C2001/6076, Transcript of Proceedings [2002] AIRCTrans 63 (2 January 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 1780
AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

COMMISSIONER BLAIR

C2001/6076

APPLICATION TO VARY AN AWARD

Application under section 113 of the
Act by Australian Postal Corporation
regarding classifications

MELBOURNE

10.26 AM, FRIDAY, 14 DECEMBER 2001

PN1

MR R. BILSBY: I appear on behalf of the Australian Postal Corporation.

PN2

MR D. GOULDING: I appear on behalf of the Communications, Electrical and Plumbing Union.

PN3

THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Bilsby.

PN4

MR BILSBY: Commissioner, this application seeks to increase the award salaries rates for the postal delivery group, to delete the postal sorting classification group and to implement the consequential variations. Australia Post and the CEPU some years ago agreed that the work of the postal delivery group had changed - had changed significantly on work value grounds and as a result should be accorded salary parity with the postal sorting group. There was a number of changes that had resulted in the postal delivery group and they really resulted from the separation in Australia Post of the retail and the delivery networks some years back.

PN5

As a result of that change there was quite a number of changes for the postal delivery officers and the other members of that group, but particularly the major work value change was related to the sorting field that the people at the postal delivery offices had to be aware of. There was quite a significant increase in the sorting field as a result of the new role they had taken on. As well, postal delivery officers also took on board a much increased delivery round. The knowledge of the delivery points and the geographical area that they required to cover was increased significantly.

PN6

There were a number of other significant issues also which we have covered in the application that collectively we believe made the case for work value increase for the postal delivery group. Post and the CEPU believe the impact of these particular changes was quite significant and that the work value of postal delivery groups should be acquainted with the postal sorting group. As a result it was agreed that the resulting salary increases would be implemented by state-based certified agreements and this occurred back in the mid nineties.

PN7

The parties have agreed as part of EBA4 that the postal sorting group will be merged with the postal delivery group and it is now intended taking action to translate all the postal sorting group staff into the postal delivery group and that in effect will render the postal sorting group as obsolete. Post believes that the variations are consistent with the principles that the changes in the work value are significant enough to warrant classification to a higher level. The variations will certainly lead to appropriate internal relativities and that there is no likelihood of wage leapfrogging and that the changes in work value have occurred since the SEP agreement in Post.

PN8

Post, therefore, submits that the change to the award should take effect - with effect from the start of the next pay period and I would like to hand up a copy of draft orders and a disk which covers the situation.

PN9

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Yes, Mr Goulding.

PN10

MR GOULDING: Commissioner, the CEPU has considered this matter and has put it to our divisional executive to endorse or otherwise and the divisional executive has endorsed it and we consequently agree with the application.

PN11

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. What further decision are we referring to in the draft order?

PN12

MR BILSBY: A joint decision to approve, Commissioner.

PN13

THE COMMISSIONER: No, sorry, you have got:

PN14

Further to a decision issued by the Commission on print - the above award is varied as follows.

PN15

MR BILSBY: Yes. Sorry, if I have misled you there.

PN16

THE COMMISSIONER: I am not quite - - -

PN17

MR BILSBY: The intent there was - - -

PN18

THE COMMISSIONER: Is there something else I have done that I don't know about?

PN19

MR BILSBY: It was meant to be today's decision.

PN20

THE COMMISSIONER: Okay, right, thanks. All right. This is an application under section 113 to vary the Australia Post Operations Award 1999 to reflect an agreement between the parties in regard to a number of deletions that are proposed in the award mentioned. This is due to a consolidation, if I could use that term, of some functions and a recognition of work value changes; there is a requirement for them to be at a different level. Is that right?

PN21

MR BILSBY: That is correct, Commissioner.

PN22

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Having heard from the parties the Commission is satisfied that the variation should occur. The Commission has been satisfied that the variation sought is consistent with the statement of principles and that is that the changes in work value are significant enough to warrant reclassification to a higher level. Two, the variations will lead to appropriate internal relativities and there is no likelihood of wage leapfrogging.

PN23

And, three, the changes in work value have occurred since the structural efficiency principle adjustment in Post. The variation to the award shall come into force from today's date, 14 December 2001, and shall remain in force for a period of six months. No further business, the Commission stands adjourned and wishes you a merry Christmas.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [10.33am]