentioned during the meeting, and I actually had quite a bad headache which aside - - -
PN758
But if they were genuine concerns, is it fair to say you wouldn't really need preparation? They would be issues that would be in your mind at that time?---I didn't feel confident enough discussing them at that stage.
PN759
You then proceeded to have a meeting on 22 October 2002 involving Ms Borg?---Yes.
PN760
And Mr Waters attended from the CPSU?---That is correct.
PN761
And in that meeting you raised each and every one of the issues in the standard pro forma document, didn't you?---I did, yes.
PN762
And they were all gone through?---Yes, we went through all of them.
PN763
And discussed?---And we did discuss all of them, yes.
PN764
Did you raise those issues because you genuinely wanted to discuss those issues or were you just trying to be difficult?---I wasn't trying to be difficult. At no stage have I ever felt that I am just trying to be difficult and I said that to Doris.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN765
Did you genuinely want to discuss each of the issues in the pro forma document?---Yes, I did.
PN766
I see. And there was nothing else you wanted to raise?---The other things were the things that we had covered previously.
PN767
Which were already resolved?---Which were already resolved, that is right.
PN768
It wasn't that those things that were already resolved were really the genuine concerns you had?---No.
PN769
I see. Now I will just leave that. Do you have your statement there again?---Yes.
PN770
You see at paragraph 21 you said your new shift payment rate is now $2500 per annum?---For this quarter, yes.
PN771
Sorry?---For this quarter, yes.
PN772
Does it say anywhere in paragraph 21 that it is this quarter?---No, it doesn't state that.
PN773
Would it be fair to say if one read that and didn't know how the shift system worked, they would think you had gone from possibly a $9000 arrangement per annum to $2500 per annum. Would you agree with that? That is the way it could read?---It could read - I had assumed that people - my assumption that people would know how the system worked.
PN774
If you wanted to create the correct impression for the Commission, you would need to qualify that by spelling out that that is, in fact, what you are looking at receiving for the next quarter?---I was in no way trying to mislead anyone.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD XXN MR BOURKE
PN775
Just answer my question. If you wanted to give the accurate impression of what was occurring, you would need to point out that for this relevant quarter this is what you were looking at, $2500?---Yes, that would have made it a bit more clear.
PN776
Right. And the next quarter it could be less? Depending on the amount of shifts you work?---Depends on how many shifts I work.
PN777
Or it could be more?---Yes, that is correct.
PN778
Yes. Did you, when you read that at the time, think that it needed to be qualified?---I suppose because I am familiar with the way the shift payments work and I assumed other people would be. I thought - I didn't think to include that.
PN779
Why did you put that in?---Because it is an example of the difference in how the - how much my pay is going to be.
PN780
You wanted to give an impression that you are suffering a pay cut. Correct?---It is not - - -
PN781
Sorry. You wanted to give the impression you are suffering a pay cut?---No, I just wanted to illustrate the difference it is going to make to my pay.
PN782
Yes, but you agree it would be critical to point out that the amount you receive will vary depending on the amount of shifts you work. Correct?---Yes, yes.
PN783
I have no further questions.
PN784
**** ANNA TERESE WARD RXN MR WATERS
PN785
MR WATERS: Anna, I would just like to take you through a few questions to clarify things that Mr Bourke has raised with you. Mr Bourke examined you on your feelings that there was a veiled threat - - -?---That is correct.
PN786
- - - in Ms Borg's e-mail to you. Could I take you to paragraphs 14 and 15 of your statement. Now when you got that e-mail on 31 October from Ms Borg?---Yes.
PN787
Had you already provided Telstra with written grounds for your concerns?---Yes, I had. The fair treatment request, you mean or?
PN788
Yes?---Yes that one.
[2.27pm]
PN789
And those written grounds are in your fair treatment request?---That is correct, yes.
PN790
So what did you think Ms Borg meant when she asked you to carefully consider the grounds?---Well I thought that I had stated my grounds for submitting the request. So, what she was saying didn't strike me as a threat. And that was my reaction to it, whether or not it was intended that way I can't be sure, but that was - I thought that I had been quite clear on what I was putting in the fair treatment request about.
PN791
Mr Bourke has also examined you, at some length, on the apology from Ms Pecora?---Yes.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD RXN MR WATERS
PN792
Could I take you to paragraph 10 and 11 of your statement. What do you think the issues were, for you, that were raised by the meeting with Ms Pecora?---For me it wasn't so much an apology for the language, we had received one and I was happy to accept that. What I was concerned about was that - was the threats that were made and yes, that that was really what I wanted to hear was not correct. Not even necessarily from Trish, from Doris would have been fine. I wasn't looking for someone to grovel or anything like that. All I wanted was just for me to have something to say, no this is not where Telstra stands on it. Yes.
PN793
When you say that you think the issue has been dealt with properly, who do you think the issue has been dealt with properly for?---I am not quite sure what you mean by that.
PN794
Mr Bourke asked you if the issue has been properly dealt with, now. And I think you responded that you felt that it had been properly dealt with?---Yes, I feel happy with Trish's apology, I am happy to accept that. I now also accept that what was said wasn't correct, at the time, so I feel that that side of it - that has been resolved for me.
PN795
Do you feel it has been properly dealt with for all of the staff who were in the meeting with Ms Pecora?---I don't know, I mean - - -
PN796
MR BOURKE: Sorry, it is not a matter that arises from cross-examination.
PN797
MR WATERS: Well, I would say that it does. There was quite a bit of questioning about whether this issue had been properly dealt with or not in the broad.
PN798
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, actually, I am not sure that this witness can answer what is in the minds of others. She can certainly answer for herself but not necessarily what is in the minds of others.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD RXN MR WATERS
PN799
MR WATERS: Was there - there was a written document that was distributed to all of the staff, regarding the language?---To all the staff that were present there, yes, yes.
PN800
Was there any written document distributed to all the staff, who were present, regarding the threats?---No.
PN801
Are you aware that the threats were corrected for any other staff who were present at the meeting?---Not that I am aware of, no.
PN802
Do you recall when after this matter first came up, that you went back to your AWA and read it?---Do you mean since the?
PN803
Since 4 July?---4 July. I had a look over it that weekend. I had a brief look over it that weekend but nothing to in depth.
PN804
When you went to attend the meeting on 1 October with Will Russell and Amber Lutz?---Yes.
PN805
Did you have a copy of your AWA with you?---No, I didn't.
PN806
Do you feel it would have been possible for you to get involved in a discussion about particular terms of the contract?---I didn't feel confident at all with discussing it. No.
PN807
Could I take you to tab 25, in the Telstra document. Mr Bourke drew your attention particularly to a statement just below the - where the document has been punched, the hole punched in it:
**** ANNA TERESE WARD RXN MR WATERS
PN808
Will asked if Anna thought this was good. Do you have any issues with overall pay. Anna said, no I don't.
PN809
Did you have anything you wanted to add to your answer to Mr Bourke about the conversation at that point?---Yes. That my gripe isn't about the amount we are paid. I do think that we are well paid. But, essentially, what I was offered was something different from what we are getting now and had I known that this was the case or that this might happen, I probably wouldn't have taken the job in the first place.
PN810
Could I take you to tab 29, in the Telstra document, and if I could take you to the last page of the document. About 5 paras up, there is a statement, "Doris do you have any outstanding concerns". And there is a response from you there. Could you tell us what your outstanding concerns are or whether any of the ones contained in your fair treatment request have been addressed?---So those - sorry I am not - - -
PN811
Have any of the grounds set out in your fair treatment request - - -?---Yes.
[2.36pm]
PN812
- - - been addressed. Are you satisfied with Telstra's responses to any of the grounds in your fair treatment request?---No.
PN813
Are you genuinely concerned about the change to your shift payments?---Yes, I am very concerned about it.
PN814
Mr Bourke finished by taking you to paragraph 21 of your statement. I understand you are about to go away on holidays?---Yes, I am.
PN815
Will holidays have an impact on what your quarterly amount of shift payment will be?---Yes, because I won't be working shifts during that period, I won't be paid any shift allowances for that period as well.
**** ANNA TERESE WARD RXN MR WATERS
PN816
So is it likely that, for the next quarter, the amount will increase or is it likely that it would decrease?---Likely to decrease, depending on, I suppose, the roster I get for the period after that.
PN817
Okay. Thank you.
PN818
THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you for your evidence, Ms Ward. I just would like to reiterate something I said earlier to everybody. That evidence given honestly in a bona fide manner in this Commission, can't be any detriment to people in their employment. In this community we cherish the capacity to have a different view. Thank you for your evidence. Enjoy your holiday?---Thank you.
PN819
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Waters.
PN820
PN821
THE COMMISSIONER: Please sit down, Mr Jamieson.
PN822
MR WATERS: Could you state for the record your name and occupation?---Yes, John Jamieson. I am an industrial organiser with the CPSU.
PN823
Your Honour, could I hand up an exhibit, a witness statement for Mr Jamieson.
PN824
THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you.
PN825
MR BOURKE: Your Honour, we do object to the adoption of paragraph 104.
PN826
THE COMMISSIONER: A hundred and?
PN827
MR BOURKE: Four.
PN828
THE COMMISSIONER: Four.
PN829
MR BOURKE: We say that is oppressive to meet, based on hearsay and no probative value.
PN830
MR WATERS: Commissioner, we say it is of probative value, given that Mr Jamieson has a very significant number of conversations with members and gets feedback on this issue all of the time and that it does provide insight into members and employees thinking.
PN831
THE COMMISSIONER: But what weight can I give a statement like that. I mean, I don't wish to trivialise it but it is almost like saying, I knew a man who had a dog that told me. It is very difficult. I mean, I understand you have an organiser who is told by a number of members of yours that these things happen, but I am not sure what weight I can give it.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XN MR WATERS
PN832
MR WATERS: We understand that the question of weight is one that the Commission needs to make a determination on. But the issue before us at the moment is whether the paragraph is struck out or not. And we say that the paragraph should remain in and that the evidence can be tested by Telstra.
PN833
THE COMMISSIONER: Well that is the objection that was made by Mr Bourke. He says, how does he test that, does he then ask Mr Jamieson to name those members, does he ask for them to be called. It is the testing of it that is a problem. Yes, very well. What do you say, Mr Bourke?
PN834
MR BOURKE: Commissioner, we have not objected to much of the hearsay evidence of Mr Jamieson, for the sheer convenience of the case not taking 10 days but, given the seriousness of that allegation, we say it is just not appropriate that that form of allegation remain in the statement.
PN835
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, very well. You are free to elicit from Mr Jamieson any specific examples that he may have to give evidence but, as a general statement, I won't admit paragraph 104. Thanks, Mr Waters.
[2.43pm]
PN836
MR WATERS: Mr Jamieson, have you read the witness statement?---Yes, I have.
PN837
Do you believe it to be true and correct?---I have sworn to that.
PN838
Are there any corrections or changes you would like to draw to our attention?---Yes, I did notice going through it on para 88, the last line of para 88, where it says paragraphs 63 to 62 should read paragraphs 89 through 91.
PN839
Commissioner, could I ask that the witness statement be marked as an exhibit, so changed?
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XN MR WATERS
PN840
PN841
MR WATERS: John, before working for the Community and Public Sector Union you worked for Telstra?---Yes.
PN842
How long did you work for Telstra?---Approximately 12 years.
PN843
Are you familiar with the fair treatment process that is used in Telstra?---Yes.
PN844
Could I ask you to have a look at exhibit CPSU1. In looking through the fair treatment process is there anywhere, to your knowledge that it states explicitly that an employee cannot be represented?---No.
PN845
If I could take you to the policy, which is on page 17 of 61?---Yes.
PN846
Looking at the key business rules of the fair treatment procedure is it a requirement that staff resolve issues with their supervisors informally before requesting a fair treatment review?---Would you say that again, is it a requirement - - -
PN847
Is it a requirement?---No.
PN848
What is it?---Well, it is - I say it rightly or wrongly, it is an option available to them to discuss it if they fell something may be able to come out of that meeting perhaps, but it is not a compulsory part of the fair treatment process.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XN MR WATERS
PN849
And based on your understanding of the fair treatment review process what sorts of decisions is it designed to deal with?---More of a local - - -
PN850
MR BOURKE: Sorry, I object. If the document is set out in writing it is a matter for construction, not for this witness.
PN851
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Waters.
PN852
MR WATERS: All right, we can come back to that.
PN853
Ms Doris Borg in her witness statement at paragraph 6, is it possible - it is at tab 5 of the Telstra - - -
PN854
THE COMMISSIONER: I can show the witness the statement as long as he gives me back the last one he has got.
PN855
MR BOURKE: Commissioner, it should be behind tab 5 in that extra folder.
PN856
THE COMMISSIONER: On the large document, thank you.
PN857
MR WATERS: Now, could you just read through paragraph 6 on page 2?---
PN858
In April 2001 a new rostering methodology called preferential base scheduling PBS was introduced. Under PBS staff members can determine their working hours based on personal preference, so long as it meets business needs.
PN859
That is probably enough. Is that your understanding of how preferential base scheduling works?---Yes. As long as it meets business needs they can't determine their working hours, they will go along with what they have got, but they themselves do not determine their working hours.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XN MR WATERS
PN860
Who determines the working hours?---Telstra.
PN861
At paragraph 21, and a number of other places in Ms Borg's statement, Ms Borg refers to staff members having consultations with their team leaders?---Yes.
PN862
Are you aware of staff members who were interviewed by Telstra team managers other than their team manager?---Yes.
PN863
Did that occur in many cases?---My understanding is, virtually without exception, yes.
PN864
Some staff were interviewed involving their team managers, weren't they?---Well there were two managers present at the majority of
the meetings or whatever. But sometimes had, yes, their team manager as an observer or something like that.
[2.50pm]
PN865
So who did most of the talking in those meetings?---Another team manager.
PN866
And who was that?---Will Russell.
PN867
Are you aware that there were at least some staff whose team manager wasn't involved in that process, at all?---Yes.
PN868
Could you go to paragraph 32 of Ms Borg's statement?---Yes.
PN869
And if you could look particularly at the third dot point under that paragraph?---Yes.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XN MR WATERS
PN870
Did Mr Foster advise you after the meeting about what occurred during the meeting?---Yes.
PN871
And can you recall what that was?---Well I understand it is in my witness statement. He was upset when he returned from the meeting and he was advised that at the - well it is hard to say it properly, I suppose - the meeting wasn't a meeting it was a discussion. So because of that, I wasn't present there and he had to have it a one on one with Will Russell.
PN872
Was he given anything by Mr Russell during that process?---Yes, he was given a letter.
PN873
And what was the letter about, do you know?---The letter was about his previous fair treatment meeting with his team manager.
PN874
So to suggest it was a normal business meeting and not at the formal FTP level?---That was wrong. That is wrong.
PN875
If I could take you - just go back to paragraph 31. How long did the meeting between Doris Borg, Justin Allen, yourself and Andrea Durkin, go for?---One and a half hours.
PN876
Was there a script or a document that the management team were working to?---Yes, they had a document, a script, yes.
PN877
Did they get through that document?---Well I can't tell whether they got - they got through a jolly lot of it, I would suggest.
PN878
Yes?---An hour and a half's worth.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XN MR WATERS
PN879
And if I can just take you to paragraph 36?---Yes.
PN880
Is Will Russell Kylie's team leader?---No.
PN881
THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Bourke.
PN882
PN883
MR BOURKE: Mr Jamieson, your union doesn't like AWAs?---When you say the union, who are you referring to?
PN884
Well CPSU?---Well the union is our members and I suggest many of our members are on AWAs.
PN885
Are you trying to avoid the question?---No. I don't have an opinion, particularly, on whether people like or dislike AWAs.
PN886
You see them as undermining your relationship with your members?---No, sir.
PN887
You would have a view of encouraging people to be involved in certified agreements, as against AWAs?---Myself, no.
PN888
Yes, I see. What about your union? Are you aware that occurs within your union?---Once again, the union are the members - - -
PN889
Well?--- - - - and we act on behalf of the members.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN890
Well, you say you act - in terms of the employees and organisers that operate within the CPSU, are you aware that is one of the industrial goals, to encourage your members to go - involved in certified agreements, as against AWAs?---Well can we speak just for the Telstra - I only handle Telstra at the CPSU.
PN891
Okay, well let us confine it to Telstra?---We will confine it to Telstra.
PN892
You would prefer your members to be on certified agreements as against AWAs?---Well as - to the benefit of our members, if I believe a certified agreement is to the benefit of our members, I suggest that.
PN893
But that is your general view, isn't it, a certified agreement is preferable?---Well once again, with what Telstra may well offer, perhaps it may be. Yes.
PN894
And you have attempted to undermine, haven't you, the ability of Telstra to engage in AWAs with staff?---No, sir.
PN895
You don't like the idea, irrespective of what the wording of the policy is, you don't like the idea that Telstra take the view that the fair treatment process doesn't contemplate a representative role for the union?---I don't know that to be correct. No. I don't know what policy you are talking about in - - -
PN896
I am talking about the fair treatment process?---Yes.
PN897
You understand that Telstra take the view that does not give you a representative role in the grievance procedure?---Well it is an unwritten thing in the policy.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN898
All right. Well I will come - let us not - do you understand that is their position?---That is Telstra's position, yes.
PN899
And you don't like that, do you?---No, no I don't like that.
PN900
Yes. And you have attempted to force on the process, your union having a representative role?---No, I haven't tried to force it on them.
[2.59pm]
PN901
And you have also attempted in doing that to tell your members that they are effectively being dudded by entering into AWAs haven't you?---I don't think I've ever used the word "dudded". They are your words.
PN902
You have challenged the integrity of the process within which people entered into AWAs haven't you?---No.
PN903
I see. You have got the large folder there?---Yes.
PN904
TELSTRA5?---Yes.
PN905
Could you go please to Tab 11?---Yes.
PN906
That is an e-mail you sent to various members on 3 September 2002?---Yes.
PN907
And second paragraph you make a reference to members attending the Commission hearing?---Yes.
PN908
And you - second paragraph the last sentence you say Telstra did not have to sign - did not have you sign individual contracts for nothing?---That's correct.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN909
You put that in to suggest there had been some trick, some advantage gained by Telstra?---I said that they individualised each member.
PN910
Yes. And you made a suggestion that that was part - the AWA was some type of strategy?---A strategy for whom?
PN911
Well, you are talking about individualising the member. You suggest that you didn't sign individual contracts for nothing. You were suggesting that Telstra had gained some advantage by your members entering into AWAs didn't you?---Well, I'm not saying Telstra gained any advantage, no.
PN912
Yes. Could you understand that if one of your members read Telstra didn't have you sign individual contracts for nothing they might - with an exclamation mark - that it might create the impression there has been - you are being tricked in some way. You are being taken advantage of in some way?---In the context of that e-mail I think it's clear that it was the individualising of our members that I am talking about there.
PN913
And if you go down to third - second last line of the next paragraph?---Yes.
PN914
If we are to get on board and get others to join the union now as a sign of support and belief you can win.
PN915
Do you see that?---Yes.
PN916
You were agitating at that stage an issue that was going towards - going to the Commission over the change in shift penalty payments, correct?---Yes.
PN917
And you saw it - you were promoting it not only in terms of getting on board in terms of solidarity but promoting it as part of a recruitment drive, join the union, weren't you?---I don't have recruitment drives, no.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN918
Why did you make the reference to people joining the union now?---So I could assist them more ably.
PN919
I see. Did you think that it helped that you in the earlier paragraph had made a comment that Telstra didn't have you sign individual contracts for nothing. Do you think that might have helped part of that recruitment?---No.
PN920
Yes, I see. Now, do you understand that what has changed in relation to shift penalties is the way of calculation? Do you understand there has been a change in the way of calculating the payment in relation to shift penalty payments?---Yes.
PN921
And that rather than based on historical record of the level of payments it is going to be more directed towards the amount of shifts you actually work?---No, it's not on a historical it's on a projected.
PN922
Yes, okay?---Opposite to what you said.
PN923
Okay. And I suggest the change is directed towards ensuring that there is closer accountability between the amount you are paid and the level of shifts you are working. Do you understand that?---I can - I can hear what you are saying yes, of course.
PN924
Yes. But do you understand that is part of the change?---Yes.
PN925
Yes. And that as a result a person that in the past has been working a high level of shifts may in fact enjoy a pay increase overall but a person who has been working a low level of shifts may suffer a decrease. Can you understand that?---Do I understand it or do I agree?
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN926
Do you understand that could be the result?---No, I don't .
PN927
Do you agree it would be highly simplistic to describe the change in payment as just simply a pay cut that does not fairly deal with the matter of the payment and the change?---No.
PN928
Okay. Well, do you agree that some people as a result of the change may be better off, some people may be worse off?---No.
PN929
I see?---I won't - when you use the word "some people" may be better off" I would put it down to a minuscule amount of people that could possibly be better off but as a matter of fact I'd probably say no.
PN930
Yes, okay. Do you think it is fair just to communicate the issue with your members on the basis that it is just a pay cut? Do you think that is fair - that is enough information for them to deal with the issue - come to terms with it?---I didn't think I did that.
PN931
Okay. Do you agree it would not be a fair way to discuss the issue?---Well, I won't consider that because I don't think I did it.
PN932
Okay. When you say you don't think you did it - - - ?---No.
PN933
- - - you would agree that would be unfair to just deal with the issue by describing it as just a cut?---As a sole thing. So if I just said to them this is - you are just going to get a pay cut that's that.
PN934
You would agree that would be over simplifying the issue?---By itself?
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN935
Yes?---Totally by itself, yes.
PN936
Okay. Can you look at tab 12 please, CPSU Bulletin?---Yes.
PN937
Were you involved in any way in putting these bulletins together?---I would always have input on a Telstra mobile thing if I was asked about it and I was aware of it and knew what was going on.
PN938
Right. Would you have checked through this one?---Yes, I probably did, yes.
PN939
You see where it says "Telstra says use fair treatment if you don't agree to the pay cuts"?---In the headlines?
PN940
Yes?---Yes.
PN941
Are you comfortable with that?---Yes.
PN942
Do you agree that that creates the impression that Telstra also are acknowledging that this is just across the board pay cut? You know that is not their position don't you?---I don't think it implies that - what you said.
PN943
I see. And when you go down to left hand side second paragraph attached to this bulletin?---Yes.
PN944
Is a request. Do you see that? And then it says "If you don't support your shift payment being cut" - right?---Yes.
PN945
- - - "complete a request and submit it to Telstra immediately". Do you see that?---Yes, yes.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN946
There is no real explanation about the pay cut is there?---In that particular bulletin, no.
PN947
No. And it is a critical bulletin in that it attaches the request to invoke the fair treatment process?---It's one of many that asked them to invoke the fair treatment process.
PN948
Yes. And effectively would you agree on a fair reading of that it is telling people if you don't agree to the cut lodge a form?---Yes. Yes, I - totally.
PN949
So it creates a situation where - can you understand that someone even if they thought it was a pay cut they may not have a grievance. They may be unhappy with it but it may not be a grievance that warrants the invoking of the process. Can you understand there might be a difference?---if they were unhappy?
PN950
Yes?---Well, Telstra's own fair treatment policy states if you are unhappy with the decision. Unhappy is a Telstra ..... and I agree, yes.
PN951
But you understand they may not have a grievance though. It may not constitute a grievance?---Well - a grievance.
PN952
Do you understand t he difference, there might be a difference? During your working life there might be numerous things you are unhappy with but they may not constitute a grievance. Would you understand that?---I'm a bit slow I suppose but one generally would go with the other I'd say.
[3.09pm]
PN953
I see. You were effectively - it was effectively being suggested that you needed to vote against a cut by that paragraph, wasn't it, by filling out a form. Just have a look at it?---I have looked at it.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN954
You agree, it is cast in a term which is effectively saying, if you don't like the pay cut show your dislike by making a grievance request?---That exactly is correct because it was written on 18 September in response to the Commission's direction to us.
PN955
And when urging people to fill out the request you don't provide them with any information of what the issue is actually about, in terms of the variation, do you?---I don't feel we had to. I think it was pretty well known on 18 September.
PN956
I see. You were attempting to just try and drum up as many requests that you could possible get?---I don't have the ability to make anybody fill anything out or do anything. I was advising them in terms of what the Commission said, if you were unhappy about the decision, do it.
PN957
You thought it would look good the more requests that were lodged, didn't you? You thought that would be a good result, the more requests you could get?---I agree totally with you, yes.
PN958
And in fact that was the whole strategy, generate as many requests as you can?---There is no strategy involved whatsoever.
PN959
Well, you had a goal in mind of attempting to attract as many requests as you could?---Yes, undoubtedly.
PN960
And I suggest that as a result of that you didn't describe the issue fairly at all, it is in a very one-sided way of just describing it as a pay cut, didn't you?---I don't think fairness is coming into it at all.
PN961
I see, yes. Can we just go back under the heading:
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN962
Telstra has now made it clear in their view, you agree, with the pay cuts to your penalties payment unless you submit a fair treatment process
PN963
?---Yes.
PN964
Now, this is coming out - you were present on 10 September before the Commission?---I was.
PN965
You say that is a fair summary of the submissions of Telstra to this Commission, do you?---Well, I am not saying that that is fair on - I don't mention that that is out of the Commission meeting on 10 September necessarily, I think it is a fair resume of what Telstra have put to us, yes.
PN966
Well, it says it is now Telstra has now made it clear, you weren't referring to the Commission hearing?---No, not necessarily. I did refer to the Commission under IRC outcome on the right hand side of the page.
PN967
Well, you knew very well that didn't fairly describe whether before the Commission or otherwise, Telstra's position, didn't you? You know that is not a fair description of Telstra's position, don't you?---Would you rephrase that for me, I don't quite understand.
PN968
Okay, just have a look at the document again?---Yes.
PN969
Telstra has now made it clear in their view you agree with the pay cuts to your penalties payment unless you submit a fair treatment process.
PN970
?---Yes.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN971
On any view, that is not a fair description of the Telstra position, was it?---I think it is.
PN972
I see. And then you go on:
PN973
The number of staff who participate in the fair treatment will be a significant factor in whether you can collectively achieve a fair outcome.
PN974
?---Yes.
PN975
Just look at some of the earlier bulletins, can you go to tab 9. This is bulletin, 13 August 2002?---Yes.
PN976
Headed, "Time to make Telstra talk"?---Yes.
PN977
And then going to the second line you make a point - - -?---I don't make the point.
PN978
But this would have been vetted by you as well?---No.
PN979
No. Never seen it?---I have seen it, quite obviously - - -
PN980
Did it run across your desk at all before it went out?---No.
PN981
When I took you to tab 12, 18 September 2002, is it fair to say you gave the impression you were fairly confident that a matter involving Telstra you would have a look over?---I said I had hoped that it probably wouldn't and I was - - -
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN982
Is it fair to say you gave the impression you were fairly confident that a matter involving Telstra you would have a look over?---I said I hoped that it would probably would and I was - yes.
PN983
Yes. But when I now then take you to the next document, tab 9, you seem absolutely emphatic that you would not have seen this even come across your desk before it went out?---Yes.
PN984
Why are you so confident about this bulletin?---Because I know I had nothing to do with it. I am not in such a powerful position in the union.
PN985
But am I right in saying that earlier you did indicate that most things involving Telstra, bulletins involving Telstra, would come across for you to vet?---Yes, most things, yes.
PN986
Would you agree this is - if most things were they wouldn't - they generally wouldn't then leave out from your supervision the more serious important issues?---Well, they do.
PN987
Okay. So you say there is no system to what comes across your desk - - -?---We are in a union here.
PN988
Okay?---No, I don't.
PN989
Could you agree that this would be seen as a more important issue involving Telstra?---Yes.
PN990
And that you would like to have some say or input in relation to the bulletin that come out in relation to that issue?---Probably if I wrote them they would never get printed. And my boss is in Sydney, so it is a little bit harder.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN991
You see that there is a reference there - you see the heading "Time to make Telstra Talk"?---Yes.
PN992
Are you aware that part of the strategy bringing this matter before the Commission was a type of show of strength to the members that you could force Telstra to talk to you direct?---That is what you keep saying.
PN993
No, well I am asking you, what do you say about that?---No, no.
PN994
I see. So a heading like "Time to make Telstra Talk" in your view, would not properly reflect the industrial goals of your union in relation to this matter?---We would hope that Telstra would talk to us, yes.
PN995
No, but you see that the tone of that bulletin is that you will make Telstra talk?---Well, we can't make Telstra do anything, as we learn daily, but I would hope that it would encourage them to talk to us, yes.
PN996
Well, but do you say that the heading "Time to make Telstra Talk" is part of the industrial strategy behind these proceedings?---Well, as I say, the industrial strategy is not necessarily to make Telstra talk it is to get our members a satisfactory outcome to the problem that they have got in front of them. And if talking to Telstra could help, I would go along with it.
PN997
And part of this strategy has been, hasn't it, that to discourage people dealing with Telstra unless you are directly involved?---No.
PN998
But you haven't been telling members don't go it alone, you will be up against lawyers and so forth?---That I've been telling them that?
PN999
Yes?---No.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1000
I see. Do you think is an appropriate part of the strategy. Is that part of the strategy of your union, to your knowledge?---To address - - -
PN1001
To discourage people from just dealing with their issues, directly with Telstra?---No, no.
[3.17pm]
PN1002
Not part of the strategy?---You keep referring to "the strategy". No.
PN1003
Yes. Could you just go down to the bottom. See where it says, "be sure you are represented"?---Yes.
PN1004
"Managers have been told some staff had told some staff that Telstra can make the changes because they have been run past high priced lawyers". See that?---Yes.
PN1005
"You need to ensure you are represented by the union and you don't go one out against Telstra and their fleet of lawyers"?---Yes.
PN1006
"Make sure you are represented by the union. If Telstra approach you, refer them to the union as your representative". You see that?---Yes.
PN1007
That was part of the whole strategy, wasn't it?---If they come - - -
PN1008
Of discouraging people to deal with their grievances on a personal level?---No, no, it is not. It is not discouraging them for their grievances at all, there is no mention of that. No that is not put that way.
PN1009
You have also encouraged people to nominate the CPSU to represent them in relation to AWAs, haven't you?---Yes.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1010
Yes. And you have done that on the back of scary messages that otherwise you are up against an army of lawyers, haven't you?---I don't think they are scary messages, no.
PN1011
Can you understand, though, can you understand, you are familiar with your members at Telstra - - -?---Yes.
PN1012
- - - that someone who may have had a comfortable relationship with Telstra can sort out their issues, reads a communication like this and think, oh my god, I have got to have the union?---No.
PN1013
That that might be their reaction after reading about the fleet of lawyers, you have got to be represented?---On 18 August, I think they were quite well aware of their situation.
PN1014
You are just repeating it to them again?---Well, quite possibly they were - - -
PN1015
Yes, I see. And then can you go to tab 10?---Yes.
PN1016
Then you see the sub-heading "Be sure you are represented"?---Yes.
PN1017
I now want to raise an issue. You put in your statement, an issue regarding a right of entry issue of 3 July 2002. Correct?---Yes.
PN1018
THE COMMISSIONER: What paragraph is that, Mr Bourke?
PN1019
MR BOURKE: Sorry, sir, paragraphs 6 and 7.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1020
THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you.
PN1021
MR BOURKE: Did you prepare the outline of your evidence before you did the statement or was it done at the same time?---How do you mean?
PN1022
Okay. We got an outline of your evidence, right? About a one page document?---Right, right.
PN1023
And there is also your statement which is a 14 page document?---Right.
PN1024
Was the outline done first?---Well I have been working on it for a fair while. I don't know what relevance - I don't quite understand the question you are asking me.
PN1025
You want to know why I am asking it, don't you?---No - well, you will tell me that, no doubt. No. I am trying to answer you honestly, where I was at in my statement, which is at midnight for the last however long and I don't even recall when the outline was done.
PN1026
Yes, I see. Well you had to file the outline, I think, over a week ago?---Well once again, I am the little fellow here, my bosses do that for me. I am unaware of that type of stuff.
PN1027
Does it surprise you that in your outline there is no reference to a rights of entry issue?---No.
PN1028
Is it possible that when, the time the outline was done, you didn't see any relevance with the rights of entry issue that you now raise in paragraph 6 and 7 or your statement?---Well I have started at number 1 and worked upwards, so what relevance or what importance I have no idea.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1029
Yes, I see?---But that is how I started and I finished at 100-odd and I worked my way through, so.
PN1030
Now let us just go back to what occurred on that day. You, in fact, provided a section 285C notification, for general discussions with employees?---Mm.
PN1031
Sorry, you have to answer, because it is being recorded?---Yes, yes. I think I wrote that.
PN1032
And, I suggest, when you arrived you were alleging you wanted to speak to people about breaches of AWAs, didn't you?---No. Totally no. That is wrong.
PN1033
Okay. And you agree that if you were raising issues of breach, that would be the incorrect notice you had given?---I can go word for word - - -
PN1034
Sorry, can you just answer my question, do you agree that if you - - -?---That would be wrong, yes, of course.
PN1035
Can you understand that if there was concern that you hadn't provided the right notice, the person involved may want to get some legal advice?---I don't know why they would even think that.
PN1036
Okay?---I was there under a 285C.
PN1037
I see. And in fact there was a delay of about one hour, whilst it was sorted out whether you should be allowed to come on the premises or not. Correct?---More than an hour, yes.
PN1038
Okay. And in the end you were told that the matter has now been clarified and you were allowed to come on?---In the end, yes.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1039
They didn't say it was a misunderstanding. They said they have now clarified the situation?---No, also they said it was a misunderstanding.
PN1040
I see. Now, in your statement, you raise a meeting involving Ms Borg on 5 July 2002, paragraph 18?---Yes.
PN1041
And this is what you have been told, effectively, secondhand. You weren't there at the time. Correct?---Well everything I get told is secondhand.
PN1042
Okay, that is fine. Were you aware that Lourdes had earlier had a meeting with her team people. Are you aware of that? Before the meeting with Ms Borg?---Lourdes. I am not sure how - I didn't know how you spoke the name - - -
PN1043
Yes, it could be right. Lourdes had earlier had a meeting with staff over this issue?---That is what I was told, yes.
PN1044
And did people tell you that there was no only an adverse reaction by some people to the change proposed but she got personally attacked, quite abusive feedback. Did people tell you that?---No.
PN1045
And that as a result, Ms Borg took over conducting these meetings?---No, I didn't hear - well, and I still haven't heard anything about personal attacks or abuse.
PN1046
Okay. And are you aware that, Ms Borg, when she held the meetings, she put up butcher's paper for people to write their issues down. Did you know that?---No, no.
[3.26pm]
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1047
And that she raised the fact that she mentioned she wasn't happy about the way people had dealt with Lourdes?---What she wrote, this is on the butcher's - - -
PN1048
No, she made the comment. Did you hear about that?---Yes, that she wasn't happy with the way that the meeting had gone and - - -
PN1049
And she said that that didn't uphold Telstra values being to treat people with respect?---Well, I don't know that she said that.
PN1050
Right, okay. And she said that, look, I can appreciate it is a change and we want to pick up your questions. Did people ever tell you that, and then she wrote them down on the board on the butcher's paper?---No, no.
PN1051
I see. And are you aware that there was an enhanced set of questions and answers that came out of that meeting that were later distributed to staff at the Como Centre?---No.
PN1052
No?---No. I know that there were several Q and As that did come out but I don't know where the emanated from or what prompted them to be issued.
PN1053
And I suggest your information was wrong that she said you only deal with me now?---No.
PN1054
Okay?---No.
PN1055
And I suggest - she said nothing along the lines of: you are not going to be treated the same way as you had before if you keep acting like this?---No. I have written it down under (8) and that is my statement - - -
PN1056
I see?--- - - - that I have been told that.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1057
Okay. Do you recognise there is always a chance of misinformation when someone is recounting to you what occurred, and then your having to recount it?---Yes, yes. There is always a possibility. In that as ai - - -
PN1058
And I suggest she didn't say all this had been run past Legals, as you suggest?---No, that was said.
PN1059
And she never suggested it was a done deal and there is - - -?---Yes.
PN1060
Or there is nothing the union can do?---No. Well, she said that.
PN1061
And you see the reference to adults: have you got that, your statement, in front of you at paragraph 18?---The reference to?
PN1062
Do you see paragraph 18 of your statement?---Yes.
PN1063
Point 4, there is reference to adults?---Yes.
PN1064
Is it possible that what she said was that: these matters need to be handled appropriately, and we are adults here to discuss them?---No, it - - -
PN1065
Something like that may have been said?---No, they weren't acting like adults.
PN1066
Okay. And I suggest she didn't raise issues concerning other states?---No, she did.
PN1067
And she asked people to maintain their level of business focus; is it possible she said that?---That is quite possible she said that, yes.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1068
Now, I now want to come to - you raise an issue of a - you visited the site on 14 August 2002, paragraph 32 of your statement?---Yes.
PN1069
Ms Borg approached you in a very informal way whilst you were on the site, didn't she?---Yes.
PN1070
On that occasion?---Well, she came in and said she wanted to see me.
PN1071
And you said to her, "You write the contracts, you should be able to change the decision - - - ?---Yes.
PN1072
- - - as Centre Manager." And she said, "It is a national decision." She mentioned that, didn't she?---Yes.
PN1073
And I suggest she never said: in her opinion, someone high up has made a very big mistake?---Well, there were two of us there that did make a note of that.
PN1074
I see. And I suggest she didn't say: you show me anyone else who gets paid for not working?---She said that.
PN1075
I see. Now, you then raise paragraph 43 that she forwarded an e-mail placing a deadline, 30 September 2002?---Yes.
PN1076
And there had been quite a bit of information about this issue and the fair treatment process prior to that?---Yes.
PN1077
And are you aware that, in fact, she gave two extensions?---No, I don't - - -
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1078
For particular circumstances down at the Como Centre: to file requests under the grievance procedure?---That she gave two extensions?
PN1079
Yes?---Yes, yes, yes. Well, I know of one at least because he is on annual leave and obviously they couldn't lodge one when they were on holidays. The member came and saw me, and asked for information on that and I advised him to see Doris, which he did.
PN1080
Now, one of the issues you raise at paragraph 53 is the fact it often wasn't the exact team leader that dealt with the informal process - - -?---Yes.
PN1081
That Mr Russell did the vast bulk of them, correct?---Yes, yes.
PN1082
Now, just going back a step. Are you aware that the vast majority of people that lodge requests lodge requests in accordance with the CPSU pro forma? Are you aware of that?---Well, I can only - the ones that I know, the union members as such, the vast majority - - -
PN1083
Yes, yes?--- - - - use that form, yes.
PN1084
Could you understand if people then raise those issues, similar issues would come up at each informal meeting? Could you - - -?---One would assume so, yes.
PN1085
And that the position of Telstra at the initial stage might be fairly similar in terms of providing the type of information that might be necessary in handling the queries as set out in the pro forma? Can you understand that?---Well, I can understand where you are coming from, yes.
PN1086
And would you agree that there probably would be some benefit in consistency in what people are told at these informal sessions if they are raising similar issues?---Benefit to whom?
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1087
Well, benefit all round. People aren't coming away - - -?---No, they are doing it individually.
PN1088
No, no, no, just concentrate. But you agree that in terms of the information they provide it would be good that the information is at least - there is some consistency in what people are being provided?---Well, one would hope it would be the right information.
PN1089
And thus there is some benefit in having a person who becomes experienced in dealing with these issues, handling the initial informal stage. Can you understand - - -?---A benefit to Telstra. I can see exactly where you are coming from.
PN1090
Can you understand the benefit of using someone who is familiar with the issues on a regular basis to deal with these matters?---No, no.
PN1091
THE COMMISSIONER: Are you sure about that?---Well, the individuals apparently have individual grievances and Telstra's fair treatment process, I can understand where he is coming from, Commissioner, but - following the fair treatment process, we are.
PN1092
You might get the same question on the other side?---Yes.
PN1093
MR BOURKE: But can you understand, although you might have a different view, that some people may have a contrary view, can see the merit in having someone who is very familiar with the issues dealing with it at the initial informal stage?---At the informal stage?
PN1094
Yes?---Well, hopefully, all of the team managers have already been briefed, yes, so I can't see why one would be better off than the other.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1095
I see. I mean, you have raised this a number of times. Is it not that you are really just trying to find fault anywhere you think you can with the process because you are anti it?---Which process?
PN1096
The grievance procedure process?---No, I am not. The process itself, no.
PN1097
Now, you then deal at paragraph 58 with the meeting with Ms Borg, Mr Allen and you on 2 October?---Yes.
PN1098
I suggest that you did not ask for a production of the policy during that meeting?---I did.
PN1099
And I suggest you were never told off?---I was.
PN1100
She was firm towards you but she didn't tell you off?---Doris had her various ways of addressing each particular part of things. That one I was told off.
PN1101
I see. You knew at the time of that meeting, right or wrong, I don't want to get into a debate on that, that can be sorted out, that Telstra's view was that you could have an observer in attendance, union person or not?---Yes.
PN1102
And they were not to intervene in the process?---Yes.
PN1103
Or become advocates?---Yes.
PN1104
Correct?---Yes.
PN1105
And you were aware that that was their position at the time of this meeting?---Yes.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1106
Were you aware that in fact that was the position we told the Commission was our understanding back on 10 September 2002?---Not particularly that you raised it at the Commission, no.
PN1107
And did you understand that there was an adjournment until 10 October to give the grievance procedure a chance to work?---Yes.
[3.37pm]
PN1108
Can you understand then it might be important to respect how Telstra viewed how their policy worked?---Yes.
PN1109
And could you go to tab 13 of the Telstra 5 folder, although it is addressed to Mr Waters, did this letter come to your attention?---Yes, I have seen that letter.
PN1110
And you see that it points out refers to under "Request for meeting with CPSU", the reference to the decision of 10 September?---Yes.
PN1111
And then there is a reference there, "Request to represent employees"?---Yes.
PN1112
And it is then set out over those two pages the expected role?---Yes.
PN1113
You acted totally contrary to what Telstra requested the CPSU organisers how they would behave at such meetings, didn't you?---No, I didn't.
PN1114
I see. And in fact you at the outset wanted to insist on acting as a representative in the meeting in terms of effectively being the advocate at the meeting?---I have very effectively represented Telstra members at many meetings with Telstra managers. Many times, yes, and I was hoping that I would be able to do that again.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1115
Well, as I said to you, I suggest you knew that was totally contrary. Your role you attempted to adopt was totally contrary to what Telstra had asked through Mr Waters, organisers such as yourself how they behave, wasn't it?---No. No, it is not a deliberate attempt for me to act contrary to what they have asked. No.
PN1116
Could you go please to document 20 of the large folder and these are notes that were made of the meeting, do you understand?---Yes.
PN1117
Do you see effectively at paragraph 2 you said, didn't you, that Mr Allen is an employee of the union, you are paid to represent him and you don't see your role as an observer but you don't want to be disruptive?---Yes.
PN1118
You effectively indicated at the outset that you weren't going to play the observe role?---No, I asked and told Doris all in the same breath that - and Doris fully understood the reason that I was there and what I was there about and I had hoped and it can, go through a meeting without me having to interrupt, if we would like to call it that. But not a deliberate attempt to go there to do that, no.
PN1119
And Ms Borg then explained to you what the role was expected of you?---Yes.
PN1120
Effectively very similar to what was set out in the letter of 30 September?---The same.
PN1121
And you then interjected a number of times, didn't you?---Yes.
PN1122
And each time she asked you to refrain from doing that?---In varying degrees of happiness and sadness - - -
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1123
And you persisted in doing it?---When you say persisted?
PN1124
You continued after she told you please don't interject, you continued to interject?---That is a bit simplistic. A bit simplistic in what you are saying because it was under the terms that had been set it was virtually impossible for me to ask Justin, who was sitting next to me, did he want a break to answer a question or did he want to leave the room or anything. I couldn't ask Doris to ask him and he couldn't ask me the same. He wasn't able to ask me for assistance. He would have to do that through Doris.
PN1125
Well, have you interjected in other meetings in this process, like the way you did in the meeting involving Mr Allen?---How do you mean?
PN1126
Well, have you behaved the same way in relation to the Allen meeting at other meetings where you have attended?---On fair treatment meetings with Telstra on the shift penalties?
PN1127
Have you behaved exactly the same in other meetings, have you?---I don't know what relevance that has got to do with - - -
PN1128
Sorry, just answer the question. Have you behaved in the same manner at other meetings?---Well, behaved in the same manner, I don't like the way you say that particularly. I am sorry.
PN1129
Because at other meetings you have attended you have not persistently interrupted the way you did at this meeting, have you?---I don't believe I persistently interrupted at this meeting anyway, but my position as I said, has fortunately been very successful at most other Telstra meetings that I have had because I have been allowed to represent people.
PN1130
Do you agree they were interjections? They weren't just - they were interjections?---Yes, I suppose on occasions they were.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1131
And you can understand an interjection can be quite disruptive?---Well, the effect it has, once again I am there to represent my member, but interjection I would generally - well, not generally, I think without exception, address Doris and say to Doris, I am sorry, Doris, I will have to ask - I am just giving you an example, Justin for something or other like that.
PN1132
But you agree a fair description of them is interjections?---Interruptions. Well, I think interruption is more appropriate.
PN1133
Do you agree that the words you used in your statement was not interruptions but interjections?---Well, that may well be so, but perhaps it sounds better if I say interruptions.
PN1134
And each time you did she asked you to desist, didn't she, not to do it?---I think sometimes she said, "John, if you keep doing this we are going to be here forever".
PN1135
Because it was quite persistent and dragging the meeting out, wasn't it?---No, it wasn't. No.
PN1136
Yes?---No. No, it wasn't.
PN1137
Well, did you say to her when she did raise with you, "We could be here forever if you keep this up"?---Yes, that is what she said. Yes.
PN1138
And did you say to her anything in response to that?---I said, "Well, if we can come to some plan here", as she said earlier, if I put up my hand or something like that, well, that obviously wasn't working, that I could be allowed to at least address Justin to say can we please have a break, or ask Justin does he need a break, which he obviously did but I couldn't do that and by me saying that to Doris she counts as an interjection and I more than occasion interjected to say that I was concerned about Justin's literal physical and mental health the way things were going and I interjected for that purpose.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1139
You said Ms Borg counted your behaviour as interjection and you counted it as an interjection?---Yes, yes. Well, I will count it as an interjection then.
PN1140
And what she said to you, if you keep on interjecting or interrupting every five minutes we will be here forever?---Well, Doris could say that, yes.
PN1141
And you did not argue with the fact that there had been substantial delay because of your conduct?---Well, there was not - why would I do that, because there hadn't been substantial delay?
PN1142
I see, okay?---No, I wouldn't say that, because it wasn't occurring.
[3.45pm]
PN1143
And she said to you, you are being totally destructive to the meeting by your interruptions, didn't she?---I don't know. Has she said that in her statement?
PN1144
Sorry, just answer. Do you recall that ever being said to you?---No.
PN1145
Can you just go - you have got the document, can you go to page 3?---Yes.
PN1146
Do you see down the bottom, you challenge her, "Are you the decision maker? Can I speak with JA?", do you see that?---Yes.
PN1147
And she points out to you, you are preventing them from moving forward and you are being totally destructive. She said that to you, didn't she?---Total destructive, well, if Doris says that I assume she has made excellent notes, but totally destructive I don't think was - I haven't bothered to count the number of times in the hour and a half that Doris says that I interjected.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1148
And then if you can go to the last page, you raised an issue about complaining about Ms Borg keeping on bringing up business requirements as an issue, didn't you? About halfway down the page?---Would you read it to me? Yes, all right.
PN1149
You raised that?---Yes.
PN1150
You complained about her saying that?---Yes.
PN1151
And in the end she said effectively that she had to terminate the meeting?---Well, I didn't necessarily keep bringing that up. You have quoted what Doris said, you keep bringing up - I know doubt said that then but that is the first time we possibly - I have said this. I don't know, I haven't read through Doris's statement.
PN1152
And at the conclusion of the meeting you said, "Well, you set the guidelines"?---Yes.
PN1153
Do you think that behaviour was consistent with the opportunity of the one month adjournment to see how the grievance procedure worked, do you consider that your conduct was consistent with that objective?---I think it was consistent with the job I had and have to do for my members.
PN1154
The fact of the matter is you didn't want the procedure to work, did you?---I expressly stated to Doris Borg that I wanted it to work and we wanted to get through with it.
PN1155
But you ignored her requests not to interject throughout the meeting?---I didn't ignore it.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1156
Are you aware of a fair treatment meeting involving Simon Goodfellow?---A fair treatment meeting?
PN1157
Involving Simon Goodfellow?---No.
PN1158
And one of your organisers, a Phillip Marshall?---Not particularly a Simon Goodfellow, no.
PN1159
Are you aware at all through your involvement in the union that that meeting had to be terminated because Mr Marshall advised the employee not to participate in the meeting unless Mr Marshall could act as advocate?---Well, I did hear that he had stopped or recommended that something didn't go ahead. I don't know the names but, yes, I know that Phillip Marshall did.
PN1160
And are you aware whether your union did anything to bring Mr Marshall into line?---I have no idea.
PN1161
Are you comfortable - - -?---He is in another State. I have nothing to do with him.
PN1162
But are you comfortable with a situation being developed by the organiser advising the employee not to proceed with any grievance procedure meeting unless the union organiser could be the advocate?---Well, I don't know that my opinion counts for anything on that. I don't advocate that but I don't know what - I have no thought on that. I don't make those decisions.
PN1163
Would you agree that it would be inconsistent with giving the grievance procedure a chance?---Yes.
PN1164
Now, can I move to a meeting involving Mr Mitchell?---Yes.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1165
At paragraph 101?---In my statement is it?
PN1166
Sorry, paragraph 101 of your statement. This is a person in Brisbane?---Yes.
PN1167
Then you refer back to attachment 24 of your statement?---Yes.
PN1168
Do you have that there?---I would, yes. Yes.
PN1169
And the point you complaint of - - -?---I complain of?
PN1170
Or the point raised which you put into evidence is that Mr Mitchell was told by Kelly Hunter there was little point in her explaining the letter?---I am sorry, I don't say that.
PN1171
Sorry, I understood you attached this to your statement?---Yes, yes, I - - -
PN1172
And essentially therefore adopting to the best you can what is being said by Mr Mitchell?---But what are you trying to say? I am sorry, I don't - - -
PN1173
Well, I am just saying you have attached this to your material. I am asking you why. I am suggesting you have done this particularly to refer to the suggested comment of Ms Hunter to Mr Mitchell, do you see that?---No, I am not. Do you want to know my reason for putting there perhaps?
PN1174
Well, can you do that?---Yes.
PN1175
Yes, thank you?---I thought it showed that there you go, there is a meeting without a union person and it has gone along swimmingly well and he has got to get his fair treatment process escalated because he was so passionate about something that Telstra had actually listened to him and she had escalated his fair treatment in 20 minutes.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1176
Can you go to tab 35, please, I just want to trace through with you what happens with Mr Mitchell. You see there is the standard form request?---Yes.
PN1177
And then there was an interview with Mr Mitchell on 14 October 2002?---Yes.
PN1178
And they go through the various issues in that document?---Yes, it is. Yes.
PN1179
And then can you go to the last page, it says:
PN1180
Chris did not understand the bulk of the above and his questions, comments are next to the relevant points.
PN1181
Do you see that?---Well, I don't really because I have not read the document.
PN1182
No, but I am pointing it out to you now?---Where - - -
PN1183
Sorry, the last page of the document at tab 36?---Right.
PN1184
Do you have that, "Chris did not"?---Yes, yes, I do.
PN1185
His basic comment was that none of this made sense as it was all legal language and we kept contradicting ourselves.
PN1186
?---Yes.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1187
He said that we were quoting that you could not take a line of the AWA and use it in isolation and we were taken two or three lines, what was the difference.
PN1188
?---Right.
PN1189
Do you see in there there is a discussion about that and that Chris was looking confused?---Yes.
PN1190
And it says:
PN1191
Ms Hunter asked Chris if he felt it was worthwhile continuing. He stated several times that he did not understand what I was saying. Given the rest of the explanations were based around the fact that preference based rostering changed working arrangements and then Chris agreed that we should cease the meeting and he said it would be better to deal with it writing.
PN1192
Do you see that, "and then get some advice"?---Yes, yes.
PN1193
And that was the approach that was taken?---Right.
PN1194
Can you now understand that that may have then shortened the necessary duration of the meeting, the matters were going to be put in writing for him to consider, do you understand that?---Well, if that was the idea of it, fine.
PN1195
I just want to move the issue of Glenn Foster, which is paragraph 82 of your statement?---Yes.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1196
Now, your complaint here was there was a second meeting and your attendance was not permitted?---Yes.
PN1197
Are you are that Mr Russell's standard practice when dealing with these matters was to meet them with at an informal meeting stage, you knew he did that?---Well, I have difficulty with the informal meeting.
PN1198
Okay. And you are aware that letters would then be prepared dealing with the issues raised?---That he would give them a letter?
PN1199
Sorry, and then that he would meet them to give them the letter and discuss the contents of the letter?---Well, I had only had one person I think and we would have to get dates and all that right, but as far as I knew there was on person and that was Glenn who had gotten a letter. I understood that - I am sorry, and I have got to remember my members, that Glenn Foster had a meeting with his team manager who was Graeme Pearcy, so he hadn't got a letter from Will Russell at all, no, I don't know that then.
PN1200
Well, were you aware that Mr Russell when he gave letters effectively summarised the concerns and the responses at the initial informal meetings, that he would meet them and discuss the letter?---No.
PN1201
But you knew he generated letters?---I got a copy of a letter.
[4.00pm]
PN1202
Yes, I see. And could you understand that a letter arising out of an informal process and summarising what occurred at that informal meeting would also constitute another informal meeting, can you understand that?---No.
PN1203
Are you prepared to accept that you might be incorrect in construing the meeting where Mr Russell provides a letter to someone as part of a formal fair treatment process?---But it is an informal meeting as part of the formal fair treatment process, no, I don't understand that.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1204
Okay. But you accept that he received a letter or you don't know, Mr Foster?---Well, I have written it here I think, haven't I? You see, I have got to go through all my members and - I believed that Glenn had had a meeting with his team leader which was Graeme Pearcy.
PN1205
But you do accept he was provided with a letter?---Which meeting? I don't. I accept that he was given a letter at the meeting I wasn't allowed to attend.
PN1206
Right, okay?---At that meeting he was given a letter, yes. But I don't concede there was a previous letter.
PN1207
Sorry?---I don't remember or I can't concede without going through this that he was given a letter previously from Will Russell, no.
PN1208
Now, can you go to tab 40, please. Did Mr Foster ever show you his letter he received?---I don't know. Unless I have mentioned in there I really don't know.
PN1209
Is it possible that is the letter?---Well, if he is referring to the same meeting that he had with Graeme Pearcy, yes.
PN1210
In fact I think it is attachment 23 to your documents, is that possible?---Yes, but you said out of the meeting that Will had had with Glenn Foster.
PN1211
Yes, I understand?---He didn't have - you said it was Will's practice to issue a letter to the staff member after his meeting with the member. That was his practice and you are assuming that I knew that this was an established practice or something.
PN1212
You didn't know that?---Well, I still don't know it. That letter didn't come out of a meeting with Will Russell. It came out of the meeting with Graeme Pearcy, for heaven's sake.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1213
Can you just go to the letter. Do you see it refers to the meeting on 26 September 2002?---Yes. Yes, I do.
PN1214
And it refers, second paragraph, as a preliminary meeting before any stages of the fair treatment process had started?---Yes, yes.
PN1215
And it then sets out below what the concerns were at that meeting?---That is the letter dated 16 October?
PN1216
Yes, correct?---Yes.
PN1217
Can I take you to the last page of that?---Yes.
PN1218
He indicates that if he is still unhappy he can arrange for the first formal review to be carried out by a level 5 person?---Yes. I am sorry but I am not quite understanding because that letter was given after the meeting that I didn't attend, that I was not allowed to attend. So I can't see when you refer to my statement the relevance of that, I am sorry.
PN1219
You see, your complaint is in relation to a meeting on 16 October?---Yes.
PN1220
Do you see that letter is dated 16 October?---Yes.
PN1221
But you are not prepared to concede that the meeting was about that letter, is that what you are saying?---All of these items in here are the fact that I was not allowed to attend the meeting that was arranged between Will Russell and Graeme Pearcy for me to attend at which that letter was given. This letter was given after I have written 81 through to - well, the whole thing, 81 through to 87 covers him being given that at that meeting that I was refused to attend.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1222
Thank you. Now, can I now move to Kylie Giannitis, which is dealt with at attachment 22 to your statement?---Yes.
PN1223
Now, one of your complaints here that there were three interviews, is that before the formal process started, is that one of your complaints?---It is not one of my complaints, perhaps the members complaining about it.
PN1224
Right. You see, could you understand that if at the end of the second meeting when the letter was provided the relevant employee wanted something else to clarify there might be a third informal meeting before the process starts?---Well, I have the difficulty with the informal side of things when there are officials letters being issued for informal - - -
PN1225
Well, putting that to one side, can you understand that if another matter requires clarification you might want to have a third meeting prior to invoking the informal process to a level 5 person?---I can't see any reason why you wouldn't if Telstra or the member needed it. Why wouldn't they do it?
PN1226
And can you just go to tab 41?---Yes.
PN1227
You see there the pro forma request put in?---Yes.
PN1228
And then there is the standard letter people received from Ms Borg at tab 42?---Yes.
PN1229
Can you see at the back of that attached is a report of the meeting of 19 September 2002?---Yes.
PN1230
She indicated she felt the change was fair?---Well, I read on because that was what the next meeting was about, because she said he, being I think it was Will Russell, wasn't it, misquoted and misinterpreted totally what she said it was not.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1231
Okay?---Yes, I can see that, but yes.
PN1232
Can you see that it was left with if it could be demonstrated that all available shifts are equally distributed that she saw an end to the fair treatment process, do you see that?---Yes, I can see that.
PN1233
And then there was a meeting on 24 September?---Where are we?
PN1234
Sorry, tab 43?---Right.
PN1235
And if you go about two thirds of the way down she states she did not believe shifts were equally distributed between staff?---Mm.
PN1236
Then if you turn to the document attached to that there is then the letter dealing with the meeting of 24 September 2002?---Mm.
PN1237
Are you aware that she in fact whilst complaining about shifts not being equally distributed she was not putting in for shifts, did you know that?---I have no idea.
PN1238
Okay?---I know how the system works but I don't know particularly what Kylie did.
PN1239
I suggest to you, as best as you can respond, that any suggestion that there was intimidation through the process is incorrect?---I can only go by what Kylie has stated.
PN1240
Now, we then have a meeting involving you, which is the last document at tab 23, do you see that? Sorry, not the last document, second last document?---At tab 23. I don't, sorry.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1241
Sorry, 43, I apologise?---Yes.
PN1242
And there was no difficulty in that meeting, was there?---Not a lot of difficulty, no.
PN1243
And you had the meeting without the necessity for any interjections by you?---I deliberately held my tongue, yes.
PN1244
Going down the page to the bottom of page 1 of those notes, one thing Kylie Giannitis raised was she said she is getting less - there is less shifts available now, "I like to work late shifts and weekends, I like the extra cash"?---Mm.
PN1245
Is that correct, was that raised?---Well, that is what is being said in the document.
PN1246
Then can you turn over to page 2, the discussion of that issue. Do you see about point 7 of the page it says:
PN1247
I used to PBR initially. I didn't get shifts so I stopped preferencing my shifts.
PN1248
?---Yes, yes.
PN1249
So you see that it became apparent that although she was complaining about shifts not being equally distributed she wasn't even putting in?---Commonly to more than 50 per cent of the staff I would suggest, yes.
PN1250
You see that that is discussed at the bottom of the page:
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1251
Yes, I understand, I have to put in preferences.
PN1252
?---Yes.
PN1253
And that was discussed and resolved?---Mm.
PN1254
Sorry, you have to answer rather than nod?---Yes. I am sorry, yes. Well, yes.
PN1255
You raised the fact that there was a comment made that the decision won't be reversed?---I did?
PN1256
Yes?---Where is that?
PN1257
I think it is paragraph 93?---Sorry.
PN1258
Paragraph 97, sorry?---Right.
PN1259
That it won't be reversed?---Yes.
PN1260
I suggest that was made in the context where Ms Borg was saying that she couldn't reverse it?---Yes.
[4.15pm]
PN1261
Do you accept that?---Yes.
PN1262
Yes, thanks. Now, can you turn over the page, do you have there an e-mail from Ms Giannitis?---I am sorry, which page?
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1263
Sorry, the last page now at tab 43?---Of Telstra documents, I am sorry?
PN1264
Sorry, Telstra documents. I apologise?---Right, okay. Right.
PN1265
And you see that she sent an e-mail saying that she found the session very informative?---Yes.
PN1266
But then indicates she wished to continue with the process?---Correct.
PN1267
And do you agree that was a fair summary, it was a very informative session?---Well, that is Kylie. That is terrific.
PN1268
And you did not behave in the same way you behaved in relation to the Allen meeting, did you?---I didn't interject.
PN1269
No. Can I move now - - -
PN1270
THE COMMISSIONER: Is that a convenient time?
PN1271
MR BOURKE: Sorry, thank you, sir.
PN1272
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, that is all right. Could I just raise a matter for the union to consider overnight. I had in mind hearing your witnesses and then I was going to ask the question as to whether or not it should be adjourned and I should not hear the employer's witnesses or submissions until after I have handed down my decision in the matter that is the subject of what your exceptional matters order seeks. I don't ask you to answer now, but the issue raised in your exceptional matters order has been the subject of very extensive arbitration proceedings as an application to vary an award and I have heard
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
extensive argument on a lot of the issues going to power balances, power relationships, the issue of the fair treatment process, how it should operate and I am being asked in those proceedings to vary or not vary the award which will require a consideration, a detailed consideration of Telstra's fair bargaining process.
PN1273
Now, it occurred to me that given the relief that you seek arising from these proceedings goes directly to the operation of the fair treatment process it is using a specific circumstance to deal with an issue that in the broad sense has already been argued and decision reserved and so what I will be asking you tomorrow after I have heard the finish of your evidence is why I shouldn't adjourn the matter, await or deal with the reserved decision and then I can give the opportunity to the employer to make submissions and to deal with evidence based upon the conclusions that I have reached in the main case about the proper operation of the fair treatment process.
PN1274
It would seem that if I heard and reserved this one I have then got a decision to make as to which one I bring down first and why and my preference would be, of course, to look at the issue globally rather than one that arises out of a particular dispute, but then re-list the particular dispute to see how that fits in with the global conclusions that I have reached. Now, can I put you on notice that that is the sort of question I am going to ask you tomorrow after I have heard the conclusion of the evidence and that I would like to hear your response on that tomorrow, give you an opportunity to consider it. And you can consider that too, Mr Bourke.
PN1275
MR BOURKE: Sir, I am just wondering and I am not wanting to rush Mr Waters, but I am just wondering, and I know it is late, is there any purpose served in whether that can be sorted out over a five or 10 minute adjournment so we may not all have to reconvene tonight if one course - sorry, tomorrow if one course is adopted?
PN1276
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, you haven't finished cross-examining the witness.
**** JOHN ALAN JAMIESON XXN MR BOURKE
PN1277
MR BOURKE: No, that is true.
PN1278
THE COMMISSIONER: So I still want - I think the issue is that I get their evidence in.
PN1279
MR BOURKE: Yes.
PN1280
THE COMMISSIONER: But the issue is then how you respond to that with your evidence. Very well. Just a moment. Ten o'clock tomorrow. The matter is adjourned until 10 o'clock tomorrow.
ADJOURNED UNTIL THURSDAY, 31 OCTOBER 2002 [4.20pm]
INDEX
LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs |
EXHIBIT #TELSTRA5 FOLDER OF DOCUMENTS PN469
ANNA TERESE WARD, AFFIRMED PN488
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR WATERS PN488
EXHIBIT #CPSU4 WITNESS STATEMENT OF ANNA TERESE WARD PN498
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BOURKE PN518
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR WATERS PN785
WITNESS WITHDREW PN819
JOHN ALAN JAMIESON, SWORN PN821
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR WATERS PN821
EXHIBIT #CPSU5 WITNESS STATEMENT OF MR J. JAMIESON PN841
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BOURKE PN883
AustLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/AIRCTrans/2002/4575.html