C2003/5552, Transcript of Proceedings [2003] AIRCTrans 4772 (29 October 2003)

AUSCRIPT PTY LTD
ABN 76 082 664 220

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

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS


O/N 10635
AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

COMMISSIONER GAY

C2003/5552

CPSU, THE COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC
SECTOR UNION

and

STATE OF VICTORIA (EXPENDITURE
REVIEW COMMITTEE)

Notification pursuant to Section 99 of the Act
of a dispute re application for a compulsory
conference

MELBOURNE

2.26 PM, TUESDAY, 14 OCTOBER 2003

Continued from 18.9.03

PN84

THE COMMISSIONER: Is there any change in appearances?

PN85

MS D. HILL: There are no changes from the CPSUs perspective.

PN86

MR S. AIRD: Mr Commissioner, I have MR B. COLE assisting me.

PN87

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. This matter comes back on. Yes, Ms Hill.

PN88

MS HILL: Thank you, Commissioner. Just to recap where we left off, and to where we are today. As a result of the hearing we last had on 18 September, if you recall we organised to meet with the Department the following week, which was 23 September, in order to try and resolve our wishes. Mr Aird had said to us on numerous occasions, and also in this Commission, that he would be more than happy to resolve this matter if we could help him find the money. We went to that meeting with the view to try and help him find the money.l

PN89

Quite frankly, we asked Mr Aird about his budget situation, about how we might start doing a little bit of jigging with a number of the deal breaks as we see them on the table, and what they might cost, and how we might assist the Department to try and find that money. But then obviously I think that the offer was hollow, and the offer was hollow because we were not allowed to be privy to any of the - whilst on the one hand you say, I would like you to help me find the money, and when we say, we are here, and we are more than happy to help you, and we would like to see what it is we can do, and how much is this going to cost, and can't we fund it from here, and whatever, the actual data is not given to us, or available to us, and certainly not forthcoming.

PN90

At that meeting Mr Aird had a couple of his colleagues from Joint Services Department with him. They decided to have an adjournment of 20 minutes because they had a few things to discuss. And we thought hello, they are going to go and have - we have got some movement here, they are going to come back and make us some sort of an offer. I don't know what they did in the other room for 20 minutes, but they came back and said, well, the meeting is over. So, well, what have you been discussing? Can you help you with anything? No, you can't.

PN91

So, obviously I went back and reported that meeting to my membership, which was on 25 September. The union meeting at that time resolved not to take any industrial action. However, they put out an invitation to their actual employers, which is the President and the Speaker of Parliament, Ms Gould and Ms Maddigan, and I will read that to you:

PN92

Dear President and Speaker, CPSU members received a report from Industrial Officer Debbie Hill and the CPSU Elected Officers Executive this morning at a well attended union meeting in relation to the recent compulsory conference in the AIRC. At a subsequent meeting held on Tuesday 23 September ...(reads)... Could you please confirm your attendance...

PN93

blah, blah. That is signed by Karen Batt. In reply, on 2 October, a few days before our union meeting was to be scheduled, I received a response which said:

PN94

Dear Ms Batt, Karen, thank you for your letter of the 25th inviting us to a union meeting scheduled to take place on 7 October. We are confident that the Parliament's position has been explained to the CPSU delegates ...(reads)... Yours sincerely, Julie Maddigan and Monica Gould.

PN95

Well, quite frankly, Commissioner - - -

PN96

THE COMMISSIONER: Did they both sign that?

PN97

MS HILL: They both signed that document.

PN98

THE COMMISSIONER: Could I see that, please.

PN99

MS HILL: Most certainly. There has been no negotiating process, so I don't know how them declining our invitation to come and talk about the real issues with us as our employer was ever going to complicate anything, because nothing had ever been - nothing had happened.

PN100

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Are you going to submit this, Ms Hill?

PN101

MS HILL: I will, Commissioner. I need to get copies, but most certainly I would like to hand that up as an exhibit.

PN102

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. We will have a copy made shortly.

PN103

MS HILL: Further, we had let the presiding officers know that their attendance - they were not going to be ambushed. That we clearly wanted to have a discussion with them, let us know what their position was, and start talking around some of the real issues.

PN104

Now, they declined that offer, so my people were very angry when they came to a union meeting on 7 October. After an hour and a half of too-ing and fro-ing - and I would like to put on record that the decision they took was not taken lightly, because they have constituents that they care about that rely on them. They chose to take a 72 hour strike action.

PN105

Now, my people have only come back to work yesterday. We had a union meeting this morning, and they are looking to this Commission to try and assist us through these issues. Now, in the meantime, whilst these people have been on their 72 hour strike, we had discussions with the Minister for Industrial Relations, Mr Hulls. My boss, Karen Batt, has had discussions with the ministerial adviser for Mr Hulls.

PN106

THE COMMISSIONER: Well, before you go on to that latter, the second point, you say you have met with the Minister: and is that the negotiating team, do you mean?

PN107

MS HILL: Well, he has never been part of the negotiating team.

PN108

THE COMMISSIONER: Sorry, when you say that you had met, I really just want to identify who has met.

PN109

MS HILL: Well, quite frankly, we collared him. He was walking through Parliament House. My people had voted to go on strike as of 72 hours for the next 3 days. He was walking through Parliament House, and I said to him, "No, hang on a minute. You have got to get this fixed. You are the Minister for Industrial Relations." And he said to me at that time, "What will fix this?".

PN110

So I said to him at that time, "Quite frankly, we have got some must haves on the table, but we are prepared to move, and we are prepared to negotiate on these points. And we put up to him what we thought could fix this dispute. And I advised him at the time that I could get my members together very quickly in order for the 72 hour strike not to continue.

PN111

I heard nothing. I heard nothing, and then they let us play ourselves out. And come Monday, there was a large number of officers weren't working. Some did, and I do have a list of those who did. We met as a union this morning, and I have nothing to report. We come out of this Commission with all good faith. We go and meet with the other side. Now, it is a furphy to say that Mr Aird - and it is not his fault. He is not a decision maker in this process. He is not a decision maker.

PN112

The employers have declined to meet with us because of some notion that it would muddy the waters of a negotiating process. We haven't had any negotiations yet. From 1 April to now, we have had no negotiations. At the union meeting today - I would like to read to you, and it is in a cut and paste form, so I can't actually - well, I could copy it up in terms - in being able to provide you with a copy of it, but it reads as follows:

PN113

The CPSU MOSPS Sub-branch authorises the following offer. A 12 month agreement that ensures no job losses, maintains existing conditions including the current federal link to salaries, facilitates a more equitable means of ensuring members are compensated for overtime and staff related expenses and initiates a consultation process to favourably resolve the issues relating to severance pay and the Band 10 claim. The CPSU MOSPS Sub-branch reaffirms its commitment to seeking an amicable resolution to this dispute, and the CPSU MOPS Sub-branch reaffirms its commitment to the four deal breakers and the protection of members' jobs.

PN114

We have moved. We have said, all right, if the length of the agreement is a problem for you, and how you are going to fund that is a problem for you, and you ask us to help you, and then you don't want us to help you, and you don't want to come to our meetings, and you don't want to talk to us, and you finish meetings after you have your little caucuses, and you still have nothing to talk to us about, there is no offer from the employer, we are prepared to move from our side, if that is what it is going to take.

PN115

That was unanimously carried this morning, and that is what I am charged with the responsibility of trying to deliver. I understand that part of the problem of this is to get Electorate Officers staff out of the current cycle, because there is quite a number of people coming up to put their claims on the table, ie, CPSU; we have got public servants, we have got teachers, we have got nurses, I believe. We are happy to go behind them. We are happy to say, well, we don't need an agreement until 2006. We are happy to do a 12-month agreement, but we want some commitments.

PN116

Now, Mr Hulls has this. I don't know who he has spoken to. He is part of this ERC group that meet and determine everything. Clearly the employer doesn't want to meet with us. They don't want to meet with us. They declined to meet with us in writing. And Mr Aird can tell us nothing else. I am sure he is going to sit here and say to you today, I have nothing further to add. If he doesn't, I am going to be so surprised; I would be delighted. That is where we are at.

PN117

THE COMMISSIONER: You might be rocked back in your seat. I hope you are.

PN118

MS HILL: I hope I am. But quite frankly, we have to start, because my people are saying to me this morning, after they moved this unanimous resolution they say to me, well, what do we do once we get a report from you? If we have got nothing coming out, let's have some more fun, because that is what we have had. And we may as well continue the industrial action, but it is not serving anyone anything. And Mr Cole here has to go chasing people around to see who worked and who didn't, in order to try and dock people's pay, and all that sort of thing.

PN119

This could be fixed very easily. It is not hard. So I hope Mr Aird has a bag of resolutions in his pocket so that we can get this fixed. Because se are sick of it. And really, if he can't do that today, I am going to be calling on the Commission to ask for those decision makers to come in here and talk to us, which was my original application. If the Commission pleases.

PN120

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Ms Hill, I am going to mark this communication from the Speaker and the President as CPSU1.

PN121

MR AIRD: Mr Commissioner, could I suggest that Karen Batt's letter that drove that perhaps be CPSU1, and this be CPSU2.

PN122

THE COMMISSIONER: Well, for the time being it will be CPSU1, Mr Aird. We are not going to argue about the - - -

PN123

MS HILL: Certainly I have the other document which facilitated the response to that as well.

PN124

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you.

PN125

MS HILL: I am happy to hand that up as well.

EXHIBIT #CPSU1 LETTER OF 25 SEPTEMBER FROM KAREN BATT

EXHIBIT #CPSU2 REPLY FROM PARLIAMENT SPEAKER AND PRESIDENT

PN126

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Ms Hill. Yes, Mr Aird.

PN127

MR AIRD: Mr Commissioner, Ms Hill has gone through the detail. We had the meeting. I left to look forward - to look at a couple of other issues. I also left with the CPSU asking could they come back to me with anything. And I must admit the first I have heard of this offer is - past this morning, is obviously just now.

PN128

One of the problems with this whole process the CPSU keeps forgetting is that the Parliament is independent of the State Government. The presiding officers are the employer, and I am the representative. The meetings with the Minister for Industrial Relations or anyone else doesn't get passed on to us, nor would it necessarily be binding to us.

PN129

Again, I was not aware at any stage, nor - I can't speak for - so I was not aware that they had spoken to the Minister for Industrial Relations, nor did I know what he had to say, or anything about it. All I can say is that I am still the employer's representative, and if they, unfortunately for the CPSU, if they want something, they have got to come through me. Going through other channels means that the information doesn't get to the presiding officers who will make the ultimate decision. Admittedly they will sit and listen and talk to a lot of people before they make their call, but they will make the decision.

PN130

Again, I would have to - the 12-month agreement, even with no job losses, more equitable overtime, favourable to Band 10 and redundancy, really there is not much change from where we were, as you say, here a month ago. There is nothing compensatory for all this. I have already said that, yes, we understand where these issues are coming from, but at the moment I am getting nothing of sort of a compensation nature. At the moment it is all, well, what are you going to give. I would now like to have something back so that I can, as I say, keep trying to fund all these things.

PN131

At the moment I am still in the same boat. And as you said last time, I am - well, I have said no, and that is part of the negotiating process, and I am waiting for something to come back, to see if there is anything that can get me to change where I sit. And I am driven by, I guess, my budget situation.

PN132

THE COMMISSIONER: Thanks, Mr Aird. Ms Hill, did you communicate with the Minister with your changed position? If I understood your summary, you are really telling me that you would bid against yourself: is that right? You say there is intransigence. There is no movement from the other side. You saw the Minister, and whether you bailed him up, or met him, however you describe that, you had some communications with him. Did you then set that out for him?

PN133

MS HILL: Yes, and we gave it to him in writing. We gave him a couple of dot points, which is essentially that resolution that I have passed to you.

PN134

THE COMMISSIONER: Did you send a copy of that to Mr Aird?

PN135

MS HILL: No, we didn't.

PN136

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. And was that a handwritten letter you gave him?

PN137

MS HILL: Yes. It was just a couple of dot points.

PN138

THE COMMISSIONER: Which was knocked up on the spot, was it?

PN139

MS HILL: Yes, it was a couple of dot points of what would broker this arrangement. And, look, can I just say - - -

PN140

THE COMMISSIONER: And when did you meet, or when did that encounter take place?

PN141

MS HILL: That was on Tuesday 6 October. Now, Mr Hulls said to leave it with him. Now, my submissions earlier, Commissioner, what I have just heard from Mr Aird just basically reiterates for me, and reiterates, I am sure, for my executive sitting with me here today, that he is not in the loop, unfortunately, because we have no faith - and it is not personal - we have no faith in going to Mr Aird because he has got nothing to tell us. He has got nothing to tell us. And so we go then to our employer who - I am sure the employer hasn't told him this either - had tried to make us an offer, said, roll over an agreement, all conditions for 12 months, won't guarantee job losses.

PN142

And we said, no, we are not going to accept that deal. So if he is not in her loop, and he is her representative, that is not my concern. The Minister for Industrial Relations who is on the ERC committee said, leave it with me; leave it with me, let's see what we can do. Now, to say we have given them nothing, "Oh, they haven't moved a great deal", what a lot of hogwash, quite frankly.

PN143

THE COMMISSIONER: What are the major concessions that you think you have made in that material you gave the Minister?

PN144

MS HILL: Well, clearly we are not asking for an agreement that goes up to 2006.

PN145

THE COMMISSIONER: So it is a 12 months agreement. You say that is a concession?

PN146

MS HILL: Yes. We are saying that we currently have our Federal link to salaries, and we are saying we need to keep that.

PN147

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

PN148

MS HILL: We want a commitment that there will be no job losses, and why wouldn't we want that, because the other side are touting that in order to keep our Federal link we might lose jobs: and we are saying as a group of people, we will not accept that. And we are saying, well, let us talk about in the next 12 months - and this is a resolution - let us get an agreement that says, that ensures no job losses, maintains existing conditions, including the current link to salaries, facilitates a more equitable means of ensuring members are compensated for overtime and staff related expenses. That says, Commissioner, that the claim we have got on the table is movable. We are happy to have a discussion about that. How we might balance that up. That is a considerable move from our perspective.

PN149

THE COMMISSIONER: Well, they are the items where you say there is evident movement?

PN150

MS HILL: Absolutely.

PN151

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you.

PN152

MS HILL: Then we have - we want a consultation process in order to favourably resolve the other couple of issues, including the severance pay and the Band 10 claim.

PN153

THE COMMISSIONER: Well, severance pay won't be necessary - - -

PN154

MS HILL: We also - - -

PN155

THE COMMISSIONER: Ms Hill, please. Severance pay won't be necessary if there is no job loss during that 12 month period, is that right/

PN156

MS HILL: Well, absolutely. Absolutely.

PN157

THE COMMISSIONER: So what was the next point?

PN158

MS HILL: And then we want a process to resolve the Band 10 claim. We wanted that additional Band 10, which once again we have differing information. Mr Aird says, oh, that is going to cost me so much money. My people have done a bit of a ring around to see who that would affect from both the Liberal side and ours, and we come up with thousands and thousands of dollars difference in what they are quoting. And we can't check their figures because they won't provide us with any of the data.

PN159

So we have to go on - - -

PN160

THE COMMISSIONER: There is nothing very complex about that, though, is there? Why can't you be certain about that? I don't understand that.

PN161

MS HILL: We hear from the other side that they say in order to get a Bank 10, that is going to cost this Department X amount of money. But then my members have gone and done a survey of Electorate offices right across the state, who is sitting at what band. And our figures come out very differently from Mr Aird's figures. But we don't have the right to challenge, because they won't show us any of the data.

PN162

THE COMMISSIONER: How many people do you think will go into Band 10 on your scheme of arrangement?

PN163

MS HILL: There is about 30 people we see would be elevated through to Band 10. Mr Aird is quoting something - I think more than double of that: 87 people, he is saying. Then the fourth claim, about a remuneration committee, he doesn't even feature in this. So that is where we have moved. To say we haven't moved, is a ridiculous statement to make.

PN164

THE COMMISSIONER: I don't think he said you haven't moved.

PN165

MS HILL: Well, I think what was being put by Mr Aird is that their position hasn't much changed.

PN166

THE COMMISSIONER: But you haven't given him any rabbits. He wants you to fund - his idea of bargaining is that if something costs $50,000, you have got to put $50,000 on the table over here by effecting some savings, or some efficiencies, or something.

PN167

MS HILL: Well, we offered to help him. We offered to help him, and he wouldn't show us any of the budgets. He wouldn't tell us what he is - we can't even prove that the claims he makes are in fact - and I don't say Stephen Aird is a liar, I have never said that. But we cant' check him. We can't check anyone. Because Stephen is not the employer, and if the employer has not told him about the dealings that she has tried to do with us in the last few days, that is not our problem.

PN168

THE COMMISSIONER: And which employer is that? That is the Speaker or the President?

PN169

MS HILL: That is right. Judy Maddigan is the Speaker.

PN170

THE COMMISSIONER: So there have been some private discussions, have there?

PN171

MS HILL: There has been private discussions.

PN172

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Have they been satisfactory?

PN173

MS HILL: I beg your pardon?

PN174

THE COMMISSIONER: It seems the answer is no, but I ask the question. Have they been satisfactory discussions?

PN175

MS HILL: Well, Ms Maddigan came to us and said, "What about this? Would this fly?" And we said that would fly if it had this, this, this and this. And the "this, this, this and this" was what we gave also to Minister Hulls. Now, Ms Maddigan was not interested as soon as we put the - as soon as we said, no job losses on the table, she wasn't interested.

PN176

THE COMMISSIONER: It looks like she doesn't agree with that point.

PN177

MS HILL: Yes. So that obviously flushes out the - - -

PN178

THE COMMISSIONER: And you think that was a negotiating response in a real way? I am reluctant to say, in good faith, because I don't particularly want to import that notion, but it is close to what we are talking about. Do you think the discussions were fair dinkum?

PN179

MS HILL: I think it was a genuine offer, but it was an offer that wasn't going to fly because it didn't protect people.

PN180

THE COMMISSIONER: And it didn't work. Thank you. I understand. We will go into conference now, Ms Hill.

NO FURTHER PROCEEDINGS RECORDED

INDEX

LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs

EXHIBIT #CPSU1 LETTER OF 25 SEPTEMBER FROM KAREN BATT PN126
EXHIBIT #CPSU2 REPLY FROM PARLIAMENT SPEAKER AND PRESIDENT PN126