AG2003/7653, Transcript of Proceedings [2003] AIRCTrans 4894 (6 November 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 5100

AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT KAUFMAN

AG2003/7653

APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION OF
AGREEMENT

Application under section 170LJ of the Act
by Job Watch Inc and Another for certification
of the Job Watch Inc. Certified Agreement 2003

MELBOURNE

10.21 AM, TUESDAY, 21 OCTOBER 2003

PN1

MR N. HENDERSON: I appear for the ASU.

PN2

MS L. DICKINSON: I appear for Job Watch, the employer.

PN3

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, thank you, Ms Dickinson. Mr Henderson.

PN4

MR HENDERSON: Yes, thank you, your Honour. This is an application for certification of an agreement under Division 2 of the Workplace Relations Act between Job Watch and the union. The union relies on the statutory declaration of Michael Rizzo, which has been filed with the material. The agreement is for a period of - I just lost my page there - three years, I think, sorry, I will find it.

PN5

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: 9 May 2005 is its nominal expiry date.

PN6

MR HENDERSON: Yes, from the date of certification until 9 May 2005. There are no reductions that have been identified in award conditions as a result of the making of the agreement and in our submission the agreement satisfies the no disadvantage test. I might just explain to the Commission in relation to the previous matter. Job Watch has been - is a respondent to the Community Employment and Training Award, the SETS award, although Job Watch has always thought that it was a respondent to the SACS award, and certainly that is the way in which it has operated, so the roping-in award clarifies that situation. If the Commission pleases, we would request that the agreement be certified for the period specified.

PN7

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, I notice that clause 39.5 in the dispute settling procedure entitles an aggrieved worker to union representation at any step in the dispute grievance process. I would seek from the parties an undertaking that that clause will not be read in a way that would prevent an aggrieved worker seeking representation other than union representation.

PN8

MR HENDERSON: Yes, we give that undertaking, your Honour.

PN9

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, thank you. Yes, Ms Dickinson. Yes.

PN10

MS DICKINSON: I am sorry, Commissioner, I am not sure what you want to hear from - I mean, sorry, your Honour, I am not sure what you want to hear from me.

PN11

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I want the same undertaking from you as Mr Henderson gave that if an aggrieved worker wishes representation by somebody who is not a union - - -

PN12

MS DICKINSON: Absolutely, yes, we are prepared to give that - an undertaking.

PN13

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, thank you. Yes, well, in that case, I will certify the agreement. And I have had regard to the union membership clause, I think it just falls on the right side of the line. And I am satisfied that the agreement is about matters pertaining to the relationship between an employer in Victoria carrying on a single business and its employees. I am also satisfied that the ASU has at least one member employed in the single business to which the agreement relates and it is entitled to represent that member's interests.

PN14

I am also satisfied that it passes the no disadvantage test, that it was made in accordance with section 170LJ and approved by a valid majority of employees, and that the explanation of its terms was appropriate in the circumstances, that it includes dispute settling procedures, and specifies a nominal expiry date not more than three years after the date on which the agreement comes into operation, nor are there any reasons in section 170LU as to why I should refuse to certify it. Accordingly it will be certified to operate from today's date. Adjourn the Commission please. Just a moment - - -

PN15

MS DICKINSON: Look, I am sorry, before we proceed. With the stat dec, I actually had an amended stat dec to submit. At the time of swearing the stat dec the executive director thought that we were actually award free, so the stat dec submitted said that we were not respondent to any award. This is an amended stat dec to say that at the time of entering into the agreement or the approval of the agreement, that we were a respondent to the SETS award.

PN16

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN17

MS DICKINSON: Just, I mean, that has now been - obviously that is rendered redundant to an extent by today's proceedings, but just for the record to reflect that the stat dec - that was true at the time of the swearing - - -

PN18

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well, in the statutory declaration at clause 7.1 it was said that the relevant award was the Social and Community Services Victoria Award 2000.

PN19

MS DICKINSON: Which until today wasn't the case.

PN20

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well, that is - - -

PN21

MS DICKINSON: That was the understanding at the time. So once it became apparent that we had never been roped-in, a new certified - - -

PN22

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, I see. Yes. Yes. Yes, I would have designated that award in any event, but I will receive the new statutory declaration, thank you.

PN23

MS DICKINSON: Thank you, your Honour, I am sorry about that.

PN24

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Yes, the statutory declaration made by Zana Blithway on 17 October 2003 will be placed on the file. And I note that, as against the award, that is indicated as the relevant award there are no reductions at all in terms compared with that award either, is that right?

PN25

MS DICKINSON: That is right.

PN26

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes. Yes, well, it doesn't alter the decision to certify, the agreement will be certified, thank you.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [10.27am]