C2002/5274, Transcript of Proceedings [2002] AIRCTrans 4753 (27 November 2002)

AUSCRIPT PTY LTD
ABN 76 082 664 220

Level 4, 60-70 Elizabeth St SYDNEY NSW 2000
DX1344 Sydney Tel:[phone] Fax:[phone]

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

MUNRO J

C2002/5274

APPLICATION FOR SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTE

Application under section 170 LW of the Act
by Rheem Australia Pty Limited and Amalgamated
Manufacturing Workers Union re proposed change to
dispatch arrangements at Rydalmere

SYDNEY

10.15 AM, WEDNESDAY, 13 NOVEMBER 2002

Hearing continuing

PN1

HIS HONOUR: This is an application under 170LW of the Act for the settlement of a dispute submitted or referred by Rheem Australia in relation to a proposed change to dispatch arrangements at Rydalmere. It was lodged on 29 October this year. It has been lodged today on what I consider to be standard notice for a matter of the kind. Could I have appearances, please?

PN2

MR B. O'DONNELL: I appear, together with Mr Noel Kelly, for the Australian Industry Group and with me also are Peter Ross and Mr Phil Woodburn from the company.

PN3

MR D. HENRY: I represent the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union. With me today is Mr J Addo, who is the AMWU convenor at the Rheem site.

PN4

MR E. MITCHELL: I appear on behalf of the Australian Workers Union. With me is Mr Frank Addo, the senior delegate. Thank you, your Honour.

PN5

HIS HONOUR: Yes, Mr O'Donnell, what is it about?

PN6

MR O'DONNELL: Thank you, your Honour. This dispute, as summarised in the notification, relates to a change in dispatch arrangements at Rydalmere. That change would involve the physical transferring of finished product from the end of the production process to the site warehouse. There are a number substantial and relevant commercial reasons for wanting to make the change, in particular, two issues from the commercial point of view that arise are that the transport logistics provided for Rheem, Patricks logistics, are in an insurance base. There are questions about who loaded the containers and if the product loaded into containers is damaged, there is an issue in terms of being able to provide guarantees and for quality assurance guarantees look for reasons. It is certainly relevant to be able to have a comprehensive insurance cover which is dependent on that tracing of the product line.

PN7

The second issue then is in terms of counting of units on to trucks. For example, in the month of October, I understand, there is a $90,000 stock discrepancy, not necessarily relating Rydalmere or of any miscounting of product, but somewhere in the system that can occur and one of the factors that will resolve that from Rheem's point of view would be having their transport provider the physical loader of the containers.

PN8

There are no redundancies or significant change to the role the employees would be carrying out. The two, employees on day shift would be involved with some change going back to working on lines where they had previously worked. Also still maintaining the use of fork lifts, the classification would not change at all. So for those sorts of practical reasons the company can see that it needs to make this change in the physical loading of the containers from the end of the line rather than, as currently, employees of Rheem are doing the physical loading and then the containers are removed to the warehouse area, which is then under the control of Patricks logistics.

PN9

We would propose, after hearing from my friends, that it may suitable for the detail of how this change has been proposed, the consultation process that we have gone through and how to appropriately resolve the issues that have arisen may best be dealt with by the Commission in conference.

PN10

HIS HONOUR: Mr O'Donnell, what effect is there on the employees in relation to overtime and the like.

PN11

MR O'DONNELL: I don't have any instructions that there is any effect in terms of overtime at all from the change.

PN12

HIS HONOUR: I see.

PN13

MR O'DONNELL: There would be no remuneration effect on the employees, as I understand it.

PN14

HIS HONOUR: Yes, Mr Henry?

PN15

MR HENRY: Thank you, your Honour. I just submit this.

PN16

HIS HONOUR: I will mark as Exhibit AMWU1 a document headed "Rydalmere Dispatches Exchange" from the AMWU and the AWU to Rheem Australia, together with an earlier letter dated 24 October - I'm sorry, it is 23 October. It is a series of correspondences running from 18 October through to 24 October. Yes, Mr Henry?

EXHIBIT #AMWU1 DOCUMENT HEADED "RYDALMERE DISPATCHES EXCHANGE" TOGETHER WITH ATTACHED CORRESPONDENCE

PN17

MR HENRY: Thank you, your Honour. Your Honour, the delegates put this issue in dispute in late September, abiding by the disputes resolution procedure, which is clause 10 of the Enterprise Agreement. There may be concern, a concern that should have been obvious, was an attack by the company on job security. Despite promises to place the affected employees into the heater assembly production crew, a decision, I might add, made without consultation, not only a breach of clause 14 of the EBA, but a breach of the OH & S Regulations 2001, as their roles are going to be changed.

PN18

For the delegates, the company's decision resembled four roles or jobs being taken away, not due to any fault of their own, but rather due to the impetus of management to be able to deal with a problem which appears, as described to myself by the company, as theft and the suspected guilty party, the very contractor being rewarded with the Rheem employees' jobs.

PN19

Your Honour, on Wednesday 16 October the organisers attended a meeting as site as part of the disputes procedure in an attempt to resolve the issue. Unfortunately, the company had clearly made a decision despite many innovative ideas put forward by the unions. As it became clear that the company were not interested in listening, the union asked for a letter from Rheem answering four key questions.

PN20

The first was a letter of comfort that Rheem and Patricks would abide by the Workplace Relations Act 170NB. The second request was a clear job description of those jobs being affected. The third was in the letter of comfort an assurance that the employees would be direct permanent employees of Patricks and the fourth request was further in the letter of comfort a guarantee that there would be no stand-downs as a result of the dispute arising between Rheem and Patricks.

PN21

Your Honour, the letter dated 18 October, which has been handed up, was the company's response to our request. As can be seen, it in no way attempts to satisfy the unions' reasonable requests. The union, wanting to resolve this issue, sent the fax dated 23 October reiterating those questions in case of a misunderstanding and making it crystal clear that a dispute still existed whilst the questions unanswered. No effort to comply has been made by the company and the unions, therefore, seek today a direction given to the company to comply with the reasonable requests of the union for a letter of comfort committing and compelling to the four key questions.

PN22

Your Honour in the immediate time though the unions would agree with the AIG that private conference may help us along the path to resolving the issue today, thank you your Honour.

PN23

HIS HONOUR: Yes. Mr O'Donnell did you wish to add anything?

PN24

MR O'DONNELL: I would wouldn't have anything further to say at this time your Honour.

PN25

HIS HONOUR: Very well. I haven't had a chance to read this document closely but I think the best thing might be to go into private conference and if necessary we will resume on the record. The commission will adjourn.

OFF THE RECORD

INDEX

LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs

EXHIBIT #AMWU1 DOCUMENT HEADED
x~x

INDEX

LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs

EXHIBIT #AMWU1 DOCUMENT HEADED
EXHIBIT #AMWU1 DOCUMENT HEADED
EXHIBIT #AMWU1 DOCUMENT HEADED PN25
EXHIBIT #AMWU1 DOCUMENT HEADED PN25