C2004/3556, Transcript of Proceedings [2004] AIRCTrans 1902 (25 May 2004)

AUSCRIPT PTY LTD
ABN 76 082 664 220

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

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS


O/N 7058
AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

COMMISSIONER BLAIR

C2004/3556

THE LAMINEX GROUP LIMITED TRADING
AS THE LAMINEX GROUP

and

TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF
AUSTRALIA AND OTHERS

Notification pursuant to section 99 of the Act
of an industrial dispute re EBA negotiations

MELBOURNE

9.36 AM, WEDNESDAY, 12 MAY 2004

PN1

MS K. IRWIN: I am from the Australian Industry Group appearing on behalf of Laminex with MR M. O'SULLIVAN and MR F. FLEMING.

PN2

MR B. LOWE: I appear on behalf of the unions with MR J. PATTI from the CFMEU, MR S. NASH from the Transport Workers Union and MR P. LOVE from the CFMEU FFPT Division. We have with us four shop stewards, Commissioner: Mr Clinton Tyler, Mr Kevin Wiley, Mr David Tuttley and Craig - and I won't try and pronounce his last name.

PN3

THE COMMISSIONER: A bit early in the morning, is it. Thank you, Mr Lowe. Right, Ms Irwin.

PN4

MS IRWIN: Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner, the dispute this morning is in relation to negotiations for an enterprise bargaining agreement at the Laminex Melbourne Airport distribution site. Negotiations commenced in February this year and meetings have been occurring regularly since that time. Commissioner, the unions notified the company they were initiating a bargaining period towards the end of March and just to give you a little background about - as to where everything is at. Since the end of April a number of bans have been put in place, including overtime bans, a ban on afternoon shift loading laminate onto trucks. There has also been a ban on drivers from the art paperwork for KPIs.

PN5

This has been accompanied by - was accompanied by a stop work meeting which was later amended to a stop work meeting on each shift every day and that meeting for a duration of up to four hours. The latest notification from the CFMEU, Commissioner, is for a total withdrawal of labour to commence from 12.01 am on Monday, 17 May and continue through until Monday, 31 May at 11.59. Commissioner, it should be noted that the company has not as yet received a live notification from the TWU. In Melbourne alone, Commissioner, Laminex has 2300 customers, many of whom are small businesses who are reliant on regular deliveries and in some cases two deliveries a day from Laminex of product. So certainly should the industrial action continue there is the potential for negative impact for many of these businesses.

PN6

Commissioner, the most recent offer made by the company is for a three year agreement with wage increases of 4 per cent for each year of the agreement. That latest offer also provides for improved long service accrual, so 13 weeks for 10 years' service; income protection insurance and increased afternoon shift loading of 17-1/2 per cent; a meal allowance after more than two hours of overtime for all employees covered by the agreement; 10 days sick leave after five years of service; afternoon shift employees being given priority for day shift positions; the ability to take sick and/or annual leave whilst waiting for determination of WorkCover claims; an increase in first aid allowance of $13 per week; a review of the classification structure, additional workplace assessors put in place ..... and stair access to building and then on top of that the inclusion of a number of company proposed changes, including the inclusion of an appropriately worded no extra claims provision; a transmission of business clause and a couple of other issues which are essentially about tightening up the wording of the agreement.

PN7

The company has costed this package to be worth about 5.1 per cent per year of the agreement. Furthermore, Commissioner, it appears to the company that each time it seems that the parties are getting close to reaching an agreement it appears - certainly appears that the union's position changes, so it is almost like the goal posts keep moving. Commissioner, at this stage the company is seeking your assistance to facilitate discussions between the parties obviously with a view to avoiding any further industrial disputation and we would be seeking to break into conference to discuss these issues. If it please the Commission.

PN8

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Yes, Mr Lowe.

PN9

MR LOWE: Thank you, Commissioner. As indicated by the employer's representative, Commissioner, the negotiations commenced between the parties in February of this year. Bargaining period notices were lodged with the Commission and with the company on or about 24 March of this year and industrial action commenced on 24 April after there was a breakdown in negotiations, and there have been ongoing forms of industrial action that has complied with the provisions of the Workplace Relations Act in respect of the notification to the Commission and the company since that time, with the members rejecting the company's last offer and instructing the unions to issue notices of total withdrawal of labour, Commissioner, to commence from 17 March.

PN10

There are a number of issues outstanding, Commissioner. There are significant issues relating to the issues of wages and we are aware, Commissioner, that there are some significant differences between employees who do similar work, use similar skills, who are employed by Laminex and the people who operate at Tullamarine. And if we just take the differences between the wage rates that apply now without the issues of the increases that we are seeking, they arrange from - on a non-union agreement, Commissioner, from 16 - or $9.16 a week or 1.52 per cent to $44.91 a week for people doing similar work, and then at another site in Cheltenham there is differences of 35 - between $35 a week and $36.83 a week, so that is some .6.2 difference.

PN11

And so the claims of the union have been to have - address that catch-up, I guess, in respect of keeping wage increases of 6 - 6 and 7 per cent increases over the term of agreement. It was indicated that they could modify that if the agreement could be wrapped up quickly and that hasn't happened. So that I am instructed, Commissioner, that those issues relating to the catch-up are still on the table. In addition there are higher service allowances paid at some of the sites which affect those employees' earning capacity, Commissioner.

PN12

In respect of things like sick leave, Commissioner, the offer made by the company for 10 days sick leave after five years service is not acceptable. We seek the 10 days sick leave after - from the commencement of employment and under the terms of the award that I am familiar with that has some application - the minimum was eight days from the commencement of employment. There are a number of issues that I think I should just mention in respect of the company's position and the no extra claims clause we are not agreeing with their position that they put to us in respect of no extra claims.

PN13

We recognise that there may have to be a no extra claims clause and we will be prepared to put some wording to them on that, but we are not going to be in a position where we agree that there won't be many claims which relate to the awards which underpins these agreement as part of any no extra claims clause. We have got some concerns in respect of what the company is seeking in relation to a transmission of business and specifically the clause - or the subclause which deals that redundancy payments will not be applicable in the cases of transmission of business and it is not unusual for a transmission of business to occur which also includes a transfer of staff to another site, and we are not prepared to agree to take away our members' rights to a redundancy payment if in fact there is going to be an impost which the employer is not prepared to meet through some transmission of business in the future.

PN14

THE COMMISSIONER: Just so I can clarify that, you are not arguing that simply because there is a transmission of business that everyone should be entitled to redundancy pay? Are you saying that if - because of a transmission of business people are required to transfer to other sites and that transfer may be deemed to be unreasonable because of travel, public transport, all that type of stuff, then there should be the option of a redundancy package.

PN15

MR LOWE: Yes, that is what we are saying. For instance, there is a site at Cheltenham and there is the site at Tullamarine to cost. There is also a site at Ballarat. So part of the transmission of business meant that if the Tullamarine site closed down, all the staff there reduced, and others had to go to one of the other sites certainly there would still be work for them with Laminex. But that the impost just may be of such that it would upset the whole family structure of the particular individual.

PN16

THE COMMISSIONER: Sure.

PN17

MR LOWE: And in those cases we would believe that redundancy was payable. If there is no change and there was a change, not a transmission of business and things flowed on, we haven't got a difficulty with it and that is the normal situation, Commissioner.

PN18

THE COMMISSIONER: Right, okay.

PN19

MR LOWE: In respect of - there is a matter that they are seeking to include in the agreement in relation to a clause on safety and we need more information on this. The company may be able to provide that. But they are seeking to change clause 21 in the enterprise agreement which currently applied which deals with safety and they are wanting to add to the agreement the words, "And it is the intention of the parties to actively work towards and will actively participate with our state safe behaviour involvement program," and we really need to know what that is. We have got no problem with the issues of safety and trying to improve safety on the work site, but we really need to know just exactly what we are agreeing to.

PN20

Likewise, there is a change that they are seeking - the deletion in the current agreement which has a - what they call a bullet point - I prefer to call it a dot point, but - - -

PN21

THE COMMISSIONER: That is the pacifist nature in you, Mr Lowe.

PN22

MR LOWE: Yes. In respect of this clause it reads:

PN23

Laminex Industries is committed to the safety of all employees and visitors to our locations and it is the intention of all parties to this agreement to work towards that.

PN24

But what they are seeking to delete is the following wording, "an effective action and investigation and prevention program," which I would have thought was a very important part of any safety program. So we would be opposing the deletion of that particular clause. They had - the next dot point was some additional wording to clause 21 for the adherence to the emergency evacuation procedure and security purposes:

PN25

All employees are to use their proximity cards on all occasions when entering or existing the site.

PN26

And I understand there is no problem with that. They are seeking to introduce a practice which will affect people who are undertaking driving duties for the company.

PN27

Flexible work practices under clause 19 and insert, "Smart trans routing package introduction is intended to provide better utilisation of all our available resources and all employees are expected to support the system to maximise its potential within the distribution network." We are not prepared to agree to that going into the enterprise agreement, Commissioner. There is in Victoria the surveillances devices at 1999 which provides for this type of thing to be done by individual agreement and we have got no problem with individual agreements, but we are not going to, I guess, legislate for that in an enterprise agreement where we take the rights which are currently afforded to individual members away through the enterprise bargaining process.

PN28

They have got a number of changes that they are seeking in respect of the performance standards at grades 1 and 2. There has been some agreement on the possibility of a review and they are seeking to add this work to grades 1 and 2 and change that in some way. So we would say that that would be more appropriately dealt with at that time. And in respect of the classification structure we have got some concerns where the work that is performed under grades 1 and 2 and probably 3 in some cases, providing a lower classification outcome than what is provided for in the award. For instance, it is in most awards, grade 1 or production employee level 1, whatever they are - an introduction to the industry and people who are in those grades for only a three month period and then they move up.

PN29

In this agreement we have - a person can be in grade 1 forever and a day and so we would be putting the company on notice that we are seeking changes in respect of that type of situation to ensure that there is training provided, but that there is an automatic progression from grade 1 to grade 2 after a three year period - then indicate to us that they want to insert a new clause called key performance indicators, KPI measurement management and the detail they have provided on this is that the use of KPIs through data collection will be used as a tool to further advance the site department individual improvements and aid as a tool to help the employer and the employee effectively manage daily activities.

PN30

An actual KPI list will be produced at a later date and I facetiously said when I was talking to our colleagues over this, when, 2007? So we are not prepared to agree to something that we don't know about. If there is going to be something which is some advantage to our members, then we won't have too much of a problem, but we are certainly not going to buy a pig in a poke in this type of situation. So, Commissioner, the position of the parties is that we are still some way apart.

PN31

The major issue obviously, of course, is the issue of wages and when our members see themselves being so far behind people who use similar skills who are employed by the company either in a production capacity or doing identical work in a non - but under a non-union agreement and find themselves earning significantly less, then if those issues aren't addressed then that is going to make the achievement of an agreement difficult. We are, however, obviously prepared to go into conciliation to see if there is a way through the problems that we face. We are quite happy to do that with the assistance of the Commission. If the Commission pleases.

PN32

THE COMMISSIONER: Do you wish to add anything, Ms Irwin?

PN33

MS IRWIN: Just a couple of points, Commissioner. Firstly, just to point out on the record that the Cheltenham site to which Mr Lowe referred to in his submissions is in fact a manufacturing site, whereas the site in question, the subject of this enterprise agreement, is a distribution site and, therefore, in itself is quite different. And I guess the other issue that we would like to raise on the record is that the discrepancies that Mr Lowe has pointed out in terms of the other issues the company wishes to pursue as part of the agreement, whilst having been on the table for at least the last six weeks or so, haven't actually come up in discussion until - by the union until the last couple of days.

PN34

Having said that though we are prepared to go into conference to discuss those issues in greater detail in order to overcome any misunderstandings that may occur. If it please the Commission.

PN35

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Right, the Commission will go into conference, thanks.

NO FURTHER PROCEEDINGS RECORDED