AG2004/6808, Transcript of Proceedings [2004] AIRCTrans 3518 (3 September 2004)

AUSCRIPT AUSTRALASIA PTY LTD
ABN 72 110 028 825

Level 10, 15 Adelaide St BRISBANE Qld 4000
(PO Box 13038 George Street Post Shop Brisbane Qld 4003)
Tel:[phone] Fax:[phone]

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

O/N 3211

AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

COMMISSIONER SPENCER

AG2004/6808

APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION
OF AGREEMENT

Application under Section 170LJ of the Act
by Lockwood Security Products Pty Limited
and Others for certification of the Lockwood
Manufacturing Agreement 2004-Sherwood

BRISBANE

3.10 PM, WEDNESDAY, 25 AUGUST 2004

PN1

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. I will take appearances, please.

PN2

MR M. COONAN: I seek leave to appear on behalf of Lockwood Security Products Pty Limited. With me is MR B. BRYDSON.

PN3

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Coonan.

PN4

MR E. MOORHEAD: I appear on behalf of the AFMEPKIU. And for today's hearing, I won't object to Mr Coonan's appearance.

PN5

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Moorhead.

PN6

MS A. TUNJIC: I appear for the National Union of Workers.

PN7

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. I have had a facsimile from the CEPU indicating that they are unable to attend this afternoon but submit that all necessary documentation has been supplied to the Commission in support of the certification. Mr Coonan, on the basis that there is no objection, I will grant leave to appear this afternoon.

PN8

MR COONAN: Thank you, Commissioner. If the Commission pleases, the application before you is to seek certification of the Lockwood Security Products Manufacturing Agreement (2004) for Sherwood. In seeking certification, we rely on the affidavits which have been filed by Mr Bill Brydson, Mr Mark Firner, Mr Dick Williams and Mr Andrew Dettma. We seek certification under 170LT of the Act. We state that the agreement passes the no-disadvantage test and refer you to the affidavits of the four gentlemen concerned, paragraphs 7.1 to 7.3.

PN9

The explanation of the agreement was provided to each of the employees, and that is also set out in the affidavits at paragraphs 6.1 to 6.5. A valid majority approved the agreement; that is set out in paragraphs 6.1(II) of the affidavits. And I am instructed that there was a 90 per cent majority in favour of the agreements. The agreement contains a dispute settling procedure required by the Act, and there are in fact two, clause 26 for grievances and clause 45 for conflict resolution.

PN10

The agreement has a nominal expiry date of 30 June 2006, which is inside the three year maximum period provided by the Act. We also submit that the agreement is not inconsistent with the Act, and my instructions are there are no orders in injunctions of the Commission in relation to section 170LU of the Act. The agreement contains no objectionable or discriminatory provisions. The employer did not contravene the Act in negotiation of the certified agreement, and we ask the Commission to certify the agreement from today's date.

PN11

There is one procedural matter I must bring to the Commission's attention. I understand that at least one of the inserts referred this to the Commission. There was a memorandum of understanding between the parties which goes to the application of the time bank system at the Lockwood Sherwood Manufacturing Plant. The parties are asking that whilst the memorandum of understanding is an agreed undertaking between the parties and that it will be filed and kept on the Commission's bench file of this matter, it will not form part of the agreement. But we ask, as I as I say, that the matter be kept on the Commission's bench file.

PN12

THE COMMISSIONER: To that effect, in terms of the - administratively dealing with that, Mr Coonan, are you submitting that you're providing a formal undertaking that would appear on the certificate? Or are you simply wanting the transcript in this matter to be copied and placed on the file with that memorandum of understanding?

PN13

MR COONAN: Commissioner, we're only asking that it be mentioned on the transcript and kept on the bench file. There is no provision on the agreement which would require an undertaking in that regard. It is just that we agreed with the unions - - -

PN14

THE COMMISSIONER: You simply want the agreement recorded on transcript between the parties?

PN15

MR COONAN: That is right, Commissioner. On that basis, we ask the Commission to certify the agreement from today's date.

PN16

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. The other issue is that, in terms of my directions, the agreement design, I understand, from looking at it, doesn't contain wage rates. But you have provided those - or certainly Mr Brydson has provided those in accordance with the directions. Normally I seek an undertaking to be made that they are the true and correct wage rates, that the unions confirm that also, and that they will be observed for the duration of the agreement and be disseminated amongst the employees who are subjected to the agreement. They then would not form likewise a part of the public agreement but would be kept on my file as well.

PN17

MR COONAN: Yes, Commissioner, we support that course of action.

PN18

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. So the undertakings are that they are a true and correct copy of the rates that are applicable to this agreement, they are observed for the duration and will be disseminated to those employees subject to the agreement?

PN19

MR COONAN: Yes, Commissioner. I would say subject to me confirming that the ones you have are the ones which.

PN20

THE COMMISSIONER: They are attached to Mr Brydson's correspondence.

PN21

MR COONAN: That is the copy which we sent to each of the unions and to the Commission. Thank you, Commissioner.

PN22

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Coonan.

PN23

MS TUNJIC: It actually hasn't been provided to us as yet.

PN24

MR BRYDSON: Sorry, that's my fault.

PN25

THE COMMISSIONER: Well, if there is any concern in relation to these agreements, we can certify the agreement subject to confirmation of the unions, by close of business or tomorrow, that they are the - - -

PN26

MR MOORHEAD: Yes, Commissioner, I think that is probably the best course of action. I have been given a copy of some rates of pay, which seem to line up with the 30 June 2004 dates.

PN27

MS TUNJIC: The wage increases are right, and that is right too.

PN28

MR MOORHEAD: Yes.

PN29

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, I think it is a full explanation of the wage rates, Mr Brydson.

PN30

MR MOORHEAD: Yes. But we can confirm that as soon as possible, Commissioner. Hopefully by the end of today.

PN31

THE COMMISSIONER: Do you have any other submissions for me?

PN32

MR MOORHEAD: Only to say that we concur with the submissions of Mr Coonan and that we seek the certification of the agreement.

PN33

THE COMMISSIONER: And you confirm that simply by having the transcript record it is satisfactory in dealing with the memorandum of understanding?

PN34

MR MOORHEAD: Yes, that's correct.

PN35

THE COMMISSIONER: All right.

PN36

MS TUNJIC: And I support the submissions that have been made previously as well, Commissioner.

PN37

THE COMMISSIONER: All right, thank you. I might ask, Mr Coonan, that in order to have full confirmation of those rates that you provide a copy to the CEPU, who are not present this afternoon, so that we can have them fax their confirmation to my chambers as well, and I would appreciate it if you do that this afternoon. And then subject to receiving a confirmation of all unions in relation to those wage rates, I certainly consider that they meet the no- disadvantage test. And on the basis of their submissions and the undertakings in relation to those wage rates, and of course the statutory declarations, I would certify the agreement subject to receiving the confirmation of the wage rates - certify in accordance with section 170LT of the Workplace Relations Act(1996), and certified from today's date, with a nominal expiry date of 30 June 2006. Thank you.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [3.18pm]