C2004/6999, Transcript of Proceedings [2005] AIRCTrans 13 (4 January 2005)

AUSCRIPT AUSTRALASIA PTY LTD
ABN 72 110 028 825

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

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS


O/N 9587

AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

COMMISSIONER BLAIR

C2004/6999

THE AUSTRALIAN WORKERS' UNION

and

FOSTER PLASTICS INDUSTRIES PTY LTD
AND ANOTHER

Notification pursuant to section 99 of the Act
of a dispute re classification of employees

MELBOURNE

9.39 AM, WEDNESDAY, 22 DECEMBER 2004

PN1

MR M. BOROWICK: I appear for the Australian Workers' Union and appearing with me is MR S. GAUCI who is an employee of Foster Plastics Industries.

PN2

MR B. DRAPER: I appear on behalf of Foster Plastics Industries with MR E. DAVIS and MR D. O'CONNOR.

PN3

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Draper. Thank you, Mr Borowick.

PN4

MR BOROWICK: Commissioner, this is Foster Plastics first enterprise agreement certified by your her Honour, Senior Deputy President Acton, in July 2003. And the agreement provides for a classification structure. The underpinning award is the Metal, Engineering and Associated Industries Award, part 1. But the agreement provides for a site specific classification structure at clause 15. Now, what happened prior to the commencement of this enterprise agreement was that each of the employees were classified in a haphazard manner.

PN5

Their - until about 1995 the employer was award-free and then they become party to an award and - but between 1995 and 2003, I think one can describe the situation as haphazard. Everyone seemed to be on a different rate of pay. For every employee there was a different rate of pay. So the negotiating parties believed there was some merit in having a site specific classification structure and each of the employees being classified in accordance with that structure. So it required people to be translated across to the relevant classification.

PN6

In terms of the production, there are six grades. Warehouse, there are three. For each of the apprenticeship years, there being four, there is a rate of pay. And then for the tradespersons there are four grades. So - now, the agreement also provided for a 10 per cent wage increase for those employees who, by virtue of their classification - already being paid above their classification, they were red circled and they didn't get necessarily the full 10 per cent. They only got the increases relevant to their new classification.

PN7

And that has been a real source of dissatisfaction at least amongst some of the employees who thought they were getting 10 per cent above what they were being paid rather than 10 per cent - only to learn it was to be 10 per cent increase on each of the classification rates as they appear in the agreement. So it has been a learning process. People have had to, sort of, understand that the system of the past hadn't served them well. Everyone needed to be properly classified. Foster Plastics began complying with the Workplace Relations regulations.

PN8

They put each employee's classification on their payslip. So a process of people being able to readily identify what classification they are at and what is the appropriate rate of pay. And everyone on the same level being paid the same rate. So no longer people doing the same work on different rates of pay. So from the union's point of view, we wanted to introduce some fairness and equity into the system.

PN9

THE COMMISSIONER: What is the issue?

PN10

MR BOROWICK: The issue is - that is the background. The issue is Foster Plastics have employed somebody and to make it attractive for that - the new starter, they are paying him as level 5, which is the second highest classification, over the heads of other long term employees. Now, we are not convinced that this employee has the relevant skills to be classified as level 5. It has caused a great deal of resentment because here you are, new employee - he may have relevant experience elsewhere and I have asked the company to provide that but for privacy reasons they are not able to release to me - they may be able to release it to you but they are not able to release it to me material that could satisfy that this person is appropriately classified.

PN11

I have got an open mind but no one else at the workplace thinks that he is because of the questions he asks and the sort of work that he is able to perform. People believe that he is just being slotted in over their head. Now, the company, their argument might be, well, to attract people to Foster Plastics we need to pay - we need to make the remUNeration attractive. But what that does, Commissioner, is it distorts what we have bene trying to achieve this - to this point in that people, if they possess the skills then they are re-classified accordingly.

PN12

Now, some employees have been re-classified during the life of the agreement but many haven't and they want to be re-classified upward and they haven't been able to achieve that. And despite not being able to achieve that this fellow walks through the door and he immediately goes to level 5. What the company has also done is they have made him a team leader even though he has no team. And there are three rates of pay for team leaders. Level A, that is with responsibility for between three and 10 employees. Level B, between 11 and 20 employees. And then you get Level C, 21 or more employees.

PN13

Now, I am not sure whether those qualifications in terms of the size of the team are - is being adhered to in respect to the other team leader's positions. So I am not sure that is the case. But in terms of this fellow, he is being paid for responsibility of between 11 and 20 employees when he is - doesn't have a team to manage at all. So this is another thing that has helped stir the pot and cause, as I said earlier, a great deal of dissatisfaction. Now, either - the union says to people, look, we have made some progress in terms of the introduction of a site specific classification system.

PN14

It is fair dinkum. You know, if you want to go up the ladder, you have got to achieve additional skills. We are always looking at the classification definitions. We have agreed yesterday at the consultative committee we will have a further review of the classification definition. Either we work to that system or if that - if there is not going to be integrity in terms of that system, well, let us just junk it and we will just try and rank people up the classification structure without any regard to skill or whatever. So I think that is the issue from our point of view.

PN15

The agreement expires at the end of next year so some time next year we will commence negotiations for a replacement agreement. And I think we really need to be clear when we go into the negotiations what we are going to do about skill and classifications and procedures for re-classifying. Are we going to be fair dinkum about it or not. If the Commission pleases.

PN16

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Borowick. Yes, Mr Draper?

PN17

MR DRAPER: Mr Commissioner, the matter has arisen from concerns expressed by individuals in relation to their classification under the revised classification structure implemented under the terms of the Foster Plastics Enterprise Agreement 2003-2005. Classification structure, wages and allowances were included under clause 15 in the agreement. And to assist the Commission I have brought a copy of the agreement which I will tender as an exhibit. Position descriptions, including classification definitions were prepared for each of the four plant sections covered by the agreement.

PN18

These are headed, 'Process operator compounds', 'Process operator extrusions', 'Storeperson', and 'Maintenance/Project/Tour room Tradesperson'. And I will tender a copy of the position descriptions as an exhibit. Within each of the position descriptions, taking the process operator compounds as a start, on the second page - at the bottom of the second page, there is a summary of the definitions.

PN19

THE COMMISSIONER: Right.

PN20

MR DRAPER: The classification definitions and that same applies in each of those four position descriptions. A copy of the relevant position description, together with a more detailed duty statement was given to each process operator, storeperson or tradesperson. And that is a copy of the duty statements amplifying some of the requirements for classification. A formal performance review process was also implemented to provide a firm basis for determining personal development needs and opportunities for advancement under the classification structure.

PN21

An example, again, of that is provided in the exhibit. A comprehensive training program was developed in conjunction with Northern Group Training to provide basic training across all areas of production leading towards a certificate in process and manufacturing. This included subjects such as process control quality, materials handling and health and safety. Work is also being undertaken with Kangan Batman TAFE to develop courses for higher level training and process operations and also for english in the workplace.

PN22

Increased opportunities are being provided for individuals to participate in formal training leading to recognition of these skills and knowledge, both within the company and across industry. At the same time the company is also able to give appropriate recognition to the prior experience and learning of employees recruited into the company. So that is basically the company's position on the matter, Mr Commissioner. We would be happy to adjourn into conference, if that would assist.

PN23

THE COMMISSIONER: What happened to the issue that Mr Borowick raised? And that is the issue of some employee - new employees being brought in with some concern by other employees about this person coming in at a level 5, I think it was, and also appears to be getting a team leader allowance based on 11 to 20 but there is no team. What happened to that issue?

PN24

MR DRAPER: Well, as far as the issue of classification 5, the company believes it has recognised prior learning in terms of the skills and abilities of the employee recruited. In terms of the team leader, maybe I could ask Mr Davis to comment?

PN25

THE COMMISSIONER: Sure. Yes, Mr Davis?

PN26

MR DAVIS: First of all, the team leader that has been referred to is one of a number of individuals that we have actually employed over recent times. There has been another individual employed at level 3 and there was an ex-employee who was re-employed as a level 4. And we have an employment company at the moment looking for other people and, again, the brief with them is to find people who have had similar experience in other organisations and who have also operated as a team leader.

PN27

The young man that has been referred to in particular, the plan for him is that he will eventually become a team leader within our new compounds plant that is currently being commissioned. And, again, the other people we are currently looking for could also potentially fit into that type of role as well into the future once we get the plant operating at full steam. I would also like to point out that we did make the approach to this young man to make his credentials available to others but he insisted that his resume and his details he wanted to remain as private and only with the company, not to make those available to others.

PN28

Could I also just make the point too that in regard to the issue regarding the number of employees that these team leaders are actually supervising, I think you would find that all the team leaders that we currently have are not supervising the number of people as per the award. We agreed way back when we set up the enterprise agreement that we would pay people according to their skill and not - and their previous experience and not necessarily just by the number of people that they have working with them. So I am not quite sure that that is totally relevant, just for the record.

PN29

THE COMMISSIONER: Right.

PN30

MR DAVIS: Okay.

PN31

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you.

PN32

MR DAVIS: All right. Thank you.

PN33

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. The Commission will go into conference.

NO FURTHER PROCEEDINGS RECORDED