AG2003/358, Transcript of Proceedings [2003] AIRCTrans 4897 (6 November 2003)

AUSCRIPT PTY LTD
ABN 76 082 664 220

Level 2, 16 St George's Tce, PERTH WA 6000
Tel:[phone] Fax:[phone]

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON
DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN
COMMISSIONER HINGLEY

AG2003/358

APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION
OF AGREEMENT

Application under section 170LC of the Act
by Hall and Prior Aged Care Organisation and
Others for certification of the Hall and Prior
Aged Care Organisation (ANF) Registered Nurses'
Agreement 2003

AG2003/360

APPLICATION TO TERMINATE AGREEMENT
(VALID MAJORITY)

Application under section 170MG by Danvero Pty
Ltd ACN 073 240 776 ATF The Brookton Valley
Aged Care Unit Trust to terminate the Hall
and Prior Aged Care Clarence Estate (ANF)
Certified Agreement
2002

PERTH

9.22 AM, TUESDAY, 21 OCTOBER 2003

PN1

MR R. CARTHEW: I appear on behalf of the employers with Ms J. GILL representing the employers.

PN2

MR N. FERGUS: I appear on behalf of the Australian Nursing Federation and with me is Ms B. BURKE.

PN3

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: I propose to deal with these two matters concurrently. Is there any objection to that course?

PN4

MR CARTHEW: No, sir.

PN5

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: I will do so. Mr Carthew, what do you want to say about them?

PN6

MR CARTHEW: This - just dealing, first, with number 358. The agreement that has come to light has come to light as a result of extensive negotiations between the employers and the ANF. I think, before I start, it is probably worthwhile just explaining the relationship between the employers and the structure of the organisation which is known as the Hall & Prior Aged Care organisation. Filed with the Commission was a statutory declaration which has been sworn by a Mr Graeme Prior, who is the CEO of the Hall & Prior Aged Care organisation and if I can take you to exhibit 1, which I understand has been marked in the statutory declarations which have been filed.

PN7

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: Appendix 1, is it, to the stat dec?

PN8

MR CARTHEW: Annexure 1, sorry.

PN9

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: Yes, yes.

PN10

MR CARTHEW: Essentially there are, all up, 11 aged care facilities which are operated by five entities, those entities being Vana Pty Ltd, Fresh Fields Aged Care Pty Ltd, Jury Investments Pty Ltd, Hamersley Nursing Home WA Pty Ltd and Danvero Pty Ltd. In relation to the relationship between these parties if I could take you to annexure 3. Annexure 3 is a document which provides the current corporate structure of the group which is known as the Hall & Prior Aged Care organisation and I say that subject to one change. This is the most current diagrammatic that our clients have available but if I could take you to the box which is marked Fresh Fields Aged Care Pty Ltd, there is a reference to the Howard Solomon Aged Care complex. That is no longer part of the group and does not form part of the business as we will be discussing today.

PN11

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: Hm mm.

PN12

MR CARTHEW: In relation to the businesses, as you can see, there are what you may call links between all of the organisations, it is a relatively complex corporate structure. The links are common in most cases but not common in all and if I could take you to the example of Danvero Pty Ltd, which is located at the base of the page, second box up, above Brookton Valley. As you can see the ownership structure of Danvero Pty Ltd, it is partly owned by Fresh Fields Aged Care Pty Ltd and 50 per cent owned by Wylie Group Pty Ltd, which has no ownership of any of the other structures. And in respect of the form of the agreement, being a multiple business agreement, the question came up while this agreement was being negotiated whether or not we were going to go in the direction of a multiple business agreement or a common enterprise agreement.

PN13

In light of the structure and in light of the arrangements in place it was determined, certainly on behalf of our clients and by our clients, that the multiple business structure would be more appropriate. The reason it would be more appropriate is that in respect of the operating structures although there are common administrative functions and common over-arching human resources functions, and this is explained in the statutory declaration, they - the companies do operate as separate companies, deriving separate profits, and the companies pay the management structure. Basically, that being Fresh Fields Aged Care Pty Ltd and another accounting company, which weren't strictly relevant to what we're doing today, to provide those over-arching services.

PN14

So in effect we have five separate companies operating businesses which have common directors in the majority of cases, but strictly they are still separate companies. So we would submit, and we can certainly go into argument on authorities which we do have before us, that the most appropriate form of agreement in the circumstances was a multiple business agreement and, subject to the Commission's wishes, I would submit that we would move forward on that basis.

PN15

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: Yes, move on.

PN16

MR CARTHEW: In respect of the requirements of the multi-business agreement under section 170LC of the Act the statutory declaration of Mr Graeme Prior and indeed the statutory declaration of Neil Fergus sets out the key reasons why it is in the public interest for a multiple business agreement to be used in this case. The first reason is that before this agreement was negotiated with the ANF by the employing parties. We basically have a situation where the employers used various forms of regulation for their employers. Some employers were employed strictly subject to the award. There were Australian workplace agreements that applied to some of the employees and the Clarence Estate facility, which is operated by Danvero Pty Ltd, were subject to an enterprise bargaining agreement which is the subject of the second application today.

PN17

In effect what was decided was that for the level 1 and level 2 employees who make up the - registered nurses who make up the vast majority of nurses employed at these facilities, that unified terms were appropriate in the circumstances and thus the negotiations took place and we would submit that there is a real interest in there being unified terms across the facilities in light of the operating structure. In relation to the business operation, as I've said, there is an integrated nature to the operations which take place. There are over-arching administrative and human resources functions which are undertaken by the group and, in effect, there is a relationship, a clear relationship, between the groups in respect of share holdings and key directors, such as Mr Prior.

PN18

In relation to cost efficiency the agreement covers 94 level 1 and level 2 registered nurses across 11 facilities and across five employers. We would submit that the most cost effective option in the circumstances was the negotiation of a single agreement in light of the relatively small number of employees at each individual facility who would be covered by this agreement. In respect of approval we would just comment that there was a 90 per cent approval of the employees who voted by a valid majority for this agreement. The documentation for this approval is in the annexures to the statutory declarations and I can take you to that documentation, if the Commission believes that is necessary.

PN19

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: No, no.

PN20

MR CARTHEW: Finally, the agreement provides certainty in respect of the terms and conditions across the facilities, keeping in mind the integration of the business operations and the integration of the employers' operations and this will allow, certainly, both in respect of terms at individual facilities and, certainly, when employees may move from facility to facility they will know the terms of employment that will apply to them. And finally, as I've submitted before, I would just submit that there is not a more appropriate form of agreement in the circumstances.

PN21

In relation to the process and - that was followed for the negotiation of this agreement this is set out in some detail in the statutory declaration. In short I would say that there was extensive consultation with both the Australian Nursing Federation and the individual employees in this case and the consultation process that was undertaken both before the terms were put to the employees and after the terms were put, are set out extensively in the statutory declaration of Mr Prior. In effect, to summarise, all of the facilities were visited both before and after the terms were negotiated with the ANF and employees were updated in relation to the negotiations as those negotiations took place.

PN22

When the agreement was finally put to the employees it was put to the employees in accordance with the requirements of the Act and the counting procedures were also done in accordance with best practise and, as I've said, this is set out in the statutory declaration and I'm quite happy to take the Commission through that if it is necessary.

PN23

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: No, we've read the statutory declarations, Mr Carthew.

PN24

MR CARTHEW: Thank you. In respect of the no disadvantage test we would submit that the initial rate which is to be applied to the relevant employees is 12.5 per cent above the rate which applies under the award at the present time and in relation to the other terms the agreement broadly follows the terms of the award, although there are some minor changes and the changes which I would point you to are in annexure 4 of the agreement. If we flip to the fourth page of annexure 4 there is a chart which has been prepared by the Hall & Prior Aged Care organisation and I think that is marked as (c) in the annexures and in effect the major change has been the removal of the accrued days off provisions which are provided for in the award. This is being replaced with a provision for six weeks annual leave per annum and seven weeks annual leave for continuous shift employees and, of course, the annual leave applies with the leave loading that would ordinarily apply for four weeks annual leave.

PN25

In relation to other provisions there has been provision for access to pro rata long service leave after 10 years service and there has also been provision for access for eligible casuals to parental leave in accordance with the recent decision of this Commission and finally, there is provision for four days special leave which is not provided for under the award. So we would submit that this is clearly an agreement which meets the no disadvantage test and we would submit that, therefore, the agreement is in compliance with the Act, it has been filed in compliance with the Act and we would respectfully submit that it be registered or certified.

PN26

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: Yes. Do you have any questions?

PN27

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: Yes, I have a question, yes. Yes, I have a question, Mr Carthew, in relation to the valid majority.

PN28

MR CARTHEW: Yes, sir.

PN29

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: On the submission you made there were approximately 90, in fact there were 94, ballot papers issued?

PN30

MR CARTHEW: Yes, sir.

PN31

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: Of which those returned were 40?

PN32

MR CARTHEW: Yes, sir.

PN33

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: On your calculation of 43 per cent, less than half of the employees did return a ballot paper. Have you any view as to why the return was low?

PN34

MR CARTHEW: Sir, just to start off with the legal requirements for establishing a valid majority. Under section 170LJ of the Act we would submit that - oh, sorry. We would submit that a valid majority has been established in accordance with the requirements of the Act. In relation to the percentage who return their ballots - - -

PN35

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: So which section of the Act were you referring to there?

PN36

MR CARTHEW: I apologise, sir. I will just revise that. Sorry, 170LE of the Act. If I could take you to section 170LE(d) a valid majority is basically determined by the majority of persons who actually cast a valid vote. In respect of the votes cast, valid votes cast were 40 of which 36 confirmed the agreement. In relation to the percentage of ballots that were actually returned I would simply submit that the ballot process was done in accordance with best practise. Ballots were mailed out to all employees who were provided with seven days to consider the ballot with all the information that had been provided and were provided with a return mail envelope to return the ballot to the address of the Hall & Prior Aged Care organisation in West Perth.

PN37

Although I would certainly be speaking without evidence, I do understand that the percentages are not necessarily that low in comparison to some similar ballots that have taken place. So, certainly, my clients were relatively pleased with the number of returned ballots, taking into consideration the experiences of similar aged care organisations in their EBA ballots. So, certainly, our clients would have preferred that the percentage return be higher but every opportunity was provided to the relevant employees to cast their ballot with all information provided.

PN38

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: Thank you.

PN39

MR CARTHEW: Thank you, sir.

PN40

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: Mr Carthew, on the statutory declaration of Mr Prior at paragraph 1.5 of it, first page, it says:

PN41

The agreement applies to only part of the business ...(reads)... employed by the employers at the time of the ballot for this agreement.

PN42

That is not actually correct, is it, when you look at the parties bound clause?

PN43

MR CARTHEW: Yes, ma'am, I do agree with that, that it will apply to employees who are employed over the - - -

PN44

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: All employees who fulfil (a) to (c), isn't it, in that paragraph?

PN45

MR CARTHEW: That is correct and if that requires amendment I'm quite happy to amend the statutory declaration on that basis.

PN46

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: No, I'm happy to take your explanation of it.

PN47

MR CARTHEW: There is one final amendment that - or just one comment on the statutory declaration. The final paragraph of the statutory declaration, it would be 8.7, the numbering is actually incorrect, there is a reference to the nominal expiry date of the agreement being 31 August 2006. The expiry date under the agreement is actually prescribed as 1 September 2006. That is the only other comment that I would make in respect of that.

PN48

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: Thank you.

PN49

MR CARTHEW: Thank you.

PN50

MR FERGUS: Thank you, your Honour. In - - -

PN51

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: Just hang on a second, Mr Fergus.

PN52

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: Yes, in relation to the stat dec, a follow up question there. In the title of the award, was that wrongly declared in terms of the year of the award? Should that be 1999?

PN53

MR CARTHEW: Yes, sir, I do believe you're correct there. I apologise for that. That is meant to refer to the Hall - I'm sorry, just to confirm the paragraph that you're looking at, sir?

PN54

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: 8.1.

PN55

MR CARTHEW: 8.1.

PN56

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: That is the statutory declaration of Mr Prior.

PN57

MR CARTHEW: Yes, sir, that should refer to 1999.

PN58

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: Thank you. Turning to the agreement, in clause 31(a) there is a reference to the Workplace Relations Act at section 30. I wondered if it was intended that be section 3J of the Act rather than section 30 of the Act?

PN59

PN60

MR CARTHEW: Yes, sir, you're - yes, sir, I believe you're correct on that. Obviously we would seek leave to amend the agreement appropriately.

PN61

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: So it should read - 31(a) should read:

PN62

It is the intention of the employer to achieve the principle object in section 3J -

PN63

is it?

PN64

MR CARTHEW: Yes, ma'am.

PN65

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: Yes. Okay. I will just amend that. Thank you. Mr Fergus.

PN66

MR FERGUS: Thank you, your Honour. In relation to AG360, the termination of the Clarence Estate agreement, termination is sought in accordance with clause 4.5(c) of that agreement. Requirements of section 170MG of the Act have been met, specifically that the ANF has agreed in writing to terminate the agreement and a valid majority of employees have genuinely approved such termination. In relation to AG358, the certification of the multiple business agreement, we submit that the proposed agreement meets the requirements of the Act, specifically that it is in the public's interest to certify this agreement.

PN67

The parties to the proposed agreement have submitted detailed statutory declarations in relation to this matter and, notwithstanding the amendments that have been identified by the Full Bench, we don't propose to revisit the statutory declarations other than to identify some aspects of the Act, if it pleases the Commission. In relation to the no disadvantage test, for the purposes of the no disadvantage test, the appropriate award is the Nurses (ANF WA) Private Hospitals and Nursing Homes Award of 1999. The agreement provides employees with a wage rate of 12.5 per cent above the existing award rates with further increases of 5 per cent during life of the agreement. The first increase is payable in accordance with the terms of clause 4 of the agreement, 1 September 2003, which we are aware is being paid administratively by the employer.

PN68

Pursuant to section 170LT(5) a valid majority of employees whose employment will be covered by the agreement approved the agreement on 15 August 2003. The application for certification was filed with the registry on 3 September 2003 within the 21 day time limit. The ANF is satisfied that the employer has met its obligations under the Act, your Honour, and in relation to the terms of explanation of the agreement each employee had access to the agreement 14 days prior to the approval being given. The agreement contains dispute settlement procedures at clause 32.

PN69

For the purposes of satisfying the requirements of section 170LC(4) of the Act we do not believe this matter could have been dealt with more appropriately, other than by a multiple business agreement, and that it is in the public interests to certify this agreement. The corporate relationship between the employers and the centralised administration of the Hall & Prior Aged Care organisation make a multiple business agreement both relevant and appropriate, in our view. We further submit that the principles illustrated by the Full Bench in its decision Domino's Pizza Australia Pty Ltd and Others v the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association at print R6382 regarding the public interest are equally applicable in this matter.

PN70

Your Honour, unless the Commission has any questions in relation to this matter, that completes my submissions except to respectfully seek that the Full Bench certify the agreement with effect from today's date. If it pleases the Commission.

PN71

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: Mr Carthew, anything else?

PN72

MR CARTHEW: No, ma'am. My friend has taken you through the second application, that being 360 of 2003. As with 358 of 2003, there have been the appropriate forms filed and a statutory declaration sworn by Mr Graeme Prior setting out the consultation that occurred in relation to the Clarence Estate employees, those being the employees employed by Danvero Pty Ltd for whom the relevant agreement, that being the Hall & Prior Aged Care (Clarence Estate) ANF Certified Agreement 2002, applied. As to the ballot process that applied for the Clarence Estate employees, as I will call them, at annexure 7 the relevant ballot paper is set out and, as can be seen, there was a separate question which was put to the Clarence Estate employees, if I could call them that. That being whether or not they approved the termination of the Hall & Prior Aged Care (Clarence Estate) ANF Certified Agreement.

PN73

Of the employees who responded, as can be seen in annexure 8 of the relevant statutory declaration, two employees responded that submitted their ballots, both of whom agreed to terminate the relevant Clarence Estate agreement, thus complying with the requirements of section 170LE of the Act. Unless the Commission requires anything further on that we would submit that that agreement should be terminated as it is being replaced by the agreement set out in 358 of 2003.

PN74

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: Mr Carthew, just - another question in the same vein as my previous question.

PN75

MR CARTHEW: Yes, sir.

PN76

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: Of the 10 votes or ballot papers, as the case may be, only two were returned in favour.

PN77

MR CARTHEW: Yes, sir.

PN78

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: Which again is a low figure and I wonder if you have a similar explanation for the low return as previously and also I wondered if you would put your mind to section 170LT(5) of the Act. I'm not suggesting that this is the relevant provision but I'm just interested to know if you had considered whether that was a provision that should be taken into account or not in determining what the valid majority should be.

PN79

MR CARTHEW: Sir, in response to your first question, again I would say that the ballot process was designed in extensive consultation with the ANF to ensure that the union was satisfied that its members had every opportunity to be consulted and every opportunity to consider their vote and submit their vote and the process that was applied for the Danvero employees or Clarence Estate employees as I will call them, was the same as the process which was applied for the other employees subject to consultation on the process of termination as well and we would just simply submit that in the statutory declaration which was provided that process as set out, it was extensive.

PN80

The employees did have 7 days in which to consider and submit their ballot and the counting of the ballots was done in accordance with both the requirements of the Act and the requirements of the ANF. I would say that in accordance with an express request from an employee who I understand was from Clarence Estate, I could be wrong on that, there was actually a Justice of the Peace who attended the ballot as an observer to ensure that - he didn't have a specific role but an observer was requested and he observed the counting of the ballots when they came in, so it was a voting process which I would respectfully describe as being well and above what is ordinarily put in place for such agreements and every effort was made to ensure that every employee had the opportunity to put their vote.

PN81

So in respect of the ballot process, I do appreciate that it is a relatively low number who return their ballots but every effort was made by the employer to ensure that the employees could submit their ballots. Sir, in relation to section 170LT(5), sir, would you be referring to the requirement that the valid majority genuinely approve their agreement, approve the agreement? The genuineness is the concern?

PN82

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: It is a different, quite a different provision from 170LE, quite a different test and I'm not suggesting that it is something that is relevant, but what I'm interested to know is whether you have actually considered that and formed a view that in fact that it is not relevant to this question, because if to the contrary, you had thought that it was relevant, then it raises a different issue as to whether or not a valid majority was attained under that different test.

PN83

MR CARTHEW: Sir, I think that the simple answer to that is that in order to obtain the genuine approval of the relevant employees, the employees would require every opportunity to be aware of the terms they were agreeing to and a certain level of consultation is expected, in this case both on the termination of the Clarence Estate agreement, as I will call it, and on the negotiation and the putting to the employees of the proposed Hall and Prior Aged Care Agreement. There was extensive consultation both before and after the terms of the agreement were put to the employees and employees were provided with the opportunity not only to consider the terms of the agreement but to actually put questions to the employer on the terms of the agreement.

PN84

If I could just briefly take you, sir, to I believe it is exhibit 5, annexure 5 of the statutory declaration filed with respect to the application for certification of the Hall and Prior Aged Care Agreement. You can see that there were a series of communiques which were produced as a result of questions which were put by employees after the consultation process occurred and this communique process occurred in the 14 days between when the agreement was put to the employees and when the voting period began. And as you can see, those questions were put and relatively comprehensive answers were provided to the employees in relation to their questions on the proposed agreement.

PN85

So on that basis we would submit that the employees certainly did have every opportunity not only to become aware of the terms but to actually put questions in relation to the agreement in order to make up their minds. So we would respectfully submit that there was every opportunity for genuine approval to occur in relation to the relevant employees.

PN86

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: Thank you. One final question. In relation to the submissions that you put concerning the public interest, firstly I don't have a difficulty with the submissions that the multiple business agreement is in the public interest, but I would ask you for your view on whether some of the reasons that you put forward to support that conclusion are perhaps commercial reasons rather than interest of the public as such?

PN87

MR CARTHEW: Sir, in relation to the issue of public interest, certainly it is in the interest of the relevant employers to standardise the terms of employment for the employees employed at the various facilities but I would respectfully submit that it is also in the interests of the employees for that to occur, for there to be certainty in relation to the terms that apply to them. And certainly that is the view of my client and I also understand it is the view of the ANF that that is preferable for the employees in this case.

PN88

What it has done is, it has removed a situation where employees working side by side, in some cases performing similar tasks, have different industrial instruments that apply to them and we would submit that in those circumstances, it is certainly in the public interest for employees to have not only certainty but a degree of unanimity in the terms that actually apply to them. We would also submit that it is certainly, on the issue of cost efficiency, that is primarily an issue for the employers, but I would also respectfully submit that if the result of cost efficiency is the creation of an agreement which provides for better terms for the employees, then it is certainly in the public interest that there be a mechanism by which that can occur and in this case the multi-business agreement is the best way that that can occur.

PN89

It is an agreement which is substantially above the relevant award and we would submit that in those circumstances, it is certainly in the public interest for these terms to be able to be provided to the employees in an efficient way. I do appreciate your point in relation to the public interest primarily being something which is not simply the concern of the employer, but I would submit that as it is a course of action which has been agreed not only by the employees but by the union and the employer, the considerations of those three parties is certainly relevant to the public interest so I would submit that it does meet the test, certainly on the basis of the reasons that have been provided or supported for public interest in the past, which have been consented to by this Commission or agreed with by this Commission and I can certainly take you through the relevant decisions if that is necessary.

PN90

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BLAIN: Just picking up your point about cost efficiency, would it be your position that there might be benefits or would be benefits flowing through to the care of the patients who will receive the services of the different employer entities that are covered by the agreement? Would you go so far as to say that the public interest would be served in that sense, the wider interest of the community in benefit?

PN91

MR CARTHEW: Sir, in an indirect way, I would certainly submit that, that that is the case. The aged care industry is an industry, and I think this is a matter of public record, is an industry in which there is high demand for the employees who are the subject of this agreement, that being skilled trained registered nurses and it is also a matter of public record that the registered nurses in the system, both private and public, are in demand in the hospital system and the aged care system. In order to attract registered nurses to the private aged care system, employers do need to offer terms which are going to be palatable to the employees and I would say that in this case, a facility whereby these terms can be offered to employees cost efficiently, in a way that, you know, that provides certainty and covers all of the relevant employees, those being registered nurses level 1 and 2 in the organisation.

PN92

If that is going to promote the retention of nurses within that system, the private health system, I would submit that that certainly is in the public interest and to the extent that it does, I would certainly submit that is a relevant consideration. So that is a little bit convoluted, the answer, but in short, if it does attract nurses and assists in retaining registered nurses within the system, it is certainly a good thing.

PN93

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: We will adjourn briefly.

SHORT ADJOURNMENT [10.01am]

RESUMED [10.03am]

PN94

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON: We have reached the following decision in these matters. In respect of matter AG2003/360, we are satisfied we should approve the termination of the Hall and Prior Aged Care Clarence Estate (ANF) Certified Agreement 2002. The termination will take effect from 21 October 2003. We will issue a formal order to that effect. In respect of AG2003/358, we are satisfied, having regard to the arguments advanced by the parties, that it is in the public interest to certify the Hall and Prior Aged Care Organisation (ANF) Registered Nurses Agreement 2003.

PN95

Further, we are satisfied that the matters dealt with in the agreement could not be more appropriately dealt with by an agreement other than a multiple business agreement under Part VIB of the Act. We are also satisfied that the relevant requirements of the Act and the rules have been met. Certification of the agreement will come into force on 21 October 2003 and remain in force until 1 September 2006. We will issue reasons for that decision in due course. We will now adjourn.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [10.04am]