C2002/4298, Transcript of Proceedings [2002] AIRCTrans 5019 (12 December 2002)

AUSCRIPT PTY LTD
ABN 76 082 664 220

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

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS


O/N VT920

AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

COMMISSIONER TOLLEY

C2002/4298

AUSTRALIAN LIQUOR, HOSPITALITY
AND MISCELLANEOUS WORKERS UNION

and

AIMS CORPORATION and OTHERS

Notification pursuant to section 99 of the Act
for a dispute re wages and conditions

MELBOURNE

10.04 AM, THURSDAY, 28 NOVEMBER 2002

Continued from 10.9.02

PN116

MS R. FRENZEL: I continue my appearance for the LHMU in this matter.

PN117

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Ms Frenzel.

PN118

MS FRENZEL: Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner when we were last - - -

PN119

THE COMMISSIONER: Just before you do so, I would like to just note for the record that no other parties have attended the Commission and all parties were informed of the time and place of hearing. They were not all informed?

PN120

MS FRENZEL: One party was informed.

PN121

THE COMMISSIONER: There was only one to be informed, wasn't there?

PN122

MS FRENZEL: Yes, that is right, Commissioner, Interactive Security Solutions.

PN123

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, well, that is what I mean, the party was informed.

PN124

MS FRENZEL: The party was informed, yes.

PN125

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, the party, yes.

PN126

MS FRENZEL: In fact he was informed in a variety of ways. He was informed by telephone, facsimile and by hand delivery of the notice of hearing and the draft orders.

PN127

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN128

MS FRENZEL: And he signed for it too.

PN129

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN130

MS FRENZEL: Commissioner, firstly, I might deal with the section 101 application to vary the dispute finding previously made.

PN131

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN132

MS FRENZEL: And I might indicate that the application seeks to do two things: Firstly to delete two respondents to the dispute finding - - -

PN133

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN134

MS FRENZEL: - - - that being Call Security and Galactic Security on the basis that after the last hearing the letter of demand and log of claims was returned by the post office so we would seek to delete those two employers.

PN135

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN136

MS FRENZEL: And we would also seek to now include Interactive Security Solutions given that they were served with a letter of demand and a log of claims and what I will do is I will tender a document which actually shows the schedule of respondents to the dispute finding.

PN137

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you.

EXHIBIT #A2 SCHEDULE OF RESPONDENTS TO DISPUTE FINDING

PN138

MS FRENZEL: Thank you, Commissioner. Now, leading on from when the matter was last before the Commission, I now request that the roping-in awards which were the subject of the previous hearing be made by the Commission save and except for a couple of amendments and what I will do is I will tender two documents, firstly, roping-in award to the Security Employees, State Government Departments, Instrumentalities (Victoria) Interim Award 1993

EXHIBIT #A3 ROPING-IN AWARD TO THE SECURITY EMPLOYEES, STATE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, INSTRUMENTALITIES (VICTORIA) INTERIM AWARD 1993

PN139

MS FRENZEL: And a roping-in award to the Security Employees Victoria Award 1998.

EXHIBIT #A4 ROPING-IN AWARD TO THE SECURITY EMPLOYEES VICTORIA AWARD 1998

PN140

MS FRENZEL: Thank you, Commissioner. Now, there are a couple of amendments to the schedule of respondents which need to be done, once again arising out of the term "mail" and on the two exhibits you will - on the respondency lists, Commissioner, what we have done is we have highlighted M.K.K. Security, Nobile Protective Services Pty Limited and - - -

PN141

THE COMMISSIONER: Interactive Security and - - -

PN142

MS FRENZEL: Interactive, that is right.

PN143

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN144

MS FRENZEL: And that mail arising out of the previous hearing was also returned and it was returned after the hearing obviously so what I have suggested to your associate is that I e-mail to your office corrected draft orders deleting those three respondents.

PN145

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you, yes.

PN146

MS FRENZEL: We would say, Commissioner, that service has been properly effected on Interactive Security Solutions. As I say, we notified by telephone, by facsimile and by hand and there should be a statement as to service on the file outlining the steps the union took to service this particular employer and we would ask that they be included with respect to both the dispute finding and the roping-in awards we are asking the Commission to make.

PN147

I would briefly reiterate by previous submissions in this matter about both awards complying with the first award principle and also with respect to section 89A(2) of the Act, certainly the Security Employees of Victoria Award has been simplified and therefore there is no need for an interim roping-in award to that award and with respect to the Security Employees State Government Departments and Instrumentalities (Victoria) Interim Award, we are seeking an interim roping-in award so that the requirements of the Act are met.

PN148

We would also just draw the Commission's attention to paragraph 5.2 on page 2 which outlines those clauses which are either not allowed or unenforceable at this point in time and therefore the roping-in award seeks to exclude the operation of those clauses in the roping-in award itself. I would indicate for the information of the Commission that the simplification is before Commissioner Holmes and is listed for hearing in early February. On that basis, Commissioner, I commend the two applications to the Commission.

PN149

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you. Well, the Commission is satisfied that the union has taken all the appropriate steps required pursuant to the rules of the Commission and the requirements of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 as amended to properly serve employers. Where there has been service returned - service of registered mail, my term is returned, the union has indicated which of those companies they are and the union will supply the Commission with an amended schedule of respondents.

PN150

In respect to the application, those applications for filing a dispute and making of awards are dealt with in conjunction with the Commission's previous order which was made on 13 August 2002 and the companies being answered to both the Security Employees Victoria Award 1998 and the Security Employees State Government Departments and Instrumentalities (Victoria) Interim Award 1993 are agreed to. The Commission is adjourned, thank you.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [10.11am]

INDEX

LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs

EXHIBIT #A2 SCHEDULE OF RESPONDENTS TO DISPUTE FINDING PN138
EXHIBIT #A3 ROPING-IN AWARD TO THE SECURITY EMPLOYEES, STATE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, INSTRUMENTALITIES (VICTORIA) INTERIM AWARD 1993 PN139
EXHIBIT #A4 ROPING-IN AWARD TO THE SECURITY EMPLOYEES VICTORIA AWARD 1998 PN140