|
|
Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Australian Industrial Relations Commission Transcripts |
AUSCRIPT PTY LTD
ABN 76 082 664 220
Level 6, 114-120 Castlereagh St SYDNEY NSW 2000
PO Box A2405 SYDNEY SOUTH NSW 1235
Tel:(02) 9238-6500 Fax:(02) 9238-6533
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
O/N 10207
AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL
RELATIONS COMMISSION
COMMISSIONER THATCHER
C2004/2391
MEDIA, ENTERTAINMENT AND
ARTS ALLIANCE
and
AUSTRALIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION
Application under section 170LW of the Act
for settlement of dispute re ABCs failure to
consult to clause 55
SYDNEY
10.10 AM, TUESDAY, 23 MARCH 2004
PN1
THE COMMISSIONER: Appearances, please.
PN2
MR M. RYAN: If the Commission pleases, I appear for the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance.
PN3
MR G. THOMSON: I appear for the Community and Public Sector Union.
PN4
MR D. SMITH: I appear for the ABC and with me is MS J. BATE.
PN5
THE COMMISSIONER: Unless anyone has got anything else to say, I presume the parties want us to get into it. There's nothing further to be said at this stage. Before we start, I just wanted to talk about a couple of programmming things. I have a video conference which I've arranged for 4 o'clock, that's with the west and that's been set in advance so we'll have to finish today about five or 10 to four if that's okay. The other thing is that I'd like to break for lunch around about 12.30. We could see at that time whether or not we should resume at 1.30 or 2 o'clock depending on how we're going, I think, if that's all right with everybody. Mr Ryan?
PN6
MR RYAN: Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner, I understand we faxed your chambers yesterday a copy of our submissions and witness statements.
PN7
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, I've received -
PN8
MR RYAN: Would you prefer a non faxed copy? It might be easier to read.
PN9
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you very much.
PN10
MR RYAN: Just on one machinery matter, Commissioner, that myself and Mr Smith need to speak amongst ourselves at some stage, there are three potential witnesses from Melbourne, Mr Bass from the ABC and two of our members. Now, there's some problem with one of our members at the very least in that she's got tonsillitis at the moment so no matter where she is, I mean the ability to speak maybe somewhat limited so I just need to speak with Mr Smith how we think we could address that issue and put that to you if you don't mind at some convenient time before the luncheon break
PN11
THE COMMISSIONER: I guess so. I'll be in your hands on that. Just on witnesses, is the usual practice of witnesses not being in the room when we're proceeding going to apply?
PN12
MR RYAN: Well, there are three union official witnesses, Commissioner. I raised that issue with Mr Smith whether he wanted them in or out. To paraphrase Mr Smith's view as to what they're going to give evidence on, he has no objection to them being present during the proceedings.
PN13
THE COMMISSIONER: Very well then. Is that so, Mr Smith?
PN14
MR SMITH: Yes, Commissioner, I don't think that there's a great deal that actually hinges on the evidence. No offence to my colleagues but on their evidence.
PN15
THE COMMISSIONER: Very well, we'll proceed on that basis then. Yes, Mr Ryan?
PN16
MR RYAN: Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner, as this matter was before you late last week and you issued directions and also ahead of those directions were the three questions that this matter raises, can I say, if I could draw your attention to clause 55 of the ABC Enterprise Agreement and raise what I believe the Alliance has to show in relation to those three questions is that firstly, is the introduction of what is commonly called the National Sports Wrap a matter of change which attracts clause 51 is the first question that needs to be answered from our point of view in the affirmative.
PN17
If that is the case then secondly, are the nature of those changes such that they attract or fall within clause 55(3) of the Enterprise Agreement? That is, are they within the definition of significant effect. So they're the two, I suppose, preconditions for attracting the jurisdiction as to what the ABC has done in recent days. Then flowing from that is the point B of your matters, Commissioner, which is the extent, if any, that discussions that have taken place prior to the introduction of the National Sports Wraps, are they consultations envisaged by clause 55? To that extent, if I could draw your attention to clause 55(4) where is set out two quite important things we say, Commissioner.
PN18
First, in the opening sentence of that, that is discussions with employees and their representatives. Now, we say that is mandatory on the ABC that it is insufficient to show that the ABC has complied with their obligation in clause 55 if they've embarked upon some form of discussion merely with certain individuals who may be affected or certain individuals who are employed as journalists or reporters in some locations because the obligation is two-fold to have discussions with both the affected staff and their representatives with the Alliance in this particular case. It would certainly be our contention which we hope to show through the evidence that the ABC has not done that with Alliance officials.
PN19
Secondly, is then set out in paragraphs A to L the sorts of information that would form the basis of those discussions and you'll note again that that's not an exclusive definition, Commissioner. It's a series of things that will be done but it's not as it says, but not necessarily be limited to just those, I think, 12 areas. Then finally, if we prove to your satisfaction, Commissioner, firstly that the nature of the change is such to attract clause 55, the change itself includes significant effects as set out in clause 55(3) that there hasn't been discussion as envisaged by 55(4) what you should do because as you point out, the requirement of this enterprise agreement makes a recommendation under this matter binding on both parties.
PN20
In particular, you picked up a matter that was referred to briefly in the 127 matter by the Vice President that certainly his view was that it was open to the Commission to put a halt to the National Sports Wrap to allow these consultations - go back to the pre status quo if you like, to allow those consultations envisaged by the Enterprise Agreement to take place. Can I say from the start, I think in some cases this has been - issues that have raised, in a number of cases as to the extent of what consultation means that we certainly don't, as much as we may have views on it, don't attempt to make any submissions as to the worth or otherwise of the ABCs decision to introduce this National Sports Wrap.
PN21
We know that having regard to the Commission precedents that consultation is a right that we have to put our views forward to the ABC and their decision-making body or bodies, for those views to be taken on board seriously by the ABC and for those views to have the ability to impact on the initial decision of the ABC. So there's an obligation on the ABC to seriously consider the views expressed by our members and the Alliance as to what we think should happen or should not happen with the National Sports Wrap.
PN22
They are obligated to consider those and weigh them up but we have not got a right of veto or we have not got a right to say that we think this project is so worthless from any number of points of view that it should not go ahead and you must agree with our point of view. But certainly consultation is much more than the mere explanation of a decision taken by, in this case, the employer in saying, we are going to do this at a point in time, we are giving you the courtesy only of telling you in advance but no matter what you say to us, it's full steam ahead with that proposal.
PN23
That is not consultation nor is it I see it from our point of view, consultation not our right to impose a view on the ABC but it is a real right, a right with weight to how it is taken seriously and discussed in the knowledge that if our views are legitimate, they may have impact on the initial decision leading either to its modification or in some cases, its dropping. So I don't want to go down that path and say, what consultation rights we have, other than to say that our views should be taken on board, must be taken on board by the ABC, mulled over in their own internal decision-making processes and it's much more than explanation and it's a lot less than having a joint decision-making approach to it.
PN24
It's not that, we don't press that point, it's a point we can't press, it's been quite clear that consultation lies in the middle, if you like, of the extreme of just mere explanation from the employer's side and joint decision-making from a union side but it is a real right nonetheless.
PN25
THE COMMISSIONER: I understand the submission. Mr Ryan, going back to your first point, are you saying that, say looking at 55, if you were saying - are you saying that if there is change but not to an extent which would attract 55(3), there is some obligation on the employer to do something under these proceedings might be related to that obligation?
PN26
MR RYAN: In a legal sense probably not, Commissioner. I think if one was to look at the regime of the agreement, there is a range of process of different things as to consultation and implementation, there are for example, a different stream of consultation for redundancies in some cases or for single person issues. This is that regime for looking at change whereby the ABC has decided to do something differently and it has and that decision will then have an impact which encompasses the issues set out at 55(3).
PN27
So if there is change right, on warning, need then to look at whether that change or those changes, it may be a combination of changes, has what is called, a significant effect and that definition again, is an inclusive definition, is not an exclusive definition. But can I just note before I expand probably in final submissions, that the significant effect definition is much wider and broader than what has typically been significant effects, for example, in the termination change and redundancy. We are really looking at job losses or loss of money for people, it goes well beyond that.
PN28
In fact the definition of significant effect in our Enterprise Agreement - this is our fourth one I think, with the ABC - have expanded over the years as well and I'll put that forward later in submissions to show that initially in our Enterprise Agreements, the significant effect definition was very much the old traditional TCR, if you like, definition of significant effect. It has now expanded to encompass things such as re-training or elimination of promotion opportunities which is something much wider than I suppose, an outsider would say, well, is it a significant effect on a large group of employees at a place which is undergoing down-sizing or retrenchments or change of programming.
PN29
THE COMMISSIONER: I understand what you are saying or your submissions is in respect of the breadth of width, that a some stage you will be addressing me on what your submission is in respect of the word, significant.
PN30
MR RYAN: Yes, Commissioner but I'm saying if - - -
PN31
THE COMMISSIONER: Other than in breadth, I'm talking about the magnitude, say, if we pick any one of those examples, the categories which are listed in 55(3), presumably there could be a very minor change in respect of any of those, as distinct from a major change in respect of any of those. Somewhere along the line a line would have to be drawn as to what is significant and what is other than significant.
PN32
MR RYAN: Yes, I mean, it's not a mathematical sort of equation, you know, less than 5 is insignificant and 5 and over is significant. That is why I suppose, we have Commission members.
PN33
THE COMMISSIONER: Always like to get a bit of help.
PN34
MR RYAN: If we could have agreed what significant effects were, then we wouldn't be here obviously, either we would have been right or the ABC would have been right.
PN35
THE COMMISSIONER: I would just like to know you view on it, that's all.
PN36
MR RYAN: I think one can take a bit of guidance from a decision of Vice President Lawler again, concerning the ABC where he ruled out that if it only affects one person you don't attract 55.
PN37
THE COMMISSIONER: I think he was referring to 55.2.1 which has the word, employees, plural, I think that is what it was turning on.
PN38
MR RYAN: Then what was significant, so he didn't have to really address that, he started at 55(1) and got to 55(2) and said, I can now go to clause 56, so it's really up to me to suggest that what we say have affected in the main, three employees, is something that attracts, has the effect of saying, if those three employees, they have had significant effects, as set out in clause 55(3). I suppose that, Commissioner, really is the opening gambit from where we are coming. With that it may be convenient to call some witness.
PN39
THE COMMISSIONER: Certainly.
PN40
PN41
MR RYAN: Mr Grunhard, did you prepare an outline of evidence?---I did.
PN42
Was that forwarded to the Commission yesterday?---It was.
PN43
Also, to the ABC, Mr Thomson?---It was.
PN44
Have you a cop of that in front of you?---I do.
PN45
Commissioner, it is attachment H to our documentation. If I can make a quick diversion, Commissioner, while it's set out as an outline of evidence, it really is to a large extent, a witness statement.
PN46
Do you say that your outline of evidence is true and correct in all facts known to you?---It is.
PN47
I ask you one particular question and that concerns the time between - in paragraph 2 you state that you started receiving e-mail and telephone calls from members from Monday 2 February concerning the National Sports Wrap and in paragraph 3 you said that you held a meeting of members in Sydney on 13 February, what was taking place between 2 February and 13 February that you were directly involved in?---As it is usual practice for us to receive a formal notification of a change detailing the effects and the corporation's intention with regard to a certain change, we were somewhat behind the eight ball in this matter as we had no detail as to what the proposal would entail, what effects there would be on members, so for that period we were largely trying to establish exactly what had been proposed, who it would affect, to what extent it would affect them and also, trying to canvass the opinion of our members as to what should be done about this announcement from management which only filtered out over a period of several days.
PN48
You mentioned written correspondence that the ABC gives us concerning change; would that be attachment A to the Alliance's submissions?---Yes, that's one example.
**** SAM GRUNHARD XN MR RYAN
PN49
Have you seen other such examples?---I have over the past 12 months in particular, there have been several.
PN50
Are they in similar form to those?---They are.
PN51
Did the Alliance receive any such documentation in similar fashion in relation to these changes?---We did not.
PN52
I have no further questions, Commissioner.
PN53
PN54
MR SMITH: In respect of Mr Ryan's last question regarding attachment A, you will in attachment A that in that particular document the ABC expressed the view that they were making some fundamental changes to its news equipment and that it involved closing news rooms, closing some segments in both Perth and Sydney and transferring people and functions to Melbourne, also that it involved redundancies?---Mm.
PN55
Generally speaking, is that the nature of the advice from the ABC regarding clause 55 consultations?---Not always, there have been a number of different types over the last 12 months or so as the ABC has implemented various changes.
PN56
With respect to this particular change, were there going to be any job losses?---To change the national sports rep?
PN57
The national sports rep?---We were uncertain as we had received no notification.
**** SAM GRUNHARD XXN MR SMITH
PN58
I'll just go back a step: with respect to my last question about the proposal or other notifications from the ABC, do you have some examples of other clause 55 notifications that involve significant effects such as redundancies?---I didn't bring others with me, we merely submitted the one that was briefest for the consideration of the Commission. There have been several in the last 12 months and I don't believe they have all involved redundancies, but I would have to check those.
PN59
Going further into your statement, you mention that on Friday 13 February you held meetings of members in Sydney and a resolution was passed. I understand that you were aware there were other meetings in other parts of the country?---There were.
PN60
Did you formally forward the resolutions that arose from that meeting to the ABC?---I believe the resolutions were passed on in Melbourne from those meetings. The meetings were not all held on the same day, they were held throughout that week in various states.
PN61
Would it be normally the practice to the Alliance to forward such resolutions to, for example, the head of workplace relations such as myself?---It is usually the case, yes.
PN62
Did you do so or are you aware whether the Alliance did so in this instance?---I believe these were forwarded at the end of that week.
PN63
Would it surprise you if I put it to you that as the head of workplace relations I didn't receive any such notification formally from the union?---It would surprise me in this case if they weren't all forwarded; however, I don't have the details, but I understand that several of them were forward. In any case, I do know that local management in Sydney did receive these resolutions as there were numerous copies being passed around and inspected.
PN64
Local management being - - -?---In the Sydney news room where the meeting was held.
**** SAM GRUNHARD XXN MR SMITH
PN65
How were you aware, because they were being passed around - - -?---They were being passed around amongst all members there and I am aware that those managers were around the place where the meeting had been held immediately afterwards.
PN66
I can allay your concerns there, that is probably the way we did get a copy, it wasn't clear to us that that was the resolution as passed, it was simply a piece of paper with no heading on it at all. Is there a particular reason why you didn't write to the ABC with those resolutions demanding clause 55 type consultation?---We in fact did do that on Tuesday the 17th.
PN67
On the 17th, that's right, yes, you did. What was your reaction to the response that you received to that correspondence? I think that's attachment D to the MEAAs submissions?---I'm sorry, the question was - - -
PN68
You say in your email that you were writing to request consultation with the Corporation under clause 55 and you indicated that we may be in breach of clause 55.2 of the agreement. What was the rationale for stating that we may be in breach?---Merely wishing to be polite, Mr Smith.
PN69
That's commendable, Mr Grunhard. You will recall I sent you an email saying that we therefore do not accept that the ABC is in breach of clause 55.2 in that we did not consider that would have a significant effect on the staff as defined in clause 55.3. What was your reaction to that?---Well, I disagreed to the position as you stated it. However, we were keen to move forward and attempt to settle this dispute.
PN70
Did you express a view as to where the real issues lay, was it generally around the country or was it your view that it was a Melbourne focussed issue?---The concerns lay around the country; however, we requested for convenience that consultation occur in one place at that stage in order to begin the process which as we saw had not begun.
**** SAM GRUNHARD XXN MR SMITH
PN71
Further in your statement, at point 5 or paragraph 5, you indicate that you were present when Chris Warren, the secretary, made a mobile telephone call to me?---I was.
PN72
Saying that you were present. Were you able to actually hear both sides of that conversation?---I was not able to hear the recipient's end of that conversation, no.
PN73
So your statement here relies on Mr Warren passing on - - -?---Immediately after the telephone call, that's right.
PN74
Those are all the questions I have, Commissioner.
PN75
THE COMMISSIONER: Before you reach re-examination could I ask a question, Mr Grunhard. What discussions, if any, did you participate in with ABC management before the implementation of the proposed changes?---No formal discussions took place, Commissioner, to my memory in Sydney.
PN76
I am asking you what did you do, were you involved in any discussions formal or informal?---About the plan, no.
PN77
About the implementation of the proposed changes?---No.
PN78
Thank you. Is there anything further you would like to ask as a result of that?
PN79
MR SMITH: No, thank you, Commissioner, I think I have made my points with regard to Mr Grunhard.
PN80
THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Thomson?
**** SAM GRUNHARD XXN MR SMITH
PN81
MR THOMSON: I have no questions, Commissioner.
PN82
PN83
MR RYAN: Mr Grunhard, could I refer you again to attachment D, which is the email exchange between yourself and Mr Smith. You actually sent the email on the same date as the stopwork meeting in Sydney, didn't you, it is dated Friday, 13 February 2004 at 4.05 pm?---Yes, that's correct.
PN84
Mr Smith didn't reply until some time on the following Tuesday at 7.24 pm?---You are correct.
PN85
My understanding was that management then addressed staff in Melbourne on 19 February?---At the request of the Alliance, yes.
PN86
So Mr Smith as head of workplace relations got notice on the same day as the Sydney stopwork meeting as to the views of the Alliance?---That's correct.
PN87
I have no further questions, Commissioner.
PN88
PN89
PN90
MR RYAN: Commissioner, Ms Lappin's outline is attachment G.
PN91
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.
PN92
MR RYAN: Ms Lappin, you prepared your outline of evidence for these proceedings?---That's right.
PN93
Is that attachment G?---It is.
PN94
To the best of your knowledge are the facts that you rely upon true and correct?---They are.
PN95
In paragraphs 6 and 7 of your outline you say:
PN96
On 19 February a meeting was held with Mr Hamilton, Mr Smith, Ms Sweeney, Mr Bass and Mr Gamali.
PN97
They all represented the ABC?---That's right.
PN98
Do you know what time of the day that meeting was held at?---I believe it was 11.30.
PN99
Then you were present along with four Alliance members?---That's right.
PN100
You state there that "ABC management"; do you know who contended that they weren't required to consult?---That statement was made by both Mr Smith and Mr Sweeney.
**** KATE LAPPIN XN MR RYAN
PN101
In paragraph 7 you say that:
PN102
Management are invited by the union to address staff.
PN103
Who made the invitation and on what day?---It was confirmed earlier that morning by phone to Mr Smith that they would speak at that meeting.
PN104
Are you saying they weren't going to address the staff?---I don't believe there was any intention to address the staff but we invited them to speak at a collective meeting and they did so.
PN105
Did that become rather than a normal stop work meeting a question and answer session?---That's right. We then after that had a further meeting without management.
PN106
In paragraph 8 you say that Mr Hamilton agreed that the process of introducing the plan hadn't been ideal, that consultation could have been better and there were lessons for the ABC. Can you recall as best you can the actual words used by Mr Hamilton?---I do have notes from that meeting.
PN107
Did you take those notes during the meeting?---That's right. I believe he said - Mr Hamilton said they accept that they have failed to communicate properly.
PN108
Can you just show Mr Smith that?---That's not entirely legible but - - -
PN109
It could have been worse it could have been shorthand.
PN110
MR SMITH: Sorry, whereabouts is that?
**** KATE LAPPIN XN MR RYAN
PN111
MR RYAN: In paragraph 9 you say that Mr Hamilton announced that PM would be suspended and not go ahead on the following Monday; is that correct?---That's right.
PN112
You didn't ask him a specific question?---I did. I sought clarification several times and - around whether this was now a proposal - merely a proposal and sought clarification that it was back on the drawing board.
PN113
Did Mr Hamilton say yes or did he actually - - -?---He said "Yes, it is back on the drawing board".
PN114
What words did he say, if any, that staff would be able to consult and all alternatives will be investigated and considered?---He said that there would be opportunities to view the pilot and that any other ideas for improving sport could be brought to management's attention and that there would be opportunities for further discussions, that all staff views would be considered.
PN115
Following that meeting on 19 February what further steps, if any, did you take to consult with the ABC over their proposal?---At that meeting it had been suggested - staff asked why more senior management wasn't in attendance, Max Uechtritz and John Cameron in particular.
PN116
Can you just explain for the Commissioner's benefit who those two individuals are?---John Cameron I believe was the architect of the plan and Max Uechtritz is the ABC head of news and current affairs.
PN117
What position does Mr Cameron hold?---I don't know what his title is, to be honest.
**** KATE LAPPIN XN MR RYAN
PN118
But he's underneath Mr Uechtritz?---That's right, he'd be second-in-charge, I imagine, of news and current affairs. Staff had put the question to Walter Hamilton why Max and John Cameron weren't there and Walter responded "Why don't you invite them". So following - the next day I then, as Mr Hamilton suggested, wrote to Mr Cameron and Mr Uechtritz inviting them to address staff in a similar way and answer their questions.
PN119
Did either Mr Uechtritz or Mr Cameron respond to you?---No, they didn't.
PN120
Did they phone you?---No, they didn't.
PN121
In paragraph 12 you say that on 3 March, some 12 days later, Mr Uechtritz and Mr Cameron were in the Melbourne newsroom; how did you know about that?---Members rang me that morning and said they believed that they were in the building and were intending to talk to people about the proposal.
PN122
Were you told by any members that there was an all-in staff meeting with either Mr Uechtritz or Mr Cameron or both?---No, I was told that they were hand-picking members to speak to.
PN123
Do we have other Alliance delegates in the ABC in Melbourne?---We do. We have within the domestic news and current affairs we have four delegates and we also asked a member to act as a staff representative on the previous occasion, Barry Cassidy, so he wasn't normally a delegate but he was for that matter, coming into a meeting as a staff representative.
PN124
Those people were known to the ABC?---I believe so, at least Rachael Carbonell had been introduced earlier as the delegate, Rafael Epstein was also known as the delegate.
PN125
Were they involved in those discussions on 3 March?---They weren't initially invited but they did then manage to meet with Mr Uechtritz and Mr Cameron or Rachael Carbonell and Rafael Epstein but not Barry Cassidy.
**** KATE LAPPIN XN MR RYAN
PN126
At the conclusion of those selective meetings on 3 March and up until Friday 12 March, had you had any contact as to their plan for the National Sports Wrap?---No, I didn't.
PN127
Were you advised by members of any decisions taken?---I was told that as a result of the earlier meetings members had been told that they would be able to view the pilots and that they would be able to provide feedback. That there would be one week of producing those and that there would be then feedback. However, they then - members then told me that there was no opportunity to provide that feedback.
PN128
How were they able to provide feedback?---They were to view daily the pilot and take notes and then consult with management. However, at the end of the week they were advised that it was to proceed on the next Monday. So there was no opportunity for them to have a review of that week's pilots.
PN129
So a week's worth of the pilots started on the - - -?I guess that would be the 7th - - -
PN130
- - - the 8th, the 7th?---8th. Yes, sorry, the 8th.
PN131
So that was the week of viewing the pilots?---That's right.
PN132
And you're saying that come the end of that week, on the Friday, there wasn't that form for consultation or discussion. That was the day on which it was announced that the following Monday the National Sports Wrap would go ahead?---That's right. The members that were particularly affected, Angela Pippos and Christine Ahern, were taking the time to view those pilots after they had finished their shifts but they had not been consulted during the week about the content of the pilot and then they also were not consulted at the end of the week around the success or otherwise of the pilot.
**** KATE LAPPIN XN MR RYAN
PN133
Were any of our delegates consulted about the content of the pilots?---No, they weren't.
PN134
Were you consulted?---No, I wasn't.
PN135
I've no further questions, Commissioner.
PN136
THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Mr Thomson?
PN137
MR THOMSON: No questions, Commissioner.
PN138
PN139
MR SMITH: You indicate, I think, in paragraph 4 of your statement that the resolution passed on 10 February was sent to John Cameron, Matt Tuteridge, John Tallow, Marco Bass and Russell Balding. In what form was that sent do you recall?---I believe it was in email.
PN140
Was that from you?---That's right.
PN141
You haven't tendered that as far as I'm aware?---I think - I'll have to check the submission but - - -
PN142
I didn't see it in the submission, so I'm just asking?---Okay.
PN143
And again there's no hidden agenda with that, it's just again this was a resolution that - - -?---I've got that here if you'd like to have - I can tender it.
**** KATE LAPPIN XXN MR SMITH
PN144
Normally these matters would be sent to the head of workplace relations or would have been referred to us?---I did actually speak to Hanan Gamali, the head of human resources in Melbourne. She pointed out to me that she'd like to have the resolution. She had obtained it by that stage and she pointed out to me that she would like to have the resolution.
PN145
THE COMMISSIONER: I'm not sure who that last person was that was referred to?---Sorry, the human resources manager.
PN146
MR SMITH: Hanan Gamali is the State HR Manager for Victoria.
PN147
You refer there in point 5 that the following day you received an email from John Cameron. I don't think you've tendered that. It was a document that I had intended to tender later in my submissions, Commissioner. I think it may be appropriate if I got the copies separated out to tender that now. I just wish to ask a couple of questions.
PN148
PN149
MR SMITH: This is on Wednesday, 11 February at 12.45 pm from Louise Lander to Kate Lappin?---That's right.
PN150
You recall receiving that?---I do.
PN151
Is that the document you received?---That is the document I referred to.
**** KATE LAPPIN XXN MR SMITH
PN152
What did you do as a result of receiving this document?---I forwarded that to my delegate and asked if they had also received it and they said yes, that something similar or that had been distributed.
PN153
This document had been distributed to delegates?---To the newsroom. I'm not sure if it went specifically to them but to the newsroom.
PN154
Sorry, there's a staple right through the word that I wanted to look at which is always the case. On the second page of S1 John Cameron states:
PN155
Practically speaking this move is still in its pilot stage but I would expect to have tapes in the hands of relevant state and territory staff before week's end. From there we will discuss and refine.
PN156
Are you aware that any pilot tapes were received in Melbourne?---I believe there were pilot tapes received. I couldn't tell you what date. I know that initially affected members were told that they couldn't see the pilots, it was nothing to do with them, but that was a decision - - -
PN157
Who told them that?---Marco Bass, I believe, but I couldn't tell you what date that was said and later they were told they could see the pilots.
PN158
When was that later?---Well, I imagine maybe it was after this email.
PN159
You were at the meeting on 19 February?---That's right.
PN160
Do you recall towards the end of that meeting Marco Bass inviting staff to view the pilot?---Yes. It may have been Walter Hamilton or Marco Bass, but one of them did, yes.
**** KATE LAPPIN XXN MR SMITH
PN161
My recollection is quite clear it was Marco - in fact it was both of them. Marco reiterated at the end of the meeting. Are you aware that anyone took up that offer to view the pilots?---I believe that they were viewed but I couldn't tell you every - the name of all the staff that have viewed them.
PN162
Are you aware that Ian Henderson, the news reader, the Melbourne news reader had viewed the pilot prior to that meeting?---No, I wasn't aware of that.
PN163
Again there's another document. I'm not sure that it's germane to hand up right now, Commissioner, unless my colleagues would like to see it, but I do have a reference to Ian Henderson having seen the pilot earlier than the 19th; in fact on the 17th.
PN164
THE COMMISSIONER: That will come from you later?
PN165
MR SMITH: Yes, it will, Commissioner.
PN166
During the period from 2 February through to 19 February is it fair to say that this proposal for a National Sports Wrap attracted a good deal of notoriety in discussion?---It certainly did.
PN167
Was any of that discussion - were you party to any of those discussions with members?---With members?
PN168
Yes?---Yes.
PN169
Did you seek during that period from the 2nd say to 10 February to raise those issues with, for example, Marco Bass, the state editor for news and current affairs in Victoria?---Delegates of the union did that.
**** KATE LAPPIN XXN MR SMITH
PN170
Those delegates being?---Rachel Carbonell and Kerry Ritchie.
PN171
So there had been some discussion leading up to the 10th?---As I think I've said in my statement Marco Bass was informed that the assistance of the union had been sought and that members would be pursuing the matter. That they didn't believe that there was consultation, adequate consultation.
PN172
Did you yourself seek to have discussions with Marco Bass?---No, I didn't.
PN173
Is that normally what you would do?---I would normally ask delegates to try and resolve the matter first.
PN174
And is that what you did?---That's what happened, yes, delegates spoke to Marco Bass as I said. We also spent that time obviously consulting with our members around what they, you know, their directions to the union on what should be done.
PN175
At the meeting on 19 February in your statement you indicate that during the meeting the ABC management contend that we're not required to consult?---That's right.
PN176
Was that the sum total of the discussion at that meeting?---No. Can I refer to my notes again?
PN177
Was there a discussion about the nature of the proposal?---That's right. A lot of that meeting and the next meeting were about the merits of the proposal.
PN178
Just the merits or was there further discussion as to how it would affect people?---In the first meeting our members put forward the effect, the significant effect it would have on their careers and their, you know, the changes, the daily changes it would mean to them.
**** KATE LAPPIN XXN MR SMITH
PN179
Did the ABC representatives Walter and Lisa take those issues onboard? Did they engage in that discussion? Did they talk and debate the nature of that effect?---I believe they said that they didn't think it would have an effect on their careers, that it would allow - free them up for local reporting.
PN180
So would accept that there was general discussion and debate over the effect or otherwise that this proposal would have?---There was some discussion about the editorial change. There was no discussion around the specific effects on the two members.
PN181
Are you certain of that Kate, from your notes?---From my notes there was no discussion - - -
PN182
I was actually at that meeting and I do recall that level of discussion occurring?---There was no discussion around things like the effect it would have on rosters, or on salary or of the nature of any of those changes. It was put by our members that it was an effect on their career and there was a discussion around that, and there was a further discussion around the effects on their future.
PN183
Do you recall that the issue of salaries for example, the point was made that there would be no effect on their salaries?---I believe there may have been a point around that there was no reduction in entry point but there was no discussions about things like penalties and so forth, as one of the members would be losing money as she will be moving from weekends - - -
PN184
Potentially?---There was no discussion around that.
PN185
You say that you believe that the ABC had not intended to have a meeting with the broader staff. On what do basis do you state that belief?---Well staff hadn't been notified of any meeting and when I rang you that morning and asked if you would speak to our members collectively, I believe you might have been in a taxi, you spoke with the people you were with, you consulted with them about whether that would be something that they would all be prepared to do. I believe you said to them, "she's referring to it as a union meeting" or something to that effect. Then you came back to me and said and you would agree to speak to them.
**** KATE LAPPIN XXN MR SMITH
PN186
Would it surprise you that the ABC had in fact wanted to talk to its staff but were concerned that it was going to be turned into a general union meeting as opposed to a meeting of our staff?---It would surprise me.
PN187
Well can I put it to you that the intention had been to meet with the staff?---That intention had never been conveyed to our members or to me.
PN188
I'll be checking that with our witnesses obviously.
PN189
MR RYAN: I don't know how Ms Lappin can have any vague idea about the intention of the ABC to do something unless there is something put before - - -
PN190
THE COMMISSIONER: I'll give due weight to the question.
PN191
MR SMITH: I think that is the appropriate thing to do Commissioner. I simply make the point that in her testimony Ms Lappin said that she believed that the ABC did not have intention of meeting staff and I am simply questioning on what basis was that belief. She has answered that question. I can now, in the event that there is anything that particularly hinges on it, contest or attest that with other witnesses. It is a very simple, straightforward process that I think Mr Ryan would be well and truly aware of.
PN192
At the broader staff meeting, Kate, you have made mention that Walter Hamilton had made certain statements. I believe from your notes you have said that:
PN193
Yes it is being the proposal is back on the drawing board.
PN194
My recollection is, and I'll put it to you that, in fact it was you that suggested that the issue was back on the drawing board?---I asked him to confirm that several times and he said yes more than once, that it was back on the drawing board. That is what you have written in your notes:
**** KATE LAPPIN XXN MR SMITH
PN195
My clear recollection ...
PN196
And again I will be asking Mr Hamilton this:
PN197
Was that he said it had never been taken off the drawing broad, it was still a proposal.
PN198
It may seem like a moot point but if we are going to be seeking to have quotes and Mr Ryan did ask whether this was a direct quote or a verbatim report?---I've got in my notes:
PN199
Walter confirms back on the drawing board.
PN200
So I won't claim that I can say verbatim.
PN201
That's fine. Your also say in point 9 that Walter Hamilton had:
PN202
Suggested staff would be able to consult and all alternatives will be investigated and considered.
PN203
Are you aware of any staff taking that issue up, any of your members taking that opportunity up with management post that 19 February meeting?---As I've outlined before there was a process that the two most effected members, I believe there would be other effected member, but the two most effected members thought that they would go through and they were going through that process viewing the tapes, making notes, preparing comments, but they were not given an opportunity to consult. Further, when the pilots were put together they were under the belief that they were going to be consulted around the content of the pilots but that wasn't done. For them they were not involved in detailed consultation around the content of the pilot.
**** KATE LAPPIN XXN MR SMITH
PN204
Did you yourself seek to view the pilot or become involved further in that discussion or consultation?---I was given some transcripts of the earlier pilot but I didn't see the pilot.
PN205
Did you ask to see it?---No I didn't.
PN206
You've mentioned that you invited Max Uechtritz and John Cameron to address a similar meeting. Are you aware when they did visit the Melbourne newsroom on Wednesday 3 March who they spoke with?---I'm aware of some of the names of people they spoke with.
PN207
Did that include any of the delegates that you've identified?---Yes it did.
PN208
You are saying that they were not specifically invited but did meet. Do you know how that came about?---I believe the first meeting of hand picked members, our delegates became aware of that meeting and then were able to be involved by going.
PN209
You describe these as "hand picked delegates". On what basis do you make that statement?---That was how it was described to me.
PN210
Would it surprise you that senior news executives would, on visiting one of our major newsrooms, would want to speak to particular people as well as speaking even more broadly to people?---Our invitation had been to address everyone so it surprised me that they selected those people that they would like to speak to.
PN211
Are you aware of how they then spoke to other people? Did they specifically seek out to talk to other people as well?---Other people in addition to - - -
**** KATE LAPPIN XXN MR SMITH
PN212
In the newsroom, other than the so-called "hand picked" members of staff?---I think that the further two meetings again were whoever happened to be there at the time and was available to speak. For example Christine Ahern was not there that day. Another member advised her of their presence. She was not advised of their presence. She was rung at home and she came in specifically the next day to try and be involved in those meetings.
PN213
During that period leading up to Friday 12 March did you seek to have any further discussions with Marco Bass or any other senior ABC officials?---Between 3 March and 12 March?
PN214
Yes?---No we believed that the proposal was back on the drawing board and we would be advised if there was any changes and so we were waiting on the ABC to advise us.
PN215
I have no further questions for Ms Lappin.
PN216
THE COMMISSIONER: Ms Lappin, you are based in Melbourne are you?---That's right.
PN217
In respect of paragraph 7, there was a phone call to Mr Smith. Was that you who made that phone call?---That's right.
PN218
I think in respect of paragraph 8, that was the second meeting as distinct from the one that started at 11.30?---That's right, that was the second collective meeting of all staff, all members.
PN219
So there was the 11.30 meeting, is that what you call the first collective meeting?---That's right, the first meeting at 11.30. There was then a later meeting probably around a quarter to one I think.
**** KATE LAPPIN XXN MR SMITH
PN220
Was it the meeting on 3 March where you said that there was an invitation for staff to look at the pilots and provide feedback?---The earlier meeting that had been discussed, the meeting on 19, the collective meeting, the second of the two meetings, it was discussed that the pilots would be made available.
PN221
And you were present at that discussion?---At that collective meeting, yes.
PN222
Did you form the opinion from what was said at that meeting that persons would have to wait a week to look at those and make notes before providing feedback to management, or did you have the opinion that it could have been on a daily basis?---The pilots actually had been stopped, they weren't being made at that point in time I believe. The ABC might like to confirm the dates of the pilot being made, but during this process the pilots did get suspended, so it wasn't until later when they were making the pilots again that they would have been available for viewing.
PN223
I've obviously got confused, which I'll study, but when the pilots that starting out on 8 March, I understood I thought you said - - -?---That week. Yes, that's right.
PN224
- - - that there was an invitation given?---Mm.
PN225
Were you present when that invitation was given?---That's right. There was - there had been a commitment that when pilots were available, members would be able to view them.
PN226
And you were present when that invitation was given?---That's right.
PN227
My question therefore is: was part of that invitation that feedback could be given on an hourly, daily, or was it understood that, "We don't want any notes and feedback until after we've seen the full week"?---I don't think the detail of how the consultation would proceed was provided at all, no. There may have been some further discussions between directly affected members and, you know, production editors or the state editor around that, but I couldn't confirm.
**** KATE LAPPIN XXN MR SMITH
PN228
Lastly, was I correct in understanding, in paragraph 12, that there were three meetings?---I believe there were three meetings, yes, that's right, with different people in them. One of them may have actually been the next day, on 4 March.
PN229
Thank you. Mr Smith, is there anything you'd like to ask as a result of my questioning?
PN230
MR SMITH: No, I don't think so, Commissioner. That covers the issue of the pilots. We can test whether that was accurate or not.
PN231
THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Thomson.
PN232
MR THOMSON: No questions, thanks.
PN233
THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Ryan?
PN234
PN235
MR RYAN: Were you ever invited to view the pilots yourself?---I was - I wasn't, no.
PN236
And if you had been, what would you have been able to value-add to that discussion?---Well, I would certainly rely on our members for their editorial expertise, but if members had invited - if the ABC had invited me to come along and view them, I would have done so, with the assistance of members.
PN237
PN238
THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Ryan.
PN239
MR RYAN: Could I suggest, to not waste time, Commissioner, that Mr Thomson call his witness.
PN240
THE COMMISSIONER: Certainly.
PN241
MR RYAN: We'll also see if Mr Warren can be got hold of if that's at all possible, Commissioner.
PN242
MR THOMSON: Thank you, Commissioner. At the outset I'd like to adopt the preliminary submissions made by my colleague, Mr Ryan, concerning the construction of clause 55. I don't want to labour the point there, I think the submission was pretty clear and to the point. Something I will be coming back to later though, it goes to the question I think that you raised, and that is: what do you do if you hit a circumstance where change arises through a formal proposal but it doesn't necessarily trigger the significant event.
PN243
The point that I'll be coming back to, is that in any construction of the term, significant effect, I think it's very important to always understand and view that from the perspective of the person or groups of people affected. It's very easy for us sitting up in a national office to look at minor changes that might be occurring in the workplace and say in the scheme of things those changes are not all that deep, they're not that major. When you get down to the workplace and see what might appear from our national perspective to be minor or insignificant changes, from the viewpoint of the people affected the changes then frequently have a very significant effect on their working lives.
PN244
That's a point I'll be coming back to, but without labouring that point I'd like to call evidence from Mr Hatter.
PN245
PN246
MR THOMSON: Stuart, could you tell the Commission what your job and your role and position is?---My role and position is organiser for New South Wales, ABC section, the Staff Union.
PN247
At the outset, Commissioner, I apologise that I haven't prepared a formal outline of submissions. Time constraints prevented that yesterday. What I did was to interview Stuart very quickly and knock some notes out which I understand and I hope were forwarded to the Commission.
PN248
THE COMMISSIONER: That's correct, thank you.
PN249
MR THOMSON: Getting to the chase, Stuart, the National Sports Wrap, when is the first time you found out about this thing called the National Sports Wrap?---When the Sydney directors' delegate gave me a call in about the first week of February.
PN250
What then happened after he phoned you?---He called me up. He said there was concerns amongst the troops about the change and that he'd like to have a meeting with everyone, call a meeting and for me to come in and chair the meeting, really.
PN251
When did you receive this phone call?---I can't remember, I'm almost hopeless with dates, but it was either the first or second week of February.
PN252
What did you do after you were requested to convene the meeting?---Well, I - absolutely. I spoke to him: we'll work out the best time to get the most people together and I'll come in for it, and that was done, that was at 1.00 o'clock on a Thursday or a Friday.
PN253
What groups of members were at that meeting?---Well, the Sydney newsroom directors, televisions directors, and also DAs well, because they were also concerned with the changes as well; DAs being directors' assistants, Commissioner, sorry.
**** STUART HATTER XN MR THOMSON
PN254
What did they discuss at the meeting?---Well, they told me that ABC were going to introduce a new sports wrap, a National Sports Wrap, that would be produced out of Sydney and would be slotted into the majority of the 7 pm news around the country. They had concerns that they themselves, well the 7 pm director and DA were required to actually produce the wrap. At the same time they would normally do other work in preparation for the 7 pm news, and that was their particular concern and that's what they raised in that meeting.
PN255
Could we just break this up into the different groups first of all. The news directors, how many news directors in Sydney would be involved?---Involved in the wrap, or in the meeting?
PN256
In the wrap, or could have been affected by this change?---There's eight - nine, I think. I could - if you really want me I can sit here and try to remember every one of them and count them for you.
PN257
You think it's about eight or nine Sydney directors?---Yes.
PN258
Did they discuss whether or not it would have an impact on news directors outside of Sydney?---No - not from memory. I can - they may have.
PN259
Would it be your assessment that the changes would have an effect on directors outside of Sydney?---Not - I don't - you know, I'm certainly not an expert witness but I assume the directors around the other newsrooms would actually have that five minutes to do other things, you know, whilst it's getting - the tape is getting run. I don't really understand.
PN260
Would it be fair to say that the directors said, and I'm leading, unashamedly, but did they suggest that the impact was primarily in Sydney and probably wouldn't have an effect in the other branches?---Look, in this instance they were calling me as the New South Wales, you know, organiser. They were discussing their particular concerns. They weren't really having - they didn't have an awareness of a broader national issue. They just had their own concerns at that point, so they really did talk specifically about the way it was impacting on their working lives.
**** STUART HATTER XN MR THOMSON
PN261
Could you just give a thumbnail description of the duties of a news director; what do they do?---Well, post director/switcher or?
PN262
What they do today?---Well, a news director/switcher puts together the news, you know, live to air. They - what they do is they not only do the graphics that sit behind the news presenter, you know, when a story comes up, not only do they direct the director's assistant to run tapes and all that sort of stuff, they also choose a camera, they also talk to the presenter, keep the presenter in line, talk to the PPs, look - you know, they do - it's like one person - one of them tried to tell me since director/switcher it's like balancing on two beach balls, you know, at the same time as juggling.
PN263
Very briefly, you have referred to a director/switcher a number of times, could you describe to the Commission what this idea means?---Yes, look, ABC about a year and a half ago I think, maybe even two years ago, combined two roles. Traditionally, in a lot of quality newsrooms around the country you would have a vision switcher and a director sitting side-by-side and the vision switcher would do all of the graphics and change - well, obviously the vision whereas a director would direct and call the shots and decide when the little supers should come up, you know, when there's a particular, you know, talent on camera or what have you and he's sort of direct the vision switcher. ABC about 18 months ago, in an attempt to save money I assume, combined the two roles so now one person does both roles so they're actually quite busy, they're very busy. The 7 pm news I've heard it described around about 95 per cent capacity whilst live on air so they're quite busy people at the time, very hard for them.
PN264
Did any of the directors discuss with you the impact that the National Sports Wrap would have on the performance of their functions as combined directors/switchers?---Yes, absolutely, because their concern as a director/switcher is all of the graphics tasks that they have to do, that's their fear that that's where they will stuff up if they're going to stuff up, like - because not only it's a new area of their working life because it's only 18 months but it's the one that's the hardest for them to keep on top. So they like to be able to rehearse all of that sort of stuff, go through and make sure the graphics are there, make sure they're in order, run through all these - there's other technical stuff that they like to run through and actually take the time to ensure the 7 pm news is going to go to air and it's going to go to air seamlessly and at the quality that the Australian public deserve.
**** STUART HATTER XN MR THOMSON
PN265
When do the directors then do their rehearsals? When do they do all of this final checking which you talked about?---Well, before the 7 pm news, in the lead up before the 7 pm news. Obviously the nature of news-gathering a lot of stuff comes in very late particularly, you know, the editors don't always get it edited very early so it's the last hour before the news bulletin where they become quite busy and that's when - it's the only real time to actually start rehearsing all of the things that are going to go to the bulletin.
PN266
The National Sports Wrap; are you aware if that is done live to air?---No, the National Sports Wrap is getting done - it was going to be done at the time when I was talking to them - is prepared as a package, a 5 minute package, that goes live to air - well, goes to air as a tape but they did it - they were meant to produce it just before the 7 pm news so, no, it doesn't go live to air - well, they don't produce it live to air, no.
PN267
Would the time that the directors said to you that they would have liked to have spent rehearsing the news would that be coincidental with the time that they were then expected to put the bullet together?---Yes, that's what their particular - that was their immediate concern when they called me in that they would fear that it would lead to on-air errors in the 7 pm news because of exactly - precisely that; they would no longer be able to go through all of the important checks that they normally go through.
PN268
If I could move briefly now to the director's assistant role; were any directors assistants at that meeting that was convened?---Yes, absolutely, because they had an even greater fear that there was no way as the plan was to go ahead the 7 pm news director was meant to also do the sports wrap and the news director isn't even in one spot - sorry, the news DA is not even in one spot just before the news. Invariably it's a she. They have to run around the newsroom grabbing changes, you know, from all different journos and what have you and bring it back to one spot so there was no way they could have spent time in the studio producing a National Sports Wrap and be a 7 pm news DA as well.
PN269
So at this meeting was any motion or resolution passed?---Yes, there were a couple of resolutions, one specifically about this, yes.
**** STUART HATTER XN MR THOMSON
PN270
As a result of that meeting what happened, if anything?---Sorry?
PN271
Did anything occur arising from that meeting?---Yes. The resolution was passed and there was some confusion as to who the resolution should go to because there's a new manager in town, Gerry McGoldrick. We didn't know whether or not we should give it to her, whether or not we should give it all to Hamilton or what have you. In the end I had the resolution and bumped into Phil Brook who's the, like, craft leader of the directors and had a quick, sort of informal, in the corridor type chat with him about their concerns in a much more gentle way than actually handing up a resolution to, you know, senior management. So I spoke to him about it and he assured - I said, look, they've got concerns, they're real. We came up with a couple of solutions that would actually solve some of the problems - - -
PN272
Excuse me? Did this occur in the corridor or?---Yes, in the corridor - well, in the newsroom, metaphorically in the corridor. We had a couple of solutions that might have worked. One of them I put to him, sort of, you know, as I said, informally and he said, no, there's no way news would pay for that, all that sort of stuff, but he went on to say - I said, look, we're going to be a little bit stuck then because it's really - the change is really going to impact on their working abilities, and he actually then said, well look, I'm the one that's actually producing or rehearsing the wrap at this point. He believed he could get it down to small enough - to a small enough - what's the word - he believed that he would be able to produce it in only 10 to 15 minutes, not the 40 minutes that it was taking at the time and that if you did it early enough in the day it probably wouldn't impact on the 7 pm news director's ability to rehearse. So he said, look, I don't know if that's really going to be a problem, I can tell - I reckon I'm going to get it down to 10, 15 minutes. I said to him, well, okay then, I'll go back to the troops and let them know that and let them make that assessment because you might be right, it might have fixed the problem for me.
PN273
So trying to pull some of this together concerns were expressed I understand by the directors and the directors assistants?---Yes, absolutely.
**** STUART HATTER XN MR THOMSON
PN274
Were there formal or informal meetings outside this corridor meeting you had with Phil Brook?---Yes, when I went back to the delegate of the directors and also of the DAs - do you want me to talk about the DAs as well?
PN275
I went to the DAs. The solution for the DAs was to get the Lateline DA to actually do the National Sports Wrap; that was one of our suggestions so she would be able to do that and that was no big problem outside of the person that actually had to do the wrap. I then went to the directors delegate and let them know that, look, it might that it can be done in only 10, 15 minutes and it's probably worth them as a group just having a chat to Gerry McGoldrick and to Phil Brook to see if they can't iron out the problems.
PN276
Sorry, you have described Phil Brook's position in the organisation. Gerry McGoldrick, what position does she hold?---Look, I never really knew it. It's resource manager - I don't know. Don, what is it? It's pretty senior - it's a very senior role.
PN277
MR SMITH: Would you like me to get into the box with you?---It's a senior role that has, you know, a fair bit of delegation so.
PN278
MR THOMSON: So a meeting was held with Gerry McGoldrick?---Yes. Not with me in attendance. The troops went as a group, like, as a body of professionals, went and had a chat to her about their concerns. When Phil Brook said, look, it can be down to 10 to 15 minutes they said, yes, well, even 10 to 15 minutes just before 7 o'clock isn't workable. Gerry said, how about if it's done at the - you don't - the beginning of the production of the National Sports Wrap will start no later than 5.30 therefore you will be back in the director's chair for the 7 pm news at quarter to 6.00. The troops said, all right, we'll do that but only on a trial basis because we've still got grave concerns, and that trial basis was for two weeks. So that was a meeting that occurred between the troops and Gerry and Phil Brook post my meeting in the corridor and then post me going back to the delegate and letting him know what the result was.
**** STUART HATTER XN MR THOMSON
PN279
For the benefit of the Commission there are different areas of coverage in the ABC. The ABC covers most groups, work groups other than the journalists and reports and senior executives.
PN280
Mr Hatter, are there any other work groups that were identified in your discussions?---Yes, the graphics people so I went to the delegate of the graphics people and had a chat to them. They obviously had to produce it and then the graphics person then put me onto - the graphics delegate then put me on to the craft leader of the editors, the news editors so I went and had a chat to her.
PN281
Briefly, what do editors do?---Well, editors - the raw footage that comes from the camera operators out from the field they put it together - they put the story together, they edit it, cut it down to the right size.
PN282
So, did you have any discussions with the news editors?---Yes I did, I had a chat to their craft leader and she said that, yes, there are some issues from their point of view. They were going to lose a whole edit suite which would have a knock on effect on how much time they had to do other sorts of - their normal 7 pm news staff because, obviously, they were already at capacity. However, she believed that they could as a group work it out without union intervention. She said, I'll come back to you if there's a problem but she didn't.
PN283
Have they come back to you?---No.
PN284
I have no further questions.
PN285
PN286
MR SMITH: Stuart, you've described yourself as not an expert witness, I understand?---Not an expert witness.
**** STUART HATTER XXN MR SMITH
PN287
You have mentioned discussions with Phil Brook and to correct the name here, it's described in the secretary's submissions as Gerry McCormick. It's actually Geraldine McGoldrick?---McGoldrick. I thought it was Terry, though. She's new.
PN288
THE COMMISSIONER: How do you spell it?
PN289
MR SMITH: I think it's M-c-G-o-l-d-r-i-c-k.
PN290
THE COMMISSIONER: And Mr Brook or Brookes?
PN291
MR SMITH: Phil Brook.
PN292
THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you.
PN293
MR SMITH: The role held by Geraldine or Gerry, is the manager of New South Wales Manager Resources. Are you familiar with that role?---I am familiar, I am very familiar with the role.
PN294
I put it to you the role is to actually manager the resources including directors, PAs or DAs and editors, tape editors and graphics staff to produce the 7 pm news bulletins as well as other news- - -?---Among others, yes.
PN295
And current affairs programs for television?---That's my belief.
PN296
So her job, I will put it to you again, would be to ensure that where as sports wrap is introduced into the program that her job is really to do as you have described, that is, to look at the implications and find the resources and ensure that those resources are applied to the broadcasting of the news?---Yes.
**** STUART HATTER XXN MR SMITH
PN297
Are you aware that Geraldine had held discussions with the editors, directors and DAs about the time line and the resources required for this national sports wrap?---No I am not. However, that could be the case because when I did go, speak to her, I spoke with her post that meeting that had that I described to Graham, just an introductory Hi, you've been here two weeks, I just want to come and say hello. She expressed concern that they came to me before they came to her so I assumed in my mind that no, that's not the case but I can't be certain.
PN298
In any event, you have had discussions with both Phil Brook the craft leader for the directors as well as talked to the craft leader for the editors. Was that the head of Graphics?---No, I went to the craft leaders of the Graphics and the craft leader of the editors.
PN299
And you had discussions with Geraldine McGoldrick over this issue as well?---And Gerry but on an introductory, let's talk about just our future relationship, not specifically about the problem because they'd already had their meeting.
PN300
So in your testimony you have indicated that solutions have been found to the line up?---Solutions on a trial basis.
PN301
In development of this wrap?---Yes, look, on a trial basis. Our members remain concerned to this point but they are professionals and they are trying to get on with it.
PN302
You said on a trial basis. My understanding is that Geraldine had organised how the work was to be done and had indicated it would be under constant review which is basically the role that she plays, ie, the production of the News and Current Affairs programs are always under the resource and requirements are under constant review?---Yes, however, the workers, who have to change their work practices, expressed concern when the solution was put forward to them by management the said, okay, that's fine, we don't mind training up but we would like it reviewed in two weeks because those solutions may not work and we might be back to where we were.
**** STUART HATTER XXN MR SMITH
PN303
You describe this as a work practice change. In what way is it a work practice change. Are they not - if I can put it to you- - -?---If they've got to go through their supers, if they've got
PN304
to go through their graphics, if they've got to rehearse, if that's something that they need to do, as 7 pm news directors, and that opportunity has been removed from them by a management decision that's a work practice change.
PN305
How has it been removed from them?---Because they've got to do the sports wrap.
PN306
The sports wrap involves graphics and supers I presume which goes to the make up of the news program?---No, sorry. The director also sits there and directs the sports wrap so, what's his name, Wilkinson, sits there and the DA sits there; there's probably a camera operator, a TT and a director. They've got to do that.
PN307
Is not the sports wrap a pre-recorded package?---Pre-recorded and produced by the 7 pm news director.
PN308
So, it forms part of the 7 pm news?---It forms part of the 7 pm news around the country.
PN309
It forms part of the 7 pm news in Sydney and around the country?---Yes, except for WA.
PN310
I put it to you that this is actually part of their ongoing role and in that sense is not a work practice chance?---Well, I put it back to you that these guys, as I was saying before, just before the 7 pm news is when all the late news is coming in; there's always changes, the journos want it, they want to rearrange the line up, they do and it's for good reason; there is a flurry of activity. Once the credits have rolled, once the introductions have rolled, their job is specifically to put things to air, live to air. There is a whole lot of preparation that goes in to doing that. The
**** STUART HATTER XXN MR SMITH
7 pm news, there is a whole lot of preparation they need to do. That is getting removed from them, the ability to actually go through and check and make those changes as required. So if what you are saying is, Oh no, look, the five minutes, the news wrap is being deferred or being brought forward and that's something they always had to do, that's not true because what is now filling up the space that they would normally use to rehearse. Whereas in the 7 pm news it would be a different type of work practice altogether.
PN311
I'm sorry, I don't really follow what you are saying there and I'm not sure that I will pursue it that much further. We might move on. You've described this as a five minute package. Would it surprise you to find it's in fact a two and a half minute package?---Look, it would surprise me because they told me it was five minutes.
PN312
All right?---As an audience member it seemed like five minutes too.
PN313
As I said at the outset, you described yourself as not an expert witness. I have no further questions.
PN314
THE COMMISSIONER: Just one question, please Mr Hatter, could you give us an approximate date of this meeting which was at 1.00 pm on Thursday or Friday?---It was either the first Friday of February or the very second. I think I said last night I was trying to recall it and I think it was the 13th or the 14th. I think it was the week before now I've really considered overnight.
PN315
That would be a couple of days before the 15th. Would it be close to that?---No, the meeting I had with the directors was before the actual directors had to start rehearsing it themselves so it must have been a fair bit before the implementation date.
PN316
That's roundabout the second week of February?---First or second. It was before I realised the journos were having a huge problem with it; like it was before it blew up in my mind.
**** STUART HATTER XXN MR SMITH
PN317
PN318
MR THOMSON: I might just try and track that date down and see if - what I wanted to do is hand over a copy of the chronology prepared by the ABC and I'm just wondering whether or not that chronology might assist you.
PN319
When you received a call from the directors did they give you any indication as to how long this story had been out that they'd be going to a National News Wrap?---Look not that I can remember. It seemed a pretty fresh idea in their mind.
PN320
The chronology supplied by the ABC says that they put out a press release on what date?---Here we go, it's press release and staff memo from John Cameron, is that the one, of 12 March 2004?
PN321
12th of?---March - sorry no, it's not.
PN322
No, I'm talking about when they made the initial announcement that they'd be looking at the Wrap?---9 February unless there's one before. I haven't read the whole chronology - - -
PN323
Can I take you to 30 January?---Sport memo from John Cameron, yes sport memo, so I assume that's the one you're talking about. That's 30 January, yes.
PN324
Would it have been closer to that date or closer to the 14th or 15th?---It would have been closer to that date.
**** STUART HATTER RXN MR THOMSON
PN325
PN326
THE COMMISSIONER: How are we going?
PN327
PN328
MR RYAN: Mr Warren, you've prepared a statement, an outline of your evidence in this matter?---That's correct.
PN329
Have you got a copy present?---Yes, I have.
PN330
Could I just take you to paragraph 3? That meeting in Sydney was a date the same meeting was held in Melbourne of Alliance members?---That's correct on the 19th.
PN331
I take it from paragraph 3 that Mr Grunhard informed you of the outcome of the Melbourne meeting?---That's correct, yes, he gave me a report on what he'd heard.
PN332
Can you recall to the best of your ability what he said to you?---He told me that he'd been told that the Melbourne meeting had been told that the ABC had said that it wouldn't be proceeding at that stage with the National Sports Wrap, to enable it to consider and consult I had understood not just with the - to take onboard not just the criticisms from the Alliance and Alliance members but also from the community at large.
PN333
So having got that detail and direct understanding of what happened you decided to give Mr Smith a buzz, is that correct?---I thought it might be easier to go - to bypass the process, yes, and so I rang Mr Smith.
PN334
Paragraph 5 of your outline sets out or you said - are you able to recall to the best of your ability the words actually used by Mr Smith?---Look I'd hesitate to say I could recall the exact words.
PN335
It was a brief conversation of about a minute and a half but I said look, I understand that you're not going ahead with the National Sports Wrap and he said yes, that's right, we've suspended the operation of it and I said well, we should get together and talk about it. I can't remember which of us suggested we would talk about it. I said look, will that be next week which would have been inconvenient to me because I was having a baby. He said no, it certainly won't be next week but it will be some time after that.
**** CHRISTOPHER WARREN XN MR RYAN
PN336
Following that conversation were you approached in any way by the ABC for further discussions or consultation over the introduction of the National Sports Wrap?---No. No, the next thing I heard was a rumour on the Thursday afternoon from Mr Grunhard, also from Ms Lappin I must say, that there was this rumour. I must say I was dismissive of the rumour because I thought well there was an undertaking as to consultation so I couldn't believe it would go ahead without that occurring and then of course Mr Grunhard advised me - rang me at about, just after 4 o'clock on the Friday to tell me that - - -
PN337
That would be Friday the 12th?---Friday the 12th, yes. I was actually in Melbourne at that stage to tell me that he'd received a call from Mr Smith.
PN338
So you were under no misapprehension that following your conversation with Mr Smith that the Alliance as in Alliance officials would be involved?---Absolutely. Since this has blown up I've actually tried to go back over in my mind and try and remember the exact words that had been said but the very clear impression I got from it was that yes there would be discussions with the Alliance over that matter. Certainly if there'd been any contrary indication then I would have very clearly remembered it and I would have reacted obviously much more clearly at the time.
PN339
I have no further questions, Commissioner.
PN340
MR THOMSON: No questions.
PN341
PN342
MR SMITH: This is a conversation between you and I which I think you're right it went for about a minute and a half. Is your evidence to date including your statement the sum total of your recollection of the conversation we had?---Yes, it is.
**** CHRISTOPHER WARREN XXN MR SMITH
PN343
Can I put it to you that we actually also went a little bit further and discussed whether or not we considered this to be a formal clause 55 consultation issue?---Look, I don't recall whether you had raised that. I know you had raised that previously with us and you may well have raised it on the discussion - in that discussion.
PN344
I put it to you that I did and that you tacitly accepted - I also put it to you that you tacitly accepted it probably wasn't a clause 55 but it would be sensible to have a bit of a chat about it I think was the way it was expressed to me?---I don't know whether I would say that I'd ever tacitly accepted it. My view is always on these matters that if we were going to sit down and talk about it it didn't matter to me whether we agreed on the basis on which we were talking.
PN345
Like a lot of these things it becomes an issue when it goes belly up, I suppose. This case is about whether or not there is a formal obligation on the part of the ABC to consult with the Alliance over this matter and as we all know that arises from clause 55. I think it is important that we try and clarify that point. I put it that that was the nature of the conversation we had?---I think the nature of the - my view is - my concern was there should be consultation and discussion with us about it. My view at that time was that if you were going to agree to talk - sit down and discuss - given that you were going to sit down and discuss it with us it wasn't important to me that you recognised that you were doing it under clause 55 or just doing it out of the goodness of your heart as long as the outcome was going to be the same. It didn't seem to me it was at that stage a necessary point to argue out to any finality.
PN346
Can I just ask you as a general question arising from your witness statement that in the event that you have an issue over consultation, is it normal practice for the Alliance to write formally to the ABC on those matters?---Yes, sometimes we will write, sometimes we'll ring. I guess we're, as you know, outcome oriented on these things and our desire is always to go through the - have the things happen rather than to make sure that we've sent you all the - sent all the - you know, done it in writing.
**** CHRISTOPHER WARREN XXN MR SMITH
PN347
I understand that. Do you accept that the discussions that were held with your Ms Lappin in Melbourne conformed with this sort of level of discussion that we were contemplating, that is you and I were contemplating?---The discussions you had on the 12th prior to - I'm sorry on the 19th.
PN348
No, on the 19th. Sorry, I should be more precise, on the 19th and then on any subsequent occasion that Ms Lappin was involved in discussions - - -
PN349
MR RYAN: Well, with respect on that last bit, Commissioner, what subsequent occasions, if any?
PN350
MR SMITH: Ms Lappin herself has indicated that she was involved in a conversation, I think, on 8 March. I may be wrong but I'm sure that's what she said.
PN351
Anyway, I'll focus on the 19th?---Yes. No, I wouldn't have thought so because at that stage, there were concerns expressed as you know to management, to management representatives about the, about the proposal. Management's intention to proceed with it would obviously, certainly my view would be the way the - what consultation would mean is that given those very serious concerns that there would have been a comeback and a discussion about what that would mean, how those were being taken into account, what the - and what the impacts that would mean for, particularly for the people effected.
PN352
And you don't accept that that level of discussion had been held in Melbourne?---No, I don't.
PN353
I have no further questions, Commissioner.
PN354
THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Ryan?
**** CHRISTOPHER WARREN XXN MR SMITH
PN355
PN356
MR RYAN: Chris, that phone call between yourself and Don, Mr Smith put it to you that he raised that they weren't obliged to consult because it wasn't a 55, a clause 55 matter. Were you aware of the fact that the ABC had already met with us on 19 February while previously stating on the 17th that they didn't think they had to consult with us?---Yes, I was aware of that.
PN357
So as you say on your basis, it wouldn't matter on what basis they were talking, as long as they were talking?---That's correct.
PN358
As demonstrated by the meeting with us on the 19th?---That's correct.
PN359
Nothing further, Commissioner.
PN360
PN361
THE COMMISSIONER: How are we going for time?
PN362
MR RYAN: We're going great for time but we haven't got much to do with it at the moment, Commissioner.
PN363
THE COMMISSIONER: How many witnesses, do you have, Mr Smith?
PN364
MR SMITH: Commissioner, I would be looking at four and it maybe five if indeed it was necessary. I'm just mulling over in my mind whether or not I need to, given that there is some contest between Mr Warren and myself over what occurred during that conversation whether I need to go into the box.
PN365
THE COMMISSIONER: Not only Mr Warren, I think your conversation also with Ms Lappin has been canvassed in the evidence too.
PN366
MR SMITH: That's a conversation that others can attest to given that they were present at that meeting. The only people involved in the conversation on the mobile were myself and Chris.
PN367
THE COMMISSIONER: As I understand it, two of your witnesses you've scheduled them for tomorrow morning, have you?
PN368
MR SMITH: Yes, at this stage. They're Melbourne based witnesses and I was going to have that conversation with Mr Ryan as to whether he may want to utilise a video conference facility.
PN369
THE COMMISSIONER: I think we have access to those arrangements so we will just move to the other end.
PN370
MR RYAN: Commissioner, Ms Lappin at the moment is trying to get onto Ms Pippos and Ms Ahern who are our Melbourne based people to see if they are available at some stage today, hopefully earlier rather than later and if that was convenient - I mean, it's out of my minds and it's an inconvenience to all concerned, particularly yourself but -
PN371
THE COMMISSIONER: Perhaps if we just go off the record for a second.
OFF THE RECORD [11.55am]
RESUMED [12.01pm]
PN372
THE COMMISSIONER: In the light of that I'll adjourn these proceedings and we'll continue as soon as we know about the availability of the witnesses and the availability of the video facility. This is adjourned till then, thank you.
LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT [12.01pm]
RESUMED [2.05pm]
PN373
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Ryan.
PN374
MR RYAN: Commissioner, could we go off the record, please?
PN375
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, we will go off the record.
OFF THE RECORD [2.06pm]
RESUMED [2.15pm]
PN376
MR RYAN: Commissioner, these are submissions from the bar table and relate to the matter that was discussed off the record previously. Could I just say that in relation to the Melbourne news room, the major impact has been on two of our members, a Ms Angela Pippos and a Ms Christine Ahern. Ms Pippos was a sports presenter on the 7 pm news, Monday to Friday, as well as being a sports reporter. She would do her stories and also present from the studio at the latter part of the 7 pm news. Ms Ahern was the weekend sports presenter performing the same role on Saturday and Sunday as well as reporting on sports stories for the TV news.
PN377
It is the assertion of both the Alliance and our members that within the news room there is a hierarchy and I think it is a basic statement of fact that presenters have a higher status and higher remuneration than others within the news room. There may be the odd one or two exceptions in relation to national political correspondence based in Canberra, but within the locality itself presenting does bring with it a prestige, job opportunity, job promotion, that many on the road reporters aspire to.
PN378
The upshot of these changes means that on all days of the week there will be no separate sports presenter, that the two women involved will no longer be seen on television sitting beside the news reader, Mr Henderson in the case of Monday to Friday down in Melbourne, and to that extent we believe that significant impact set out in clause 55 comes into play because that does speak of elimination of remuneration or job promotion opportunities.
PN379
Now, the word "job" is an interesting one in the case of the ABC, Commissioner. If I could draw your attention to attachment L, the last attachment, which is the job planned for Ms Pippos. Everybody has a job plan at the ABC these days and everybody's got more titles than a European lord at the turn of the 19th century. We start off with a very broad classification of programme maker which covers a variety of classifications which previous existed in the awards. For our purposes it covers journalists and reports. There is a salary point, there is a job title.
PN380
You will note in the case of Ms Pippos the job title is Reporter/Presenter. There is then a job purpose and that is to prepare and present news and current affairs content, to contribute to the ABC's comprehensive local, state and national coverage and to engage and inform the target audience, which is a rather broad job purpose. Over the page - - -
PN381
THE COMMISSIONER: Before you turn the page, it says date of cycle, 1602 to - and I can't read that.
PN382
MR RYAN: It should be 12 months, it should be - it looks like it has been changed to 31 December '03. There are some further dates, if you look underneath that, there's an appraisal meeting, 20 February '03, then there's another reference, it looks like 2.6.03, and down at the bottom there's the delegates, 3.3.03.
PN383
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, unless I hear from either of you to the contrary I will assume that this is an 18-month cycle or a 19-month cycle and that is 31.12.03. It clearly has 03 on it in a number of places.
PN384
MR RYAN: Well, it does seem to have been extended, otherwise if you look at what was typed there the job was for that 12 months, from 1 June '02 to 1 June '03, I mean just by logic, it's double-crossed out and we have the 31.12.02 or '03, '03 seems more sensible when you look at the dates these were signed off on.
PN385
THE COMMISSIONER: It would have had to happen retroactively or something, the appraisal meeting would have had to have been after the date.
PN386
MR RYAN: The performance appraisal in the job plan meeting is important because it sets out in clause 23.4 of the agreement, Commissioner, you can see in the first sentence of clause 23.4.1:
PN387
The job plan should provide a clear description of the employee's role and the objectors for the forthcoming performance cycle.
PN388
That makes sense when you look at the fact that the starting point is a very broad classification of programme maker. The next step down is the job title, then the job purpose.
PN389
THE COMMISSIONER: So when these things run out, how are they renewed?
PN390
MR RYAN: It depends to some extent on the sort of work that person is doing. If you look at clause 23.4.2, you are looking at job planning, as it says there it may involve managing design, new jobs keep pace with changing operation requirements or fine tuning existing jobs around the range of functions of appropriate employees classification. On the other hand, it says:
PN391
PN392
However, in many cases, for example, where a number of employees are performing similar work ...(reads)... rolled over to the next year.
PN393
So it's really to catch the whole gamut of what happens.
PN394
THE COMMISSIONER: Can you advise me as to whether the last sentence, is there one that's applicable here?
PN395
MR RYAN: I'm not too sure when she started work as the presenter.
PN396
THE COMMISSIONER: No, I meant if this ran out on 31 December last year, has it by agreement been rolled over to this year 2004 or is there some other process in? Do you know what's happened? If you don't -
PN397
MR RYAN: We requested Angela's current job plan from the ABCs HR Department and this is what was provided to us so there's obviously nothing that exists at the moment to replace this one and that's not unsurprising in that she's in the same job now or she was until the other week doing the same work as set out in the job plan that's before you.
PN398
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.
PN399
MR RYAN: You'll see the next two pages, we have two columns per page and we have on the second page on the first column the key performance indicators are a continued high recognition of ABC TV news in Victoria. The maintenance and growth of the audience for the ABCs 7 pm Bulletin Victoria and then the preparation and presentation of high quality and timely sports stories underline the depth of the ABCs ..... of news coverage and that, as I said, job is important in the context of clause 55 because that clause doesn't use the word "classification". It uses the word "job" and it talks about in clause 55.3.1:
PN400
Elimination or ...(reads)... of job or promotion opportunities - alteration of hours of work.
PN401
So the situation is, I think I must need to correct myself is that there will still be a separate sports presenter in Melbourne on Saturday and Sunday but my understanding is the proposal to move Ms Pippos to do the Saturday and Sunday. She's been doing Monday to Friday previously and Ms Ahern falls off the perch with the abolition of any presenting role for her.
PN402
THE COMMISSIONER: I don't know whether you're in a position to tell me, I'm a little unclear as to what happens Monday to Friday. Say we have seven minutes for sport and we have the two minute roll the tape National Wrap is played, then there's going to be for example in Perth someone say from the Dockers has sprained his little toe and all that really important stuff, how is that presented?
PN403
MR RYAN: With the new system?
PN404
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. I know it's not Western Australia but just assume we're thinking Brisbane or something.
PN405
MR RYAN: Well, I can speak my own knowledge of watching Channel Seven News in Sydney. You have Juanita Phillips who is the news reader Monday to Friday. She'll do her normal job for the first 20 or 30 minutes of the bulletin which is presenting national, international and local news. She'll then go to Peter Wilkinson or previously she'll go to Alan Cole who does the finance. There's a little break. Are you aware of that, Commissioner.
PN406
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, I've seen the finance person.
PN407
MR RYAN: It's not dissimilar to that with - to Peter Wilkinson. She'll then go to Peter Wilkinson with the national sports news. That's as you heard this morning pre-recorded so you have a situation where there's some graphics of Mr Wilkinson and other graphics of whatever sport - I think he covered last night Peter Allenby winning the golf and some other sports. He finishes that, that's finished, then you go back to Ms Phillips and in New South Wales sports news there's -
PN408
THE COMMISSIONER: The main newsreader will do that.
PN409
MR RYAN: Then do some local sports stories and that may consist of just reading it or then going to some footage that another reporter has done so that's stand alone footage and that's a similar situation in Melbourne now. Previously there was a separate person and they would just say, he's the sport from so and so and they would have whatever mix of sport they wanted to put to air for viewers in the various states.
PN410
So we say in relation to these two employees, they are plural, they have had a change in hours of work. They're not regular because the jobs entailed Monday to Friday presenting. It's not like you're a rotating shift worker which is not uncommon for some journalists to cover all the cycles in the 24 hours during the course of the day that some journalists are on rotating shifts over both hours on particular days and also the seven days of the week.
PN411
In this case the two people involved were regularly rostered, starting and finishing times on particular days of the week. The finish time is 7.30 pm and in Ms Pippos' case she worked Monday to Friday. I assume the starting time is about 10 o'clock or so and finished at 7.30 pm when the news finished. Ms Ahern worked on weekends and three other days of the week so their jobs have changed in that they're no longer presenting from the studio. They're just purely reporting in the field.
PN412
THE COMMISSIONER: From this page 1 of the attachment, it appears this isn't just about performance. There's some little salary action boxes.
PN413
MR RYAN: Yes. The ABC BA provides for a mixture of automatic progression at some of the lower points, Commissioner so subject to performance, you'll just move through a particular salary band and then in other cases up to a certain point above that it's really up to annual assessment as to if you meet or exceed standards and the like, whether you get an advancement in your salary. You can see there that she is assessed to stay at her particular salary point which is point 30 in band six.
PN414
THE COMMISSIONER: I don't wish to know this in respect of the individual for privacy reasons but normally over in that box overall assessment, it would be someone put a "u" or an "m" or an "e" or a "p" would they?
PN415
MR RYAN: Yes and that's the basis on which you either - I think it's up to point 27 which is automatic - 28. Up to point 28 is annual assessments. You move up if you meet requirements, you'll go up on your eight points if you're on that meet requirements up to point 20S and above that then it becomes as to actual assessment on an "e" or a "p" basis or there's actually a change in your job obviously that would - job plans, you know, rewritten to reflect new responsibilities or tasks.
PN416
So we say the use of the word "job" is quite significant in clause 55.3 which talks about significant effect because it's a job that's affected, not the person's classification by the changes instituted in this particular case by the changes instituted by the introduction of the National Sports Wrap. In relation to consultation -
PN417
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, just before you move off that, we have a decision of Vice President Lawler who says one person is not employees, haven't we?
PN418
MR RYAN: Yes, I think we acknowledge that and it's a decision of the Vice President.
PN419
THE COMMISSIONER: You have submitted to me that there is a job which is Ms Pippos?
PN420
MR RYAN: Yes, and there is also Ms Ahern, who is the week end presenter.
PN421
THE COMMISSIONER: Does she have a job?
PN422
MR RYAN: Yes, but her job has now changed - - -
PN423
THE COMMISSIONER: Does she have a performance agreement. Am I to assume that she's for a performance agreement?
PN424
MR RYAN: I've got one copy, we can provide more in the morning, Commissioner.
PN425
THE COMMISSIONER: I was just making that point.
PN426
MR RYAN: We will make sure it's available. Again, she's described as a program maker, job title is reporter/presenter again, so we have Ms Pippos, Ms Ahern and Neil Cross in the Adelaide newsroom.
PN427
PN428
MR RYAN: Thank you, Commissioner. As I said, we will provide copies of Ms Ahern's performance agreement first thing tomorrow. It's in similar format to Exhibit R1. We also have Neil Cross in Adelaide who was in a similar situation to Ms Pippos. He was the Monday to Friday sports presenter, presenting from the studio and reporting on sport. As a result of the national sports wrap that job presenting role has been abolished so he is now purely an on-the-road reporter; he doesn't go into the studio to present. So, purely mathematically, 3 is greater than 1, fits the definition of employees on his Honour's basis.
PN429
I have some further submissions on that, Commissioner. Very briefly, I think his Honour referred to the CPSU history of agreements with the ABC so their 1992 agreement. I think from memory that spoke of a definition of five employees or so. It wasn't until some time ago that there was one common agreement for the ABC for both the CPSU and the Alliance. We had separate agreements for our journalist members in 1992 and the one following that, I think that was 1996 and post that in 1999 I think was the first of the all up agreements. I think 2000 was the first time there was a joint agreement covering both members of the Alliance and the CPSU in a range of classifications.
PN430
THE COMMISSIONER: I will put you both on notice that before these proceedings are finished I would like you to advise me as to whether or not you concur with the words in paragraphs 8 and 9 of his Honour's decision, the decision in respect of the previous redundancy, which talks about what was not disputed about the history. I would like to know whether I can accept that. Thank you.
PN431
MR RYAN: I will have copies of the historical process in the agreements.
PN432
MR SMITH: Sorry, Commissioner, was that Parts 8 and 9?
PN433
THE COMMISSIONER: Paragraphs 8 and 9 of Vice President Lawler's decision of 16 December 2003 when he was looking at the construction and interpretation of the clause and in 8 and 9 it's noted that that's accepted.
PN434
MR RYAN: So we say that there are three people involved and I think one shouldn't lose sight of the fact and it is an important fact in that while the overall numbers are small that's totally unsurprising when one looks at the make-up of TV sports journalists, they are a very small number per viewer; so the fact that there's only two people affected in Melbourne is unsurprising when there's two dedicated sports journalists.
PN435
There are other journalists in the general pool of reporters who cover particular stories, maybe sports stories, on a particular day having regard to the newsworthiness of events but as far as journalists which have in their job plans a specific reference to coverage of sport there are few in number and the fact that there are a few doesn't in our submission lessen what is significant where the pool of numbers effected is a small pool.
PN436
THE COMMISSIONER: I understand that submission. Very clearly what you are saying to me is that in that context but what you are saying to me is in the interpretation of 55.3.1 in this case we are looking at that in the light of three employees being significantly affected.
PN437
MR RYAN: Yes. In your home State, I don't know what you call a national sports wrap up, whether it excludes WA. There were some sessions some time ago, I think that's come and gone.
PN438
THE COMMISSIONER: Someone would have to be very courageous to put the Broncos on over someone straining their little tendon, I tell you.
PN439
MR RYAN: All I need to show is although the numbers are small they are able to trigger this if the impact on those individuals is deemed to be significant.
PN440
THE COMMISSIONER: Of significant effect for the purposes of 55.2.1.
PN441
MR RYAN: I don't think I can take it much further at this stage except that tomorrow I will be seeking to ask some questions of Mr Bass concerning the post February 19 meeting addressed by ABC management because it is certainly my understanding that the opportunity offered to people to look at the pilots of the news sports wrap were limited to the week in which they started on the Monday and we were told come the following week - - -
PN442
THE COMMISSIONER: The question I posed earlier, is that the one I'm talking about?
PN443
MR RYAN: Yes, I think it was and I think you posed a question - - -
PN444
THE COMMISSIONER: I had some understanding it was for a week, you had to look at it for a week.
PN445
MR RYAN: A week or a day, there wasn't anything spelled out in detail. So, Commissioner, I think it's about as far as I can take it this afternoon. I hope that is of some assistance in at least focusing on the Melbourne side of things concerning the practical effect of the decision being taken by the ABC to introduce the national sports wrap on the pre-existing structure and roles of the sports presenters and journalists for the 7 pm news. If the Commission pleases.
PN446
THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Ryan. I propose now that we adjourn. We will resume in the morning at 10.00 o'clock with Mr Smith presenting his overview and presenting his witnesses and then we will then finalise with the submissions from the respective parties. Anything further at this stage anyone would like to raise? Nothing further you would like to raise at this stage?
PN447
MR RYAN: Just to say, again, on behalf of the Alliance, the way this proceeding has turned out I can only apologise, Commissioner.
PN448
THE COMMISSIONER: No problems.
PN449
MR SMITH: Commissioner, I would only say two things: one, in terms of I think we had an off-the-record discussion about the statements attached to Mr Ryan's submissions, being statements from Christine Ahern and Angela Pippos but, without the opportunity to cross examine on those statements that they should be given no weight in this matter.
PN450
THE COMMISSIONER: I think I have indicated that that would be so and Mr Ryan has concurred with that.
PN451
MR SMITH: Thank you, Commissioner. The other point is that I can assure the Commission that Marco Bass will be available as a witness and will be able to attest to a number of the issues and be examined on the issues Mr Ryan has raised. We certainly will be going to those issues.
PN452
THE COMMISSIONER: While you are on your feet, do we have any problem with the witnesses and the video? Some of them are going to be by video link are they?
PN453
MR SMITH: Yes, two of them.
PN454
THE COMMISSIONER: Do we have a time for them so we can - perhaps you can confer immediately after we adjourn.
PN455
MR SMITH: Yes, I think that would be the best way.
PN456
THE COMMISSIONER: It might have to be in another courtroom when we resume in the morning.
PN457
MR SMITH: I think it's the next courtroom down, actually, Commissioner. That's all at the moment, thank you.
PN458
THE COMMISSIONER: This matter is adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 am.
ADJOURNED UNTIL WEDNESDAY, 24 MARCH 2004 [2.45pm]
INDEX
LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs |
SAM GRUNHARD, AFFIRMED PN41
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR RYAN PN41
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR SMITH PN54
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR RYAN PN83
WITNESS WITHDREW PN89
KATE LAPPIN, AFFIRMED PN90
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR RYAN PN90
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR SMITH PN139
EXHIBIT #S1 EMAIL RECEIVED FROM JOHN CAMERON PN149
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR RYAN PN235
WITNESS WITHDREW PN238
STUART HATTER, SWORN PN246
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR THOMSON PN246
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR SMITH PN286
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR THOMSON PN318
WITNESS WITHDREW PN326
CHRISTOPHER WARREN, AFFIRMED PN328
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR RYAN PN328
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR SMITH PN342
FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR RYAN PN356
WITNESS WITHDREW PN361
EXHIBIT #R1 PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT OF MS PIPPOS PN428
AustLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/AIRCTrans/2004/1245.html