AG2002/6767, Transcript of Proceedings [2003] AIRCTrans 1145 (31 March 2003)

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 VT2011
AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

COMMISSIONER LEWIN

AG2002/6767

APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION
OF AGREEMENT

Application under section 170LK of the Act
by State Sport Centres Trust for certification
of the State Sport Centres Trust Certified
Agreement 2002

MELBOURNE

10.20 AM, FRIDAY, 14 MARCH 2003

PN1

MR R. LEVIN: I seek leave to appear on behalf of the applicant in this matter.

PN2

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Levin. Yes, under the circumstances there is no reason why leave should not be granted. Mr Levin, what I should tell you is something that I would like to have told you prior to today's hearing. There was a little bit of a delay and obviously you attended to that in your letter of 4 March, and the reason for the delay which pressure of work prevented me communicating to you earlier, was that there was a report being sought in relation to the agreement, a copy of which I now give you.

PN3

A report was sought by the Commission from Victoria University Workplace Studies Centre about the application of the agreement, and as you will see from the report, and I appreciate that I have just handed it to you and I don't expect you to comment on it without having the opportunity to read it in full and understand it, but essentially the Commission asked for the expert advice of the centre using a software application that they have for the processing of certified - or proposed certified agreements for the purposes of the no disadvantage test.

PN4

The conclusions, somewhat provisional, are that the agreement may or does not pass the no disadvantage test because the software indicates that some of the employees at least may be disadvantaged by the terms - - -

PN5

MR LEVIN: Yes.

PN6

THE COMMISSIONER: - - - some of the terms of the agreement. The procedure would normally have been that you would have had this report available prior to today.

PN7

MR LEVIN: Yes.

PN8

THE COMMISSIONER: And you would be able to speak to it. The procedure also involves the author of the report being available for questioning by the party making the application. I apologise for the fact that this report has been provided to you rather late in the day. I think the implications of it are that it will need to be responded to, so apart from that my inspection of the agreement is that it - at least in terms of the making of the agreement, that it is in order, isn't it?

PN9

MR LEVIN: Yes, sir.

PN10

THE COMMISSIONER: So that leaves us with the no disadvantage test.

PN11

MR LEVIN: Well, sir, can I say on the record that we were in a position today to take you through where it is less than and where it is more than.

PN12

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN13

MR LEVIN: And I believe that I can satisfy you today by a chart showing you the differences.

PN14

THE COMMISSIONER: I see, all right.

PN15

MR LEVIN: Because each of those matters identified that I quickly looked at I have already observed.

PN16

THE COMMISSIONER: You have anticipated those.

PN17

MR LEVIN: Yes, sir.

PN18

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, all right.

PN19

MR LEVIN: Now, I wonder if I could also ask if we could go off the record for a moment?

PN20

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, certainly.

OFF THE RECORD

PN21

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Levin, I think that in light of the lateness of the report that I tabled earlier that it is desirable that you produce a written response to that. I don't think it is fair to you to have to respond to it on the run this morning. The reason for that is that even though you may well have anticipated some of the issues, you may not have covered all of them. I mean it requires a careful reading and I think the best idea is that if I list this matter, say next Friday at 1.15, and in the meantime could you produce the written response to the report.

PN22

If you contest any of the content of the report, you think that it is wrongly founded, then please let my associate know and we will arrange for Dr Dorney, the author, to be present for questioning.

PN23

MR LEVIN: Yes, sir, thank you for that. I might raise a matter that I discussed with you in conference, the possibility of adjourning today altogether and I wonder if I could ask the Commissioner's view on adjourning - - -

PN24

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, well, it seems to me that the only matter before me is an application validly made by the organisation. The relationships between the organisation and other parties is not a matter that falls within the legislative provisions applicable to the consideration of the application. The Commission is required to hear and determine the application for certification. The only issues that I have to deal with are in two broad headings. One, was the application made in the manner prescribed by the legislation, and two, does it meet the no disadvantage test?

PN25

MR LEVIN: Yes, the applicant is aware of the obligation of the Commission under section 110 to proceed swiftly and as soon as the application is lodged, and also is aware, and wants to put on record, the concern that the employees have in relation to the delay that might occur for the months now since they have certified the agreement, and that they would like to have their pay processed as quickly as possible. If the Commission pleases.

PN26

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, well, as I say, I have to hear and determine this application and that is what I will do. There is nothing else for me to do.

PN27

MR LEVIN: Yes, indeed. There is one procedural matter before we close off, and that is that I would like to hand up, if I could, and then undertake to have filed with the Registry an application to add two certified - two awards as underpinning awards.

PN28

THE COMMISSIONER: When you say underpinning awards do you mean for XF purposes?

PN29

MR LEVIN: An application under XF. Yes, for XF because they have got some creche people and also two clerks.

PN30

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Well, I might need to actually refer that to Dr Dorney.

PN31

MR LEVIN: Well, yes, I wonder how - well, perhaps then before I make the application, perhaps I will read his report.

PN32

THE COMMISSIONER: Read the report, yes.

PN33

MR LEVIN: It may not be necessary.

PN34

THE COMMISSIONER: I will just foreshadow that application may be made.

PN35

MR LEVIN: Thank you very much.

PN36

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, all right. Will you let me know when you have actually formulated your written response, whether you intend to amend your XF application?

PN37

MR LEVIN: I will, sir.

PN38

THE COMMISSIONER: Good, thank you.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [10.30am]