|
|
Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Australian Industrial Relations Commission Transcripts |
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
Workplace Relations Act 1996 12588-1
COMMISSIONER SPENCER
C2005/1538
CONSTRUCTION, FORESTRY, MINING AND ENERGY UNION
AND
NEW SOUTH WALES SUGAR MILLING CO-OPERATIVE LIMITED
s.170LW - Application for settlement of dispute (certification of agreement)
(C2005/1538)
BALLINA
9.41AM, MONDAY, 22 AUGUST 2005
Continued from 30/6/2005
Hearing continuing
PN1
PN1
THE COMMISSIONER: I understand in terms of correspondence received prior to today that there's been some change to the witness order this morning, is that correct, Mr Bodkin, are you in agreement with that?
PN2
MR BODKIN: Yes, Commissioner.
PN3
THE COMMISSIONER: So you intend to call two of your witnesses?
PN4
MS FLYNN: That's so, Commissioner.
PN5
THE COMMISSIONER: Then your final witness will be called tomorrow morning, Mr Bodkin?
PN6
MR BODKIN: Yes.
PN7
THE COMMISSIONER: We'll commence on that basis then.
PN8
MS FLYNN: Commissioner, before I call Mr Peterson, with the respondent's written submissions, shall we mark that first as such as an exhibit?
PN9
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.
PN10
MS FLYNN: Actually before I pose an exhibit there was just a few amendments, they're basically just typos, but would you mind if I take you through those?
PN11
THE COMMISSIONER: We might just go off the record for a minute.
<OFF THE RECORD
PN12
THE COMMISSIONER: We're back on the record. Paragraph 19 inserting "were" and in terms of paragraph 23?
MS FLYNN: Yes, Commissioner, in the extract from clause 4.4 of the certified agreement, if you go approximately halfway down within that quote, which is the paragraph commencing, "In respect of overtime worked", on a call out prior to the normal, it should read out, "starting time" not "stating time". In paragraph 30, fourth line in paragraph 30 it commences, "ie" it should read "an increase" not "and". Paragraph
AUDIO MALFULCTION [9:45:07] TO [9:49:27]
EXHIBIT #10 RESPONDENT'S WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
EXHIBIT #11 DOCUMENT FORM HUNTER TATE INSTITUTE FROM MARY ANN HILL AND JOB DESCRIPTION OF NUMBER 1 STEAM OPERATOR
<GREGORY JOHN PETERSON, SWORN [9.47AM]
<EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS FLYNN
PN14
..... statement in this matter?---I have.
PN15
Do you have a copy there with you?---I do.
PN16
Is there any changes that you'd like to make to that statement?---Yes, there's four changes I'd like to make.
PN17
Can you take me to those please?---Paragraph 19.
PN18
Yes?---Just insert the word "four" after "2003 season".
PN19
Is that in the first line?---In the first line.
PN20
Was there another change?---Paragraph 56, in the fourth last line where it says "the water level value" should be "valve".
PN21
Is there another one?---Paragraph 64, on the last - fourth line down, "less accountability than" rather than "then".
PN22
So t-h-a-n?---That's right, and paragraph 65 on the first line it should just, "the system crush operator's duties" - - -
PN23
That's at the end of that line?---Apostrophe "s".
PN24
So you're saying with those amendments, is that true and correct to the best of your knowledge and belief?---Yes.
I seek to tender that statement.
EXHIBIT #12 STATEMENT OF GREGORY JOHN PETERSON
PN26
MS FLYNN: Mr Peterson, you've had an opportunity to read Mr Lane's statement in reply in this matter?---That's right.
PN27
Mr Lane suggests that you wouldn't know anything about what he does in his position. What would you have to say in relation to that?---I guess I've been in the sugar industry 22 years, I've worked at Harwood Sugar Mill as a shift production superintendent - supervisor. Also at Condong. I also have worked as assistant production superintendent at Harwood, Broadwater and Condong, worked in the refinery there and have been production superintendent at Condong. So in those 22 years of working in the sugar industry I've worked with a number of operators over a number of different mills. I've been involved with commissioning plant, training operators, just at Condong alone I've interacted and worked with up to 10 different water tenders over the time I've been there, 10 different number 1 operators, number 1 drivers as they were prior to restructure and numerous other people in that industry, so in that time I've come across many problems, have had to dealt with in the factory operations side and are fully aware of what each of those individuals do in the job.
PN28
In relation to the negotiations around the certified agreement, the one that was certified in December 2003, were you a party to those negotiations?---I was. I was in the New South Wales Co-Operative's negotiating team.
PN29
Was that Paul Lane a member of that team?---Not that I'm aware of, no.
PN30
Are you familiar with the agreed outcomes document that was dated February 2003?---Yes.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XN MS FLYNN
PN31
One of the agreements within that document was that there would be a 12 week trial period for the new structure, do you remember that?---I remember that being negotiated. It was talked about, if after the 12 week period that increase that had been forwarded on, they were, I guess, not happy with, there was not community work value, if they so felt.
PN32
After that 12 week trial period did anybody approach at the Condong site to say that they wanted to do a work value assessment?---No one approached me at Condong.
Thank you, no further questions.
<CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BODKIN [9.54AM]
PN34
MR BODKIN: Mr Peterson, you've been employed by the Co-Op for
22 years?---That's right.
PN35
In paragraph 1 of your statement you have accounted for about 10 years. What other positions have you held with the Co-Op in that period?---I commenced working with the Co-Operative at Harwood Sugar Mill and I worked there as a shift production supervisor. During that period of time I also did a stint as assistant production superintendent.
PN36
Which years were they?---Okay. So from '83 to '86 seasons, I was a shift process supervisor at Harwood. I spent one season, '87 season, as assistant production superintendent at Harwood. I then went back on to shift the following year, '88
PN37
As a production super?---As a production supervisor.
PN38
Yes?---In '89 I was assistant production superintendent at Broadwater. I did a spell as refinery shift superintendent. I was involved in the commissioning on day work for the refinery to start with, I guess as a project officer, initially, I guess, if that's the title, and then I went on to shift and on the refinery as shift superintendent.
PN39
This is at Broadwater?---At Harwood.
PN40
Harwood?---Yes. In 1990 I was engaged as shift production supervisor at Condong. Then from '90 to - through to '94, so at the end of '94 I was assistant production superintendent at Condong. From '94 through to 2000, production superintendent at Condong. From 2000 to 2002, acting factory superintendent. I guess the rest is in the statement.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN41
Yes. Well, in making your witness statement are you talking about the situation at Condong alone or are you speaking generally of
the situation at the three
mills?---The - - -
PN42
MS FLYNN: Objection. In terms of - can the question be more specific as to what the generalisation relates to?
PN43
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, I think he's entitled to ask what his duties are and what experience he has - maybe you might state the question again, Mr Bodkin.
PN44
MR BODKIN: Well, Mr Peterson, in your witness statement you're giving evidence about the water tender position, the assistant water tender position, work utilisation, duties of number 1 steam operator. When you're making that statement do you have in mind just the situation solely at Condong or generally across the three mills?---Most of those references to operations at Condong.
PN45
Yes. Now, the restructure was announced to the workforce in
December 2002?---I believe so, yes.
PN46
And neither the workforce, that is the unionised workforce, or the unions themselves were involved in the planning that preceded that announcement?
PN47
MS FLYNN: Objection. Relevance.
PN48
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, I'm going to allow that question. I'm aware of what the relevance would be and I'll just have the witness at this stage answer the question?---No, they weren't involved prior to that announcement.
PN49
MR BODKIN: So for the unions and the workforce it was a sudden announcement?---It was given in December so that it would allow enough time before implementation for there to be discussions with the operators.
PN50
Prior to the announcement in December 2002 did you and other senior staff put a great deal of time and thought into the new structure to ensure that it would work?
PN51
MS FLYNN: I'm sorry, Commissioner, I do have to object on the basis of relevance. We're here to day on the basis of wage rates performing specific jobs. I don't understand how this line of questioning is relevant to that issue. That needs to be determined.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN52
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, Ms Flynn, you introduced this issue in your examination-in-chief in relation to - and I'm not going to state all of it in his presence - but you introduced that particular type and opened it up for cross-examination.
PN53
MS FLYNN: I don't believe - in terms of the reasoning behind the restructure or discussions leading to the restructure, with respect, Commissioner, I don't believe that that was introduced as such.
PN54
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, you did ask questions about whether he was part of the negotiating team - - -
PN55
MS FLYNN: For the certified agreement.
PN56
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, referred to the 12 week trial in relation to these particular classifications, as I understand it.
PN57
MS FLYNN: That's correct.
PN58
THE COMMISSIONER: And the opportunity for a work value.
PN59
MS FLYNN: That's correct.
PN60
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, I'm going to allow these particular questions. Did you want to say anything in response to the objection, Mr Bodkin, about this particular issue?
PN61
MR BODKIN: Well, at this point just to say that if it's not - the relevance isn't clear to my friend yet, it will certainly become clear as the - - -
PN62
THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Well, there's an objection in relation to the fact that the questioning was specifically in relation to the restructure. I'll allow this particular question and we'll see where we head from there, Mr Bodkin.
PN63
MR BODKIN: Perhaps I might repeat the question.
PN64
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.
PN65
MR BODKIN: Prior to the announcement of the restructure in December, 2002, did you and other senior staff put a great deal of time and thought into the new structure to ensure that it would work?---Yes, we did.
PN66
Did you carry out research into the new structure?
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN67
MS FLYNN: I'm sorry, I'm just going to press my objection as to where is the relevance arising from this matter in general. If we're going to go back and explore the reason for the restructure, I understand that that's not an issue before the Commission. That's for the Commission to decide the reason for the restructure. What we have is a restructure which was implemented and the individuals performing the jobs in that restructure say that they don't think they're being adequately compensated for those positions. There's been no material evidence led in relation to whether the Co-Operative had done any research prior to implementing the restructure. I understand that the issue is, well, is the restructure and the payments made to people performing positions in that restructure adequate.
PN68
THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Bodkin, I understand that you're going to tie these particular questions to the matter that's before me.
PN69
MR BODKIN: Yes.
PN70
THE COMMISSIONER: I note your objection, Ms Flynn, and I expect Mr Bodkin to relate these particular questions very quickly to the specific classifications and the pay rates in the question.
PN71
MR BODKIN: Thank you.
PN72
Mr Peterson, did you do any research into this type of manning structure for steam operators?---Search - research, I guess we had a number of meetings during the year of 2002 leading up to December amongst the three mills. There was numerous discussions amongst the three as to whether - what automation could be implemented to actually free up the time available so the two jobs could be merged into one from number 1 steam operator. There was a number of different options available in the restructure. There was different manning structure, if you like, considered, that it was felt that the final outcome would be suitable to lead us forward into the future especially with co-generation coming.
PN73
In the course of your planning and research did anyone to your knowledge from the Co-Op make inquiries to other enterprises to see - - -
PN74
MS FLYNN: Again, I'm just going to relevance and I'm concerned that Mr Bodkin is trying to lead through this witness material which he should introduce otherwise through his own witnesses.
PN75
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, Mr Bodkin, I'll allow this particular question in the sense that it does need to be relevant to the assessment of the work that the - and you're aware of that - these employees are undertaking.
PN76
MR BODKIN: Yes, we could have been there 10 minutes ago, Commissioner, without the unnecessary objections.
PN77
THE COMMISSIONER: All right, well - - -
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN78
MR BODKIN: And we will get there if I can proceed.
PN79
THE COMMISSIONER: I mean, there are legitimate concerns that Ms Flynn raises in relation to this material but I'll allow you to proceed and obviously Ms Flynn will be addressing me in relation to submissions on this particular matter. Thank you, Mr Bodkin.
PN80
MR BODKIN: Yes. Shall I repeat the question?---I think so, yes.
PN81
In the course of planning the new manning structure, did anyone from the Co-Op make inquiries to other enterprises to see how they manned their plants?
PN82
MS FLYNN: Commissioner, if I can object. I'm going to press the objection. I still don't see how this question is relevant to the matter that you're being asked by the applicants to determine.
PN83
THE COMMISSIONER: I mean, I don't have any of that material before me. I'll allow the particular question, Mr Bodkin, and I'm not sure what I'll be able to do with the particular answer, but I'm not wanting to confine you unnecessarily, but proceed on the basis. Again, I note the objection of Ms Flynn.
PN84
THE WITNESS: I didn't make any inquiries about any other industries. I'm not sure if anyone else would have at that time.
PN85
MR BODKIN: Do you know if inquiries were made about manning structures at a mill or mills in Queensland?---There would have been - well, not that I know of, inquiries. I guess we were aware of what was happening in Queensland.
PN86
How would you have been aware of what was happening in Queensland?---I guess through conferences and seminars where people have been involved in meeting Queensland counterparts.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN87
Yes, and do you know if any member of the Co-Op staff visited a sugar mill or mills in Queensland in connection with this restructure?
PN88
MS FLYNN: I'm sorry, I'm going to object again, Commissioner.
PN89
THE COMMISSIONER: I mean, Mr Bodkin, in the outline of submissions, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't understand I have before me in the union's submissions any comparison with other mill structures or in fact that the Commission is being asked to compare these particular rates with the work that other employees are doing in other mills. Now, it may be a course that you are pursuing, but I don't recall that in your submissions.
PN90
MR BODKIN: Well, there is evidence given by a union witness that this restructure was related to a Queensland situation. It was denied in evidence submitted by the company. It's in submissions, by both the union and the Co-Op as to the relevance of the sugar milling industry in Queensland and, indeed, you know, the CFMEUs written submissions at paragraph 55 go straight to this point.
PN91
MS FLYNN: Commissioner, if I may address you on that point, in the sense of Mr Bodkin trying to - - -
PN92
THE COMMISSIONER: Just one minute. Ms Flynn, I'll allow you to respond but I'm just conscious that the witness is in the box.
PN93
MS FLYNN: Yes.
PN94
THE COMMISSIONER: So if in fact these are going to be submissions of a detailed nature, it may be better to excuse the witness. However, I will allow Mr Bodkin to ask some of these particular questions in relation to the matter that he's pursuing. It will be a matter for submissions and I note your objection in relation to these particular issues. So I'll allow him to ask these particular questions. I understand that you have an objection to this particular material and that you are going to pursue those in submissions or re-examination.
PN95
MS FLYNN: May it please the Commission.
PN96
MR BODKIN: Shall I repeat the question?
PN97
THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN98
MR BODKIN: Yes, Mr Peterson, to your knowledge did any member of the Co-Op staff visit a sugar mill or mills in Queensland in connection with this restructure?---No.
PN99
In the course of your career at New South Wales Sugar, have you followed developments in the field of Industrial Relations in the sugar milling industry in New South Wales?---Only through the EBA negotiations.
PN100
Have you followed any decisions of the Commission in relation to New South Wales sugar milling?---I'm not quite sure of the question.
PN101
Have you read any?---I have from to time, yes.
PN102
Would you agree that the New South Wales Sugar Milling Co-Op, there is a history of the unions and the company relying on the Queensland Sugar Industry Award?---I hadn't made those connections.
PN103
The output of the New South Wales Sugar Co-Op, is that all for the local market, or is any of it export?---Some of Condong's sugar is export.
PN104
To where, overseas or - - - ?---Overseas.
PN105
Do you have any idea of the total percentage of Australian sugar output that New South Wales Sugar represents?---Not off the top of my head, no.
PN106
Now, if I could take you to paragraph 2 of your statement. Now, there you say that you are responsible for overseeing the work of
the steam operator and assistants. Did you have that responsibility prior to the restructuring of
2003?---Yes.
PN107
And prior to that restructure what responsibility did you have for the water tenders, assistant water tenders and the number 1 and the number 2 drivers?---As acting factory superintendent, I think I became Operations Manager during the 2002 year.
PN108
Yes. But did that just happen in 2002 or was there a prior history of you having responsibility for those water tenders, assistant water tenders and drivers?---Prior to that as production superintendent they were under my - within my role as production superintendent.
PN109
When you say within your role, what do you mean?---I guess I was involved with training, with selection of those operators. So in that regard.
PN110
Did you have the day to day responsibility in a supervisory capacity?---Not direct, no. Through the shift superintendent, or the shift - the shift process advisor or shift engineer.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN111
So did you interact with the water tenders, assistant water tenders and drivers on a daily basis?---It would have been close to daily. As far as yes, contacting, discussing issues with them, when I used to visit their work station.
PN112
And typically how long would you spend at the work station with
them?---Depending on the topic that was being discussed, anywhere from five to 15 minutes, maybe 20.
PN113
Would that be each and every shift?---No, not - only day work, during the day. Not each shift, so I might have missed maybe one or two. I used to take round the production figures for each day along with the analysis for all the products, the intermediate products, so that they were aware of our efficiencies.
PN114
When you say that's on day shift, would that be each and every day shift?---Pretty well. I guess, except Saturday or Sunday.
PN115
Have you yourself ever done any hands on operating work?---Yes, I have.
PN116
When did you do that?---I used to be, I guess, the person who trained most of the operators there in the evaporator station, the operation of that.
PN117
When was that?---From '94 through to 2002.
PN118
Yes, and that was in a training capacity?---That's right.
PN119
What about in a normal shift operating capacity, have you ever - - - ?---Not in the sugar industry. Prior to working in the sugar industry I used to work in a chemical manufacturing plant, we used to make poly vinyl acetate and sodium hydrochloride.
PN120
What was your position there?---I was the - I was a chemist, trainee chemist.
PN121
In paragraphs 3 and 4 you mention boilers at Condong. Do know off hand what the evaporative capacities of the boilers at Condong mill are?---Roughly, number 11 is around 60 ton an hour. And then there's 1 to 8 boilers, I guess might combine round 40 ton an hour. 1, 2, 7 and 8 being the higher pressure ones, which put out the majority of that.
PN122
All of those boilers are still in operation?---Yes.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN123
Could I take you to paragraph 10. In the second sentence at paragraph 10 you say, "I believe they were approximately 60 per cent utilised." When you say you believe that the water tender and assistant would utilise approximately 60 per cent, do you mean it's something you think is true?---As I mentioned in the next paragraph, that utilising figure is difficult to measure and I've tried to use some sort of gauges to how - how to get or arrive to that 60 per cent figure.
PN124
So when you say you believe, you don't have certain proof, is that the
situation?---That's right.
PN125
When do you believe the water tenders and assistant water tenders became under-utilised to that extent?---Sorry, when did I?
PN126
When, at what point in time did they - was this - at what point in time do you believe that they became under-utilised to the extent that you're mentioning?---I think it was always considered that they had the ability to take on extra work load. It was just at the time there was nothing to have them to do.
PN127
So this would - is this over the entire history that you were there, or the entire history of the plant? What years - - - ?---The entire history?
PN128
Yes?---Well, from when I was there, I guess, in 1990 there was, I think, in '88, there was some automatic instrumentation was put in, so there was, I guess from that point, I guess when - first discussions might have been around '94 when there was thoughts there that they could take on additional tasks.
PN129
They were your thoughts, were they?---No, they'd been discussed amongst myself and a couple of engineers at the time.
PN130
Does this figure of 60 per cent encompass both the crushing and the slack season?---No. Only relates to the operation of the water tender and the number 1 driver.
PN131
During the crushing season?---During the crushing season.
PN132
What methodology did you use to arrive at the figure of 60 per cent?---I guess the - I think I might have referred to trying to break their time up in the day, the functions they had to do, and I guess when I visited that station, being involved in work with them, what they were actually carrying out at the time, what they were doing at the time.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN133
As you've said earlier, the extent of your interaction with them was 10 to 15 minutes on the day shift?---That's right. At times you'd come in and you'd find them reading the paper or a magazine in their room. You'd discuss with them the issues of the day, with them having very little need to monitor, control any of the operations at that point in time.
PN134
Now, would you agree that one of the most important functions of the steam operator is to monitor the equipment?---Yes. They monitor controllers which are acting independently of themselves. So they're monitoring a number of trends, alarms and controls.
PN135
When the plant is not running smoothly, they may well be running up and down the catwalks?---Very much so.
PN136
When the plant is running smoothly they're seated at their console?---Perhaps not running up and down the walkways, but they're certainly active on their control panel.
PN137
And out on the plant?---Well, as - we're talking water tender?
PN138
Yes?---They would be - no, they wouldn't - again, all they had to do to leave - when they left the controller's room was to monitor the water levels in the one day boilers, so provided that was going all right, and they're fairly slow low steaming rate boilers, most of the action I guess was on the main control panel at number 11 boiler.
PN139
The assistant water tender, if the plant is not running smoothly, would they be out of their work stations around the plant?---The assistant water tender was generally the arms and legs of the water tender, around the boiler station.
PN140
When the plant is running smoothly you would expect the water tenders to be seated at their console?---Yes.
PN141
Are there any rules and regulations in relation to the reading of
newspapers?---There's - no, there's nothing written.
PN142
Has anything ever been said?---We have chatted, counselled one number 1 steam operator of recent times in regard to reading literature which wasn't work related.
PN143
Yes, and what about prior to the restructure, when the water tenders were involved? Were they ever spoken to about - - - ?---Not that I believe so.
PN144
About reading papers?---No.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN145
No disciplinary action ever taken?---Not that I'm aware of.
PN146
Could I take you to paragraph 11, down to the fifth line, line 5?---Mm.
PN147
In line 5 you say this, "In terms of analysing their work every five minutes," and here you're talking about the water tenders, "In terms of analysing their work every five minutes, their work consisted of one minute to review the controllers and four minutes to talk to others or read papers." Was that four minutes talking and reading about non work related matters?---At times it might have been. At other times it might be work related with other - well, with myself for instance when I came into the room. That one minute in five is I guess a guideline I was running on. Some might scan a control panel 15 seconds every minute.
PN148
Can I ask you, did you overhear them talking about non work related
matters?---Yes.
PN149
What, four minutes out of every five?---I've walked in the control room and the operator's been on the telephone organising the pick up of some cattle and that conversation went on longer than I would have liked.
PN150
When was that?---That would have been back, prior to the restructure, of course, would have been late 1990s, '98, '99.
PN151
Was that a one off situation?---With that chap, yes. I've only been - that one instance that I've been involved in.
PN152
I mean, this analysis you've made in paragraph 11 where you say, in terms of analysing their work every five minutes, now, you can't mean every five minutes of their shift there, can you?---If things are running well, there's very little need to interact with the console. It's just a case of monitoring.
PN153
Well, Mr Peterson, how can you analyse their work in terms of every five minutes of the shift when you yourself are not alongside them every five minutes of the shift?---That's true, I'm not there all the time but their work, when the place is running well, doesn't change.
PN154
If we were to take you at your word there, you say four minutes out of every five is spent talking to others or reading papers about
non work related matters, that's 80 per cent of the time they were supposed to be doing productive work, is it
not?---During that period but there are others where I think I've mentioned in the statement when that actually is the reverse,
when there's an issue they have to deal with in their station or out in the factory itself.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN155
Yes, but I mean, essentially you're saying there in paragraph 11, 80 per cent of the time they're supposed to be doing work, and they're talking, this is the water tenders, they're talking to others and reading papers. So what, did utilisation drop from 60 to 20 per cent?---I guess in that five minutes, yes.
PN156
Well, if we take the figure of 60 per cent that would mean three minutes productivity out of five. If you take your figure in paragraph 11, it's one minute out of every five. Which figure do you want the Commission to take into account in considering your evidence?---I guess I've averaged those situations and come up with a number of 60 per cent.
PN157
When you made your observations did you actually measure the time it took to perform the task and the time spent in chatting?
PN158
MS FLYNN: I object to that question. The witness has already given an answer as to how he determined that figure, he mentioned the average.
PN159
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, this is a specific question on that point. I'll allow the question. You might have to repeat it, Mr Bodkin.
PN160
MR BODKIN: When you made the observations did you measure your time with a watch or a stop watch as to the time it took to perform each task and the time the men spent chatting and reading newspapers?---We didn't do a time and motion study.
PN161
Was there any overtime being worked by the water tenders and assistants throughout this period?---Which period is this?
PN162
The period of under utilisation, 60 per cent or 20 per cent?---The major source of overtime I guess would have been covering water tenders who were off sick, so they'd have to stay back and cover those positions.
PN163
So there would have been overtime work during that period?---Yes.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN164
So, what you pay them overtime to come in and read newspapers?---I guess if - they were there to do a job and that wasn't disallowed from being done.
PN165
Just finally on this point, when did you actually focus your mind on this question of utilisation and form the belief that it was 60 per cent or 20 per cent, when did you actually think about this?---I guess to put a number on it, it was during this work value claim that we - I considered what sort of time was spent on the actual job itself and put a number to it.
PN166
So the situation is that round about May this year when you made your statement you started to think about what the level of utilisation had been prior to May 2003, and you thought it had been round about 60 per cent?---I don't remember back then actually coming up with this 60 per cent number. We, at times, discussed it being very close to 50 per cent of the time because we were looking at merging the two jobs together, but it - - -
PN167
Yes, but what I'm asking is that when you start to think about this figure, you start to think about it during this case for the purpose of making the statement?---For the purpose of making the statement, yes.
PN168
And you thought that back in 2003 it had been round about 60 per cent?---Yes.
PN169
Well, do you believe that they were under utilised because the job design did not provide them sufficient productive work to fill an entire shift?---They carried out the work that was necessary to run that item of plant.
PN170
Well, would it be the case then that any under utilisation was an inherent part of the old positions?---Yes, that's correct.
PN171
And that was accepted by management over a period of many years?---Things had changed over those many years. I guess automation was something that was introduced over a length of time which freed up the operator perhaps more than - requiring them to do less work than they did prior.
PN172
Could I take you now to paragraph 13, Mr Peterson. In paragraph 13 you say that the number 2 driver carried out oiling of the reciprocating engines and some general housekeeping and relieve the number 1 driver for half of the shift. Was that the full extent of the number 2 driver's duties?---I think I mentioned that previously, in the paragraph previous, they also monitored the three mega watt generator set.
PN173
Yes?---And they, to some extent, the turbines as well, from 1 and 4 mills. But basically that was a rough outline of the job requirements.
PN174
Well, what did the number 1 driver do for that half of the shift when he was being relieved by the number 2?---They would generally inspect the plant machinery and do some of the tasks that were laid for the number 2 driver.
PN175
So they were usefully occupied?---They were usefully occupied.
PN176
13 you refer to the mill reciprocating engines. Do you know off hand the bore of the reciprocating engines?---Not off hand.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN177
Perhaps I just asked you, did you help draw up the new job descriptions for the number 1 steam operators and assistants?---Yes.
PN178
And did you play a very prominent role in drawing up those job
descriptions?---Yes, involved at some length with the Board of a counterpart and then in negotiations with the union delegate and
members.
PN179
Are you quite satisfied that those job descriptions accurately describe the duties and responsibilities attached to those decisions?---They were - I guess there might be some changes since we've operated that they haven't been strictly adhered to. Some of the roles, some of the tasks have been carried out by one of the assistant crusher or the assistant boiler, but all in all, all of those tasks are being done.
PN180
Could I take you to paragraph 14. Now, at the bottom of paragraph 14, say the second last sentence, you say that you believe that with regards to the number 1 steam operator, along with improvement in the automation and sequencing, they are now approaching 85 per cent utilisation?---That's right.
PN181
What methodology did you use to arrive at the 85 per cent utilisation figure?---I guess I've explained that in the statement on the next sentence, I was doing the same thing, trying to get an idea of what sort of free time they would have in an hour.
PN182
And so did you conduct any sort of time and motion study in that regard?---There was no time and motion study carried out.
PN183
In the last sentence at 14 what are the non number 1 operator related activities that you're referring to there?---I guess they were conversing with others, they visit the number 1 steam operator in the crushing console. As I indicated previously, we had counselled one of the operators for reading a newspaper. I think generally that was what it amounts to.
PN184
So the number 1 steam operator related activities, you're referring there to, what, just reading papers or chatting about the footy?---No. It could be related to that. I guess I was basically saying they have that opportunity, obviously the job that they've got, they can't walk out of the room and do anything else. They have to stay there to monitor alarms, et cetera, so if no one's there, there's nothing else that they can do.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN185
So would there be any inherent problem when the plant is running smoothly and somebody looking at a newspaper in the control room?---Is there any inherent problem? I guess they do read other reading matter that comes up, so - - -
PN186
Such as?---I think they've read - there's union material there. During the EBA process there was the EBA document itself that resided there for operators to read.
PN187
You wouldn't have any problem with them reading that, would you?---No.
PN188
Are there presently any rules against reading the papers in the control
room?---There's nothing - no policy in writing in regards to that, no.
PN189
And nobody's been told not to do it?---Yes. We have counselled one operator, that was - - -
PN190
Was that the occasion that you mentioned?---Yes.
PN191
If I could take you now to paragraph 29. In fact from 29 to 31 you refer to difficulties in the 2003 crushing season?---Yes.
PN192
And you mentioned that these problems had been ironed by the 2004
season?---That's right.
PN193
Did you and the operating employees learn anything about the plant as a result of those difficulties?---Learn anything about the plant? I guess, with the automation that we'd installed there were some issues with sequencing and the actual interaction of interlocks which were - well, what couldn't be addressed during the 2003 season, was done in the slack of 2004. So in that regards, we learnt how things should be automated.
PN194
If similar problems were to arise in the future, do you think you'd all be better prepared to deal with them there?---I think so.
PN195
Could I take you to paragraph 33. In this section you deal with the current pay rates and you say in paragraph 33 that the current
rate for the number 1 steam operator is fair when compared with the rate for the sugar boiler, do you see
that?---That's right, yes.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN196
When you say fair, do you mean fair in terms of skill, knowledge required and length of training required to produce a competent operator
in each
category?---That's right.
PN197
Do you consider the current relativities within the plant for all classifications overall to be correct?---Yes, I do.
PN198
And in paragraph 39 you've set out a table which shows that the steam operator currently receives a higher wage rate than the sugar boiler, the differential is 67 cents or about 3.5 per cent. Do you see that table?---I see the table.
PN199
And the asterisk indicates that a disability allowance is excluded from the sugar boiler's rate. What are the details of that allowance?---The disability allowance?
PN200
Yes. You can see, you just have asterisks beside the sugar boiler rate and I think the note is that that indicates that you've excluded the disability allowance for the sugar boiler rate. What are the details of that allowance?---Well, I'd have to check but I think there are disability exclusions to all those figures.
PN201
So that asterisk actually applies to each and every rate?---Well, it should. I'd have to check.
PN202
That's what I'd assume, but I just wanted to clear it up with you?---Okay.
PN203
Could I ask you to just read to yourself - you've looked at paragraph 39, read to yourself paragraph 49. Your statement at both 39
and 41 suggests that the levels of skill, knowledge and training required of the number 1 steam operator are greater than the levels
required of a sugar boiler. Would you agree with
that?---Yes.
PN204
By about 3.5 per cent in favour of the number 1 steam operator, 3.5 per cent represents the current wage difference?---Difference. Yes.
PN205
Would that be, in your view, a fair assessment of the difference in the skills between the two classifications?---Yes.
PN206
Now, in paragraph 40 you discuss the placement of tradesmen in the number 1 steam operator positions and you say it would provide the benefit of having a stable maintenance workforce. Are you suggesting there that you currently have an unstable maintenance workforce?---We do have difficulty acquiring skilled tradesmen during the slack season.
PN207
That's what you mean by unstable, is it?---Yes, that's right.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN208
So it's not a problem of tradesmen leaving; it's a problem of - - - ?---Not being able to offer them full time work at their tradesman rate, they don't tend to be available the following season. So we only employ tradesmen, temporary tradesmen, those that aren't permanent for major maintenance or capital work.
PN209
How many permanent tradesmen, metal tradesmen do you employ at the moment?---Well, roughly around 12, 14.
PN210
And how many - that's for the whole 12 months of the year?---Yes.
PN211
How many supplementaries would you …..
AUDIO MALFUNCTION [10:45:25] TO [10:49:28]
PN212
THE WITNESS: Generally it takes several years because of availability of vacancies, although I don't see that myself, that someone couldn't be trained in a much shorter time period than that.
PN213
MR BODKIN: But in practical terms you haven't done that?---I guess I'm thinking of the operators that are there now, what opportunities they've had, I don't think we've done it in a very short time frame.
PN214
Would you agree that the bulk of the learning undertaken by the number 1 steam operator occurs on the job?---Yes.
PN215
Mr Peterson, do you currently have any trades apprentices at Condong?---Yes.
PN216
How many?---There's five.
PN217
And what do you see as the anticipated period of their apprenticeships?---Four years.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN218
And after four years they would achieve, what, a C10 outcome?---That's right.
PN219
Have you looked at what the position could be under the system of new apprenticeships in relation to the duration of an apprenticeship?---No.
PN220
You're not aware that the term of an apprenticeship can be shortened significantly?---I was not aware of that, no.
PN221
Are you aware that an outcome for an apprentice can be higher than C10, for example C9?---C9?
PN222
C9?---If they did additional modules, additional time spent training.
PN223
So your understanding is they'd have to spend additional, longer than four
years?---That's right.
PN224
Could I take you to paragraph 43. Would you like to just read that, and in the final line you say that, "The tradesmen however would not receive a wage increase purely on the basis of having a working knowledge of many different items of plant." Is that just an opinion that you hold or do you know that to be a fact?---That's what occurs at Condong.
PN225
But you don't know what might occur outside of Condong, is that what you're saying?---I'm not familiar with outside of Condong.
PN226
Can I take you to paragraph 47. 47 you say - or would you just like to red 47 to yourself?---Mm.
PN227
In the second line where you say there is a potential for further claims from tradesmen, do you mean there further unjustified claims
or just further
claims?---Unjustified claims.
PN228
When you say further claims are you suggesting that such claims have already been made?---No claims have been made.
PN229
Do you have any information that tradesmen and sugar boilers intend to make a claim to restore their previous relativities with the water tenders?---No.
PN230
Well, what is the basis for your present concern?---I guess the fact that those three top level positions, they've always - I guess they've always been competitive in nature as to where they sit in the pecking order. Each one sees their position as being more important than the others. I couldn't imagine seeing it go without any comment or without any claim being made.
PN231
Well, Mr Pearson, there has already been a 3.14 per cent increase for the steam operators who were previously water tenders, 3.1 per cent increase. There was no claim for flow on after that, was there not?---No, it's been seen as a fair increase, I guess.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN232
If the skill knowledge and training required for a particular position changed to any significant degree, then do you think that persons employed in other classifications can reasonably expect the historical relativities to remain unchanged?---Can you repeat that, sorry?
PN233
Well, if the skills of one group changed significantly - - -
PN234
MS FLYNN: Which group?
PN235
MR BODKIN: For example the steam operators changed significantly and if the skills of another group, say, the sugar boilers and
tradespersons don't change to any significant extent over the same period, can that other group have, in your view, any reasonable
expectation that the historical relativities will be
frozen?---No, I guess not.
PN236
Can you recall any past instances or cases where one group in the factory were awarded an increase on work value grounds and this precipitated claims for a plumber?---Not that I'm aware of.
PN237
So far as you are aware it's never happened before?---I think I've only been involved in one work value claim and it didn't happen then. I'm not quite sure if that was successful.
PN238
Mr Peterson, you've been in senior positions, senior management positions for quite a number of years. You would reasonably know if the Commission awarded a work value increase at any mill, would you not?---I would be.
PN239
Do you know if the Co-Operative has agreed to consider to implement competency standards for its trades employees?---It's in the process of going down that track.
PN240
How far down the track is it?---I think they've done a skills audit at this point and they're reviewing those results.
PN241
Who has carried out that skills audit?---It was coordinated by Bill Syme, the Human Resources Manager in the Co-Operative, and TAFE, I think, were involved.
PN242
The AMWU involved?---I believe so, yes.
PN243
And also I take the employees, tradespersons themselves are involved?---Yes.
PN244
Does that exercise have the potential for tradespersons to be re-classified upwards?---It does have the potential.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN245
Therefore it would have the potential for an alteration to the internal relativities and wage rates for tradespersons?---It potentially could.
PN246
Relative to every other position within the mill?---If those skills are assessed such that they are within a higher classification, yes.
PN247
Would that mean for example that a tradesperson on C10 could be re-classified to a higher skill level, say C9, C8?---If they have the skills and we utilise them, that's possible, yes.
PN248
Would that not result in a disturbance of the historical relativities within the sugar mill?---Possibly for that one or two persons who re-classified, if that's the way it occurs.
PN249
Have you said to the employees, the trades employees or their union that you're worried that sugar boilers, for example, may want to restore their relativities?---I believe that has been said.
PN250
And nevertheless, the Co-Op has agreed to participate in the exercise with the AMWU?---Yes.
PN251
Can I take you to paragraph 49. You might just like to read that, Mr Peterson. In 49 you say, five lines from the bottom, "Hence the skills are similar to those held by the number 1 and number 2 drivers prior to the restructure but with the work load increase." When you say they're similar, what is the degree of similarity in your opinion?---I think earlier I referred to the number 1 and 2 drivers having the same tickets as a number 1 steam operator that had been trained in boiler operation and had been trained in turbine and reciprocating engine operation.
PN252
Yes, but if we just look at the question of degree of similarity. In your opinion would it be slight, moderate, high?---Similarity in the skills needed?
PN253
In the sense where you say the skills are similar to those held by 1 and 2 drivers prior to the restructure. So were they slightly
similar, moderately similar
or?---High.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN254
Pardon?---High, yes.
PN255
THE COMMISSIONER: We might actually take a short adjournment, Mr Bodkin, 15 minutes. Mr Peterson, you're free to leave the witness box but you will remain under oath.
<SHORT ADJOURNMENT [11.01AM]
<RESUMED [11.21AM]
PN256
MR BODKIN: Mr Peterson, we were at paragraph 49 of your statement. Mr Peterson, do you have any qualifications as a skills assessor?---No.
PN257
Now, in 49 I think just before the break you said that the skills for the number 1 steam operator are highly similar to those held by the number 1 and number 2 drivers prior to the restructure, that's correct?---That's right.
PN258
So are you saying that in terms of work value the skills formally exercised by those drivers are highly similar to the skills currently exercised by the number 1 steam operator?---I'm saying to you they had the skills necessary to do the function of a number 1 steam operator. They had the certificates. They required additional experience to operate the boilers.
PN259
Well, I think you've said it's the wages the Co-Op pays to its employees, I think you said accurately affect the value of the work for each classification?---That's right.
PN260
Has that been the case over the past two or three EBAs?---Yes.
PN261
Could I take you to paragraph 34. In the first table at paragraph 34 it shows that prior to the restructure the water tender was paid $13 per week than the number 1 driver and $32 per week more than the number 2 driver, do you see that?---Yes.
PN262
Well, doesn't that indicate that even before the restructure took place there were significant differences in the skills and responsibilities exercised by the water tender and in relation to the number 1 and number 2 drivers?---That's right. As I mentioned previously, they had the skills but they weren't utilising those necessarily in their role as number 1 and number 2 driver.
PN263
And the second table in paragraph 34 shows that after the restructure the wages gap between the number 1 steam operator and the drivers increased to $33 a week and $52 a week respectively. Do you agree with that?---That's right.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN264
Well, I put it to you that that wage differential would hardly suggest that management considered the skills of a number 1 steam operator and the old driver positions to be highly similar, because they were paying them so much more than the old driver positions?
PN265
MS FLYNN: There seems to be either a statement and a question bundled into that last question. Can that be re-put to the question?
PN266
THE COMMISSIONER: Have you a question for the witness, Mr Bodkin?
PN267
MR BODKIN: Well, if we look at the second table in paragraph 34 and that shows that after the restructure the wages gap between the number 1 steam operator and the number 1 driver and number 2 driver increased to $33 a week and $52 a week respectively. Do you see that?---Yes.
PN268
What I put to you is that that wages gap hardly suggests that management considered the skills of the number 1 steam operator to be the same as or highly similar to the skills of the old driver positions?---The skills that they had were very similar. They just, for the number 1 driver, being fully utilised in regards to them actually operating the boiler station at the time.
PN269
So you say just for that they were paid $33 a week and $52 a week
more?---Because they do have that role, that task of operating the boiler now. Whereas previous they didn't. That's the biggest
difference between the two jobs.
PN270
So are you saying that they had the skills before but weren't required to use them. Now they are required to use them. Is that what you're saying?---The career path required them to gain a boiler ticket, the number 1 drivers this is, gain a boiler ticket. They normally came as assistant water tenders across to number 1 or number 2 driver, they gained a turbine reciprocating ticket, and then became number 1 driver. So in their career path, they acquired skills in both the operation of the boiler and the operating side of the crushing station. Obviously when they came to be number 1 driver, they can be required to operate the boiler, although they had the skills necessary to take that role.
PN271
And typically how long would it take for a person to progress along that career path?---Again, dependent on vacancies that arose, it could take a number of years.
PN272
Approximately how many years?---Could range to go from assistant water tender to a number 1 driver, could take three, four, five years.
PN273
So you're saying that along that career path, they're picking up skills as they go along?---Yes.
**** GREGORY JOHN PETERSON XXN MR BODKIN
PN274
Well, if I take you to paragraph 13, take you to 14, you say there, "The number 2 driver carried out oiling of the mill reciprocating engines, number 2 and 3 mills, and some general housekeeping." That's hardly consistent with your view that those duties are similar or highly similar to those of the number 1 steam operator, are they?---The duties are different, but at that point in time they've got the boiler ticket behind them so they know the operation of the boiler steam generation, and then as number 2 driver they're gaining skills and experience with the operation of turbine reciprocating engines.
PN275
So in number 13 you're not suggesting, are you, that oiling the steam engines and doing general housekeeping is on par with the duties of the number 1 steam operator?---No, I'm not.
Thank you, Mr Peterson, that's all.
<RE-EXAMINATION BY MS FLYNN [11.29AM]
PN277
MS FLYNN: Mr Peterson, you were asked about the introduction of competency standards at the Co-Operative in conjunction with the AWU. Do you remember being asked about that?---Yes.
PN278
And do you know who made the decision to introduce the competency
standards?---I understand it was part of the EBA negotiations.
But was it the AWU that wanted to introduce them or was it the Co-Operative that wanted to introduce them?---It was the union.
Thank you. No further questions.
<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [11.30AM]
PN280
THE COMMISSIONER: Ms Flynn, are you able to call your next witness now? Do you require a short break for your papers or are you happy to proceed?
PN281
MS FLYNN: I'm happy to proceed, Commissioner, if you are.
PN282
THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you.
PN283
MS FLYNN: I'd like to call Mr Paul Somerville.
PN284
THE COMMISSIONER: I should have asked you, Mr Bodkin, you're happy to proceed, aren't you?
PN285
MR BODKIN: Yes.
THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you.
<PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE, AFFIRMED [11.31AM]
<EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS FLYNN
PN287
MS FLYNN: Mr Somerville, could you please state your full name and address for the record?---Paul David Somerville, care of Broadwater Sugar Mill at 117 Pacific Highway, Broadwater, New South Wales.
PN288
Have you prepared a statement in this matter?---Yes, I have.
PN289
Do you have a copy there with you?---Yes.
PN290
Do you say that the contents of that statement are true and correct to the best of your knowledge?---Yes, I do.
I seek to tender that statement.
EXHIBIT #13 STATEMENT OF PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE
PN292
MS FLYNN: Mr Somerville, Mr Jon Mulcahy has asserted during these proceedings that after the 12 week trial process that was in the agreed outcomes document that he raised an issue about the wage rates with you. What do you have to say about that?---I don't recollect him raising any issue about wage rates.
PN293
Mr Mulcahy has also asserted that shortly, either during that 12 week trial process or shortly thereafter, he said to you when are we going to do the wage case study, what do you have to say about that?---I've said in my statement that I approached Mr Mulcahy at or about the 12 week period and suggested that thing to him. It wasn't bought up by him to me. And as I've mentioned, the response I got was that he wanted a full Co-Operative meeting about it and that we were instructed by Mr Syme, our Human Resources Manager, to address these issues at a site level and then perhaps something else further down the track. That review or that meeting didn't occur.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XN MS FLYNN
PN294
Mr Mulcahy, in his statement in reply has also suggested that he's aware that Wayne Flaherty also approached you on several occasions
about the wage
rates?---No, that's not correct.
Thank you, no further questions.
<CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BODKIN [11.34AM]
PN296
MR BODKIN: Commissioner, at the outset I would indicate that the union objections to paragraphs 36, 54 and 55 as hearsay.
PN297
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, as I understand it there was a direct discussion that this witness is indicating that he had with Mr Baxter. It's not been that that discussion hasn't been related to him, but you're able to cross-examine on that, I'm sure. That was 36, and what was the other one?
PN298
MR BODKIN: 54 and 5.
PN299
THE COMMISSIONER: Do you have anything to say on that, Ms Flynn?
PN300
MS FLYNN: Commissioner, only that they are - Mr Somerville is relating conversations he's directly had with people. I don't see the basis upon which it is hearsay.
PN301
THE COMMISSIONER: Again, in terms of hearsay assessment, he was a direct participant in those discussions, but he will be able to cross-examine on it and provide submissions in relation to those, Mr Bodkin.
PN302
MR BODKIN: Mr Somerville, in paragraph 2 you've set out your history of employment, summarised your history of employment with New South Wales Sugar and you've mentioned that you've spent 31 years in technical management positions?---That's correct.
PN303
Does that include any position, or do your qualifications include any qualification relating to skills assessing?---I have undergone training when I was an employee of CSR as to train the trainer and courses like that, communications courses to do with training people and assessing whether they'd understood the materials that were presented to them. I haven't undergone any formal skills assessment during my career.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN304
Now, in your evidence about he work of steam operators and assistants - or is your evidence about the work of steam operators and assistants confined solely to your knowledge of those classifications at the Broadwater mill?---I have worked in three sugar mills during those 31 years. The bulk of that has been at Broadwater and so most of my observations and my recent history involves Broadwater, yes.
PN305
Nevertheless do you keep yourself well informed about Industrial Relations matters at all three mills?---Yes, I'm aware of issues at the other mills.
PN306
So would you closely follow the progress of negotiation or arbitration of any claims at any of the mills or all the mills?---Yes.
PN307
Would you read any decisions or recommendations of this Commission concerning such claims?---Yes.
PN308
Including past decisions?---Yes.
PN309
How far back would you have taken a depth of interest?---The depth of interest I suppose came with my most recent appointment to production superintendent where it was required to be knowledgeable about such things in case there was some impact on my place of work and also as part of the corporate team, when I held the honorary position of team manager at Broadwater which, because we didn't have a site operations manager, I was required to be in the loop, you might say, about Industrial Relations matters.
PN310
As you say in paragraph 2 you've been production superintendent for
16 years?---Yes.
PN311
Have you yourself done any hands on operating work in a sugar mill?---From time to time I've operated stations, only on a very short term. I have, in my days with CSR, done a three week training course as a sugar boiler. Later this year I intend to spend some time at operator level to facilitate my gaining steam and turbine tickets.
PN312
So I suppose the answer is that you haven't done any hands on work, operating work on a regular basis, would that be correct?---That'd be correct, yes.
PN313
You mentioned that you were going for some tickets. Do you currently hold any WorkCover tickets?---No.
PN314
Now, in paragraphs 3 to 6 you deal with the restructure process at Broadwater and you outline the process which was announced in December, 2002, and came into effect in the 2003 crushing season?---Yes.
PN315
You say in 4, paragraph 4, that there was a rationalisation of the workforce and that manning changes were introduced prior to the 2004 season?---The cane receivers operating changes were made prior to the 2004 season. The factory operation positions were restructured for the 2003 season.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN316
I think you mention in 5 that before all of these changes occurred, the engineering department was responsible for the feeding, crushing, boiler and power stations, is that correct?---That's correct.
PN317
But the changes have resulted in the production department assuming authority over the entire factory, is that so?---That's correct.
PN318
And as part of that re-organisation the positions of number 1 steam operator and assistant boiler/crushing operator were created?---Yes.
PN319
So that one operator, the number 1 steam operator, is now responsible for operating the boiler station, crushing station, feeding
station and power
station?---Yes.
PN320
And the assistant operator is also required to attend to all of those work
stations?---Yes.
PN321
Did you participate in the design of these new positions?---Yes.
PN322
How prominent a part did you play in designing those positions?---I was one of the team.
PN323
So if there was anything to be known about the planning of that restructure, you would know?---Can you just clarify that, please?
PN324
Well, if there's any relevant information about the planning of the restructure, you would have been in the loop?---I would have been in the loop from time to time. There was a period where I took some extended leave. I tried to stay in the loop while I was out but, yes, in general.
PN325
Now, of course you're aware of the new job descriptions, the written ones?---Yes.
PN326
Did you participate in drawing those up?---No, they were done during my leave period.
PN327
You're familiar with them now, of course?---Yes.
PN328
In your view do the job descriptions accurately describe the current duties and responsibilities of the number 1 steam operator and the assistants?---Yes.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN329
Now, the restructure was announced to the workforce in December of '02?---Yes.
PN330
Neither the workforce nor the unions were involved in any of the planning which preceded that announcement?---No.
PN331
So for the workers and the unions it was a sudden announcement in December 2002?---Yes, it was.
PN332
The manning structure that you devised for the steam operators and assistants, is that unique to the New South Wales Sugar Milling Co-Operative?---I would say not. There would be other sugar mills elsewhere in Australia, in the world that would have a similar operating structure.
PN333
Do you know for a fact whether any other mill in Australia has a similar operating structure?---I have been told that other mills do.
PN334
Which mills?---I couldn't tell you which mills specifically. I took that as being something that could be done.
PN335
You couldn't tell the Commission which mills. Is that because - - -
PN336
MS FLYNN: He's already answered the question. Objection.
PN337
MR BODKIN: When you say you couldn't, do you mean you don't know or that you - there's some other - - - ?---I don't know.
PN338
You don't know. Well, then how do you know? You said earlier that the manning structure is not unique to New South Wales Sugar.
How can you say for
certain?---Because I've been told by knowledgeable people that such a manning structure is possible.
PN339
Did those people tell you that it was actually in operation elsewhere?---Yes.
PN340
In Australia?---Yes.
PN341
In Queensland?---Yes.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN342
Did any member of the Co-Operative staff visit a sugar mill in Queensland to ascertain how the manning structure operated there?---I'm not aware of anyone visiting.
PN343
Do you know Mr David Mollar and Mr Allan Brasseux?---Yes.
PN344
What positions do they hold?---Allan Brasseux no longer works for the Co-Operative. He was the maintenance manager of Broadwater. David Mollar is Assistant Production Superintendent, my assistant.
PN345
He's your assistant?---Yes.
PN346
Would you be aware that Mr Mollar visited a mill in Queensland?---Mr Mollar and Mr Brasseux did a tour of Queensland mills. I'm not sure what year that was. It would have been, I'd say probably two to three years ago.
PN347
Round about 2001, 2002?---Yes, could have been that - it could have been at that stage.
PN348
Was that an official visit on behalf of the New South Wales Sugar?---It was a visit mainly to see what plant operated - every operating facet that they could - that they could look at. We've all done - or most of the technical staff in the Co-Operative have done such tours from time to time, not with anything specific in mind but just to see how other plants operate.
PN349
When Mr Mollar and Mr Brasseux returned did they have any report to make about the manning structuring in Queensland?---I haven't got that report with me, so I can't remember.
PN350
Have you seen that report?---Yes, I have.
PN351
You can't remember whether it said anything at all about the manning in the Queensland mills?---No, I can't remember.
PN352
You say that on your oath, do you?---Yes, I do.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN353
Would you agree that at the New South Wales Sugar Milling Co-Op there is a history of the unions and the company relying on the Queensland Sugar Industry Award?---I think that the New South Wales industry has relied pretty well on its own awards. The Sugar Industry Award was actually a state award before it became Federal.
PN354
Do you know which year it became Federal?---It would be in recent years, within the last five years.
PN355
So even though you said earlier that in 16 years as a production superintendent you familiarised yourself, I think, with relevant decisions?
PN356
MS FLYNN: I don't really see the relevance of knowing when the award becomes a Federal award turns on the matters that the Commission needs to decide.
PN357
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, Mr Bodkin, is able to ask that particular question. We'll have to draw the relevance of that.
PN358
MR BODKIN: In your 16 years as a production superintendent I think you said that you familiarised yourself with decisions affecting
New South Wales
Sugar?---That's correct.
PN359
Do you recall a decision in 1994 in relation to the broadband of classifications under the New South Wales Sugar Industry Federal Award?---I remember that there was some discussion about broad banding that didn't ultimately really come to any sort of fruition.
PN360
So you're saying that you wouldn't be aware of whether any party in those proceedings relied upon the Queensland award?
PN361
MS FLYNN: I'm sorry, Commissioner, can I just object. I don't even now what decision Mr Bodkin is referring to back in 1994. How is that a fair question to put to this witness? If it's not in evidence.
PN362
THE COMMISSIONER: Certainly more specifics, I think, would be helpful. Clearly you're aware of the decision, Mr Bodkin.
PN363
MR BODKIN: I'd like to show that there is a decision, Commissioner.
PN364
THE COMMISSIONER: Do you have a copy?
PN365
MS FLYNN: Please, before the question is asked, I hope that this witness is not going to be asked to interpret effectively what the decision says, but I'll wait until the question is put.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN366
MR BODKIN: Have you ever seen that decision before?---I haven't seen it in this printed state. I would have been aware at the time what the rough sort of circumstances were.
PN367
You see at the bottom of the first page, if you'd like to read to yourself that final sentence.
PN368
MS FLYNN: Commissioner, I don't know if this is a matter that can be dealt without the witness being in the box as such because I'm just concerned as to where this question might be leading.
THE COMMISSIONER: We might excuse you for a minute, Mr Somerville, whilst Ms Flynn raises her objection.
<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [11.52AM]
PN370
THE COMMISSIONER: Ms Flynn?
PN371
MS FLYNN: Commissioner, this is the first time that I've seen this decision, the first time Mr Bodkin has indicated that he intends to rely on it, but I know, even just scanning this decision, I haven't read its contents, that it's referring to a prior legislative framework (a) under the Industrial Relations Act 1988, not under the current legislation which you would have to determine this matter, but in any event, even if a paragraph is shown to this witness, is he meant to draw a conclusion as a result of reading the decision, I would object to any kind of question on that basis, but it may ask the witness to speculate or draw a conclusion of his non expert opinion about what this decision may turn on. I don't see the relevance.
PN372
THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Bodkin?
PN373
MR BODKIN: Commissioner, if I could just take you to paragraph 100 of the respondent's submissions. Clearly, the question of the Queensland Sugar Award is an issue in these proceedings. This witness has given evidence that over a period of 16 years as production superintendent he familiarised himself with relevant decisions of this Commission. When asked about this particular decision he said he wasn't familiar. So I've shown him a copy of it. In view of what Commissioner Holmes said in that third paragraph, I think it goes to the question of reliability in some respects of the witness.
PN374
THE COMMISSIONER: I mean, if it's an issue of credit in terms of this particular witness, you can ask the question and make submissions on that in terms of the assessment of this particular witness. Is that the basis upon which you were showing him this particular decision?
PN375
MR BODKIN: Yes.
PN376
THE COMMISSIONER: Right. Well, Ms Flynn, I'll allow Mr Bodkin to do that and you can make submissions on the basis of whether that does in any way discredit or reduce the reliability of the evidence of this particular witness and I'll make my own assessments in relation to that and the nature of the decision.
PN377
MS FLYNN: May it please the Commission.
THE COMMISSIONER: Call the witness.
<PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE, RECALLED [11.55AM]
<CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BODKIN, CONTINUING
PN379
MR BODKIN: Mr Somerville, in the decision of Commissioner Holmes on 15 February 1994 on the first page in the third paragraph, would you like to read that paragraph to yourself?---Yes.
PN380
THE COMMISSIONER: That is paragraph commencing?
PN381
MR BODKIN: "It is my understanding".
PN382
THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you.
PN383
MR BODKIN: And in that paragraph the Commissioner indicates that - - -
PN384
MS FLYNN: Can you just make sure the witness has read that paragraph.
PN385
THE WITNESS: Okay.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN386
MR BODKIN: Would you agree that there is some past history of reliance upon the Queensland award situation?---I - - -
PN387
MS FLYNN: Commissioner, I have to object. If we're just going to isolate one paragraph out of the decision, I still don't think that is a fair proposition to put to this witness.
PN388
THE COMMISSIONER: That's a matter for submissions.
PN389
MS FLYNN: Thank you, Commissioner.
PN390
THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Bodkin, can you ask that question again of Mr Somerville.
PN391
MR BODKIN: Yes, Mr Somerville, would you agree that there is some history of reliance upon the Queensland award?---Well, I see that there's a reliance by the Commission on looking at Queensland. But as far as a reliance by our industry, on the Queensland industry, I don't read that in there.
PN392
Just on the third page, you see the appearances?---Yes.
PN393
Mr McIntosh appeared for New South Wales Sugar Milling?---I see that.
PN394
Is Mr McIntosh still with New South Wales Sugar?---Yes, he is.
PN395
In what capacity?---He's Manager Marketing Administration.
PN396
Where is he located?---Over the road at the corporate head office.
PN397
Mr Somerville, I take yo off that now. If we could go to - - -
PN398
THE COMMISSIONER: Did you wish to have that marked?
PN399
MR BODKIN: Yes. Well, it's the print number, but perhaps it could be marked as - it's print L-something or other, L1814.
PN400
THE COMMISSIONER: There's no objection to that?
PN401
MS FLYNN: No, Commissioner.
PN402
THE COMMISSIONER: But I understand your objections to the material, but I think perhaps for the record we'll mark it as exhibit 14, and that is that particular decision as referred to, print L1814, of this particular document.
PN403
MR BODKIN: It's L1814.
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.
EXHIBIT #14 PRINT NUMBER L1814 OF COMMISSIONER HOLMES' DECISION DATED 15/02/1994
PN405
MR BODKIN: Mr Somerville, before the restructure took place who was in charge of the water tenders, engine drivers and assistant water tenders?---They were under the Chief Engineer's Department.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN406
And which person in particular had direct responsibility for them?---The Shift Engineer.
PN407
Who is in charge of the number 1 steam operators and assistants now?---The Shift Superintendent.
PN408
So is that a different, it's a different department than previously directly supervised them?---The Shift Superintendent operates under my line of authority, but answers to the Chief Engineer, the Chief Engineer's Department on matters, some matters concerning operation and matters concerning plant. The line of authority is a little blurred, I suppose you could say.
PN409
A little blurred?---It's - the Chief Engineer has the authority to direct how a piece of plant is operated, shut down, start up, et cetera. I direct the shift superintendents with more an overview through that section. The human resource issues, time keeping issues and overall factory production targets.
PN410
Well, before the restructure did you personally have any supervisory responsibilities over the water tenders, assistant water tenders and engine drivers?---As part of the management team only.
PN411
So that would not have been on a day to day basis?---No, it's not a direct line of authority.
PN412
I take you to paragraph 6. Now, at 6 you say that the new supervisors were chosen for their expertise in the boiler and crushing area?---That's correct.
PN413
Who are these new supervisors?---Two of them, of the people currently there, two of them are ex tradespeople who were offered staff appointments as shift engineers and have subsequently been changed to shift superintendents. One of them has been recruited in directly as a shift superintendent. The fourth position is currently vacant and being relieved.
PN414
When you say ex trades, is that metal trades?---One was metal trades, one was an instrument fitter by trade.
PN415
So I take it, did those few supervisors previously have hands on operating experience in the boiler and crushing areas?---No.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN416
Now, in paragraph 7 you say that before the restructure supervisors had retained a number of duties and practices that should have
been delegated to
subordinates?---That's correct.
PN417
Which duties and practices are you referring to there?---There was often requests of the supervisor to check out a piece of plant that an operator could have easily and more effectively could have done himself. One example is the boiler water analysis. The supervisors, or the shift engineers did that, but that is a simple, what you call very similar to pool testing, a number of tests of boiler waters that are run by kits.
PN418
Run by, sorry?---Kits, little analysis kits, you know, like a pool kit, yes, that's it, yes.
PN419
K-i-t-s, yes. I thought you said k-i-d-s, sorry?---So yes, there were a number of things that the supervisor was getting involved in to the extent of hands on and some of the operators would tend to sit back and just say, well, that's the supervisor's responsibility, he can go and look at it, and I felt that there should have been more active and more proactive involvement by the operators and the system operators.
PN420
Are there any other duties and practices you felt should have been delegated to subordinates?---No, I haven't got any more specifics for you.
PN421
Well, those duties and practices you just mentioned, have they now been taken over by steam operators and assistants?---The steam operators and assistants will take a more active, more productive sort of shift role in checking the instruments themselves, checking monitors, bearing, temperatures. There's a number of things. They're out there on the work face more, checking things out, because the shift superintendent has more area to cover.
PN422
Just how large is the area the shift superintendent has to cover?---Well, it's under the factory roof.
PN423
The lot?---Yes, the lot.
PN424
In paragraph 8 you say that prior to the restructure you assessed the degree of utilisation of various operators?---Yes.
PN425
Did you make that assessment in relation to Broadwater only, or does it apply to any other mill?---I made that assessment at Broadwater.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN426
Over what period did you carry out your assessment?---Well, I've been at Broadwater for 25 years so I'd say 22 years, I've had the opportunity to walk around and make these observations and discuss them with my peers and technical management colleagues.
PN427
You say that those percentage figures in paragraph 8 represent the utilisation situation over the past 20-odd years, is that - - - ?---No, that would have been at the time that the restructure was being thought about, looked at.
PN428
From about which time onwards?---Say, late 2002, when those positions still existed.
PN429
So when those positions still exist, you started to think about what the degree of utilisation was, is that - - - ?---No. We needed to make sure that the new structure was viable, the proposed restructure was viable.
PN430
Were you looking just at the crushing season or at the crushing and slack seasons combined?---No, just at the crushing season for those numbers.
PN431
Could you tell the Commission what methodology you used to produce the figures in paragraph 8?---It was observation and experience, it was consultation with other technical management people, including the engineers who had the direct line of authority over that part of the factory for many years.
PN432
Do you know what methodology they used?---They used a similar assessment to myself.
PN433
Do you claim to have any expertise in time and motion studies?---Only my experience, a long experience, in a high volume manufacturing environment.
PN434
Have you ever done any course in time and motion studies?---No.
PN435
Have you ever read a book about it?---No.
PN436
When you made your observations did you use a watch or a stop watch of any description?---From time to time I would have when I saw something that was particularly unproductive.
PN437
What sort of thing?---Well, an example would be someone sitting there for an hour reading a magazine or a newspaper.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN438
How would you know that they'd sat there for an hour doing that?---Because from time to time I might be in that area for an hour.
PN439
Is this typical or would this be an isolated case?---No, not isolated. Under routine operations for many of the operators and assistant operators, there would have been large periods of time spent - I've said somewhere in my statement reading work related - materials that weren't related to work and by that I mean magazines, novels, newspapers. I've seen operators set up for a shift under this old structure and opened the newspaper, and the first thing they do is start reading.
PN440
Were they following the set procedure when they did that?---No, that's not a set procedure.
PN441
Were they in breach of any rule or requirement when they did that?---No. As long as they monitored their station, particularly the senior operators, I mean, the water tender and the number 1 driver would be less prone to that and their assistants, but provided they viewed all the monitors, made necessary adjustments and did the things that were necessary to do when they were necessary to be done. There was just a lot of unproductive time built into the structure.
PN442
Built into the structure?---Well, it had come about through a long term change, if you like, in the technology and the - or the evolution of the factory, of the plant. It was an old fashioned structure in a new fashioned or retro fitted old plant to make it more newer and in doing that it required less attention and less hands on than it had previously, and ultimately, less people. That was our decision. That's why we went with the restructure.
PN443
When there's a problem in the plant, I take it that people became more productive, is that the case?---Yes, yes, that's certainly the case.
PN444
A substantial part of normal operation involves the monitoring of the plant from the control room?---Yes.
PN445
Does that require the operator to have their eyes glued on the controls for the entire shift?---No.
PN446
So they could be productively engaged monitoring while at the same time looking at newspapers?---I'd say a good productive operator would have had less - would have been looking at newspapers and magazines a lot less than less productive ones.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN447
What productive work would a good productive operator have done?---Well, with this distributed process control system that we have, it's a user interface with a number of screens. They could have been stepping through a lot of screens, looking for trends, looking at trends and looking for numbers or conditions that were less than optimal.
PN448
You're referring here to the old water tender operator?---I think that principle still stands. The water tenders and the number 1 drivers had similar equipment and operating systems to review their factory and look for things that were abnormal as the number 1 operators and assistant operators do now.
PN449
Are you saying then that depending upon the diligence or enthusiasm of the operator, some operators would spend more time doing that productive work than others who would just read papers.
PN450
It can be an individual thing?---Yes, yes.
PN451
When you made your own assessment, did you observe any operator for an entire shift or for a substantial part of a shift?---No, not an entire shift. A substantial part of shift, if you said a quarter of a shift or a third of a shift, I've been in operator rooms for extended periods, up to a few hours.
PN452
Would that be on a day to day basis or just from time to time?---No. From time to time. There was something specific that I needed to be looking at.
PN453
Well, you agree then that the figures that you set out in paragraph 8, the utilisation figures are not based on any scientific method of assessment?---No. I have a - I suppose I'm asked to make evaluations along a similar vein even in plant utilisation. I carry numbers around in my head every day. This is not unfamiliar territory to me to give a subjective evaluation on something. Quite often I have to make fairly important decisions based on these evaluations.
PN454
In the monitoring of the plant is sound a significant factor, is that an important factor?---Sound is important in that it has to be abated where possible, designed out in new plant, or personal protective equipment and exposure levels looked at and kept under control otherwise we wind up with industrial deafness.
PN455
Can an experienced operator tell that something is going wrong with the plant just by the sound?---I'd expect there to be a number of senses of an experienced operator that should use.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN456
Which sense would he rely on?---It could be belts burning so you've got smell. It could be a vibration so you've got feeling, sound, could be a different sound. I mean, all these senses comes into play, any good operator in any part of the plant.
PN457
Well, I put it to you that irrespective of what the figure may be as to utilisation, that this was over a long number of years, this was accepted by the management as being part and parcel of the job?---Yes. I - under the structure at the time it was accepted by me that a certain amount of the time was unproductive. I didn't see - I'm finding this hard to put into words - but, yes, I must say that I accepted it and in retrospect I shouldn't have.
PN458
Well, would you agree that during that period of under utilisation it was an inherent part of the old positions and the job descriptions for that matter?---I wouldn't say the job descriptions. I mean, you know, what part of the job description would you say, well, sit down for 40 per cent of your time and read a novel?
PN459
Well, if a job description sets out the task to be performed and you've done them well within the a shift, what else does one do?---Well, one could read technical specifications of the plant they're operating. There are a number of educational packages that we had available that we had told the operators were there if they wanted to look at them.
PN460
You didn't require them to look at them?---No.
PN461
So it was up to the initiative of the operator to do that if they so desired?---Yes.
PN462
Did any of them to your knowledge do that?---I think a couple of them might have looked through some of the materials that related to their stations, some course training materials.
PN463
Now, in paragraph 10 you say that, "Since the restructure staffing levels are now more closely matched to the available work"?---Yes, I wrote that.
PN464
Yes, so you're referring there only to the boiler and crushing stations?---No.
PN465
Or to the entire mill?---No, I'm referring to the part of the factory that was restructured, the crushing and boiler areas.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN466
Did you have any concerns about under utilisation in other parts of the mill?---We had concerns over the years in those areas and they were addressed. The other part of the factory has undergone restructuring over the past couple of decades.
PN467
What about in the past five years?---Not in the past five years to my memory, no.
PN468
So you've had no - or have you had any concern about under utilisation in other areas of the mill over the past five years?---I've had concerns from time to time, yes.
PN469
Have you taken that up with the relevant employees or their union?---Yes. In one station in particular with insisting that the operators read a complex procedure that's used for cleaning and I've also made available materials relating to the - I suppose a low level theory of the parts that they look after.
PN470
When was that approximately, when you insisted that the do that?---This would have been last season and the season before.
PN471
Now, at paragraphs 12 and 15 also, you mention boilers. Could you tell the Commission what the evaporative capacities of the boilers
at Broadwater
are?---The current boilers, I'm not sure what the maximum continuous rating is, so it would be within 5 tonnes, but we have a 70
tonne boiler at about 18 bar pressure and we have a 55 tonne boiler, the newest one, that operates at 45 bar.
PN472
That relates to the pressure, does it?---Yes, that's 45 atmospheres.
PN473
In paragraph 16 you refer to this brief history. What period of time, which years are you referring to there?---I'm referring to the years that I've referred to throughout this but particularly I suppose since 1988. What I've done is, in giving the history, I've given a rough idea of what the plant was under the old - I suppose you'd call it inherited from CSR factory and what's happened at a point where we had to start getting with the times and updating the plant. So I think the key start point of that was 1988 and then - and I've made separate paragraphs for '88, '92 and '95.
PN474
So I take it this paragraph refers to Broadwater only, does it?---This is Broadwater only, but Condong had a similar number of boilers - well, Condong boiler station - paragraph 12 describes the Condong plant as it's operating today, except that some technological advancement would have happened with that old plant whereas we've decided to make it redundant, or we've had the opportunity and the capital to do so.
PN475
You said paragraph 12 relates to Condong today?---No, I said it relates - well, it relates to Broadwater as it was, but it relates reasonably well to Condong as it is today with the exception I suppose of the control system.
PN476
If I can take you back to paragraph 16 again where in the second line you say the supervisory responsibilities of the water tender gradually diminished. Are you suggesting there that the value of the work over all of the water tender decreased over that period, since 1988?---I'd say it's utilisation rate and the number of people that he directed reduced.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN477
Do you think that that reduced the value of his work?---I don't think it reduced the value of his work, but at the same time it was something that we didn't take money off him for looking after less people or looking out for less people or less plant. So, you know, it was a principle that I found difficult to comprehend, why, when you put some extra plant back and start to occupy him again, that he's worth a lot more money.
PN478
Well, do you consider if the work load and responsibilities are reduced, then pay rates should be reduced accordingly?---I suppose that's not my decision to make but as a principle, if you de-skill a job, perhaps it should be less.
PN479
So do you equate de-skilling with decrease in the work load, do you?---No. These people operate, have always operated boilers and heavy sort of machinery that require tickets.
PN480
What about the crushing cage over that period between 1988 to the present, has that altered at Broadwater?---Yes, it has. I couldn't give you an exact quantum.
PN481
Ball park figures?---Ball park figures, I suppose 52, maybe 60 per cent increase in crushing rate.
PN482
Over a period of how many years?---Since 1988, you're looking at, what is it, 17 years.
PN483
With reductions in the number of workers employed to produce that increased tonnage?---That's right, that's right.
PN484
Well, during the period you've been employed at the mill there have been a number of plant upgrades?---Yes.
PN485
From time to time new technology has been introduced?---Yes.
PN486
And from time to time workers have become redundant because of new technology?---We've only undergone a redundancy process just one time at Broadwater. Previous reductions in manning had been managed through attrition.
PN487
From to time the job requirements have changed because of re-organisations and technological change?---Yes.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN488
So that typically there will be a change. On one occasion the company, by redundancies, and otherwise reduction by natural attrition?---Yes.
PN489
And that that change is followed by a period of comparative stability?---Yes, normally you would get a few years' grace before starting to change things around again, yes.
PN490
And there'd be another change down the track and that would be followed by a period of stability and so on, is that the way it goes?---I'd say since - probably since we really started upgrading the mill and especially since 1995 there's been a big investment in Broadwater, since the early '90s, really, and a constant upgrading in one part of the factory or the other. You can say, if you take one station in isolation perhaps that you get a few years' grace or a few years' quiet, followed by another quantum change, but overall we're continuously upgrading the plant to remove bottlenecks and to increase the total capacity of the factory.
PN491
The significant changes occur at a point of time and then, you know, there are redundancies or job reductions and then there's a period
of stability, is
that - - - ?---Yes, that's generally the case.
PN492
And at the time these changes occur, the job requirements of some workers change, but not other?---Yes.
PN493
Is that the sense in which you use the expression "evolutionary change" in paragraph 19?---Yes. The evolutionary change, as you've described it, yes, there are quantum changes. If you look at a micro part of the factory. If you look at an overview, just take a key performance indicator, like crushing rate, generally there'll be a gradual increase, although even that key performance indicator might be a gradual increase accompanied by the odd quantum increase. Overall I'd say the evolutionary change has produced a gradual increase in production.
PN494
In paragraph 20 you talk there about the two week course designed and delivered by Hunter TAFE and you say in the second sentence, "This was done to ease the concerns of the supervisors." What concerns are you referring to there?---Well, the supervisors did not have turbine and steam WorkCover accredited operators' tickets. They had some concerns that they now had the whole factory to look after and needed to be a little more familiar with, or a little bit more familiar with the qualifications and some of the hands on things that the operators did.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN495
So when you say the concerns of the supervisors, operators and assistants, it related solely to that point, did it?---Yes.
PN496
That's what you're talking about?---What I'm talking about is in relation to the crushing, feeding, power and boilers areas in particular. They wanted a bit more in depth knowledge and so we included them in this educational process.
PN497
In 21 you say participation in the course is not mandatory. For whom was it not mandatory?---It was offered to the supervisors and the employees and everyone it was relevant to decided to take up the offer.
PN498
Did anyone who wanted to be a number 1 steam operator or an assistant have the option not to attend that course or not to have the ticket?---Well, the question never arose.
PN499
Down at 25 you say that the job descriptions of the number 1 operator and assistant operators require that both these qualifications be held?---That's right.
PN500
Who requires it, whose requirement is that?---We're getting confused here between a course and a WorkCover ticket. In 21 I'm referring to the course, which isn't an integral or a necessary part. It's a desirable part of a process of education towards a WorkCover ticket. Whereas in 25 I'm saying that I want everyone to hold those WorkCover tickets.
PN501
So you're saying there that it's possible to obtain the WorkCover ticket without attending the course?---My word, yes.
PN502
The - - - ?---And that's the way it was done prior to 2003.
PN503
And 27 I think you say that, in 27 in the last sentence you say, "The ability to obtain these tickets is an essential part of the selection criteria for the number 1 steam operator and the assistant operator positions"?---Yes.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN504
So a person can't be appointed to that position unless they hold the tickets, is that correct?---A person can be appointed to those operator - assistant operator positions provided, we believe, that they have the capacity to be developed to a point where they can qualify for those tickets.
PN505
So ultimately the Co-Op has a requirement if they possess the tickets?---Yes, but not to get in the door to those jobs. We want the people to be capable of achieving those qualifications.
PN506
You mention there, you talk about the assistant positions. What about the operator positions?---The operator position needs them.
PN507
Must have them?---Yes.
PN508
That's a company requirement?---That's our requirement, yes.
PN509
In 25 you say it's not theoretically necessary for either the operators or assistants to have WorkCover tickets if they're under the direct supervision of a ticketed supervisor?---That's correct.
PN510
In practice does that degree of direct supervision occur?---In practice, no, that would be - that would require a supervisor, a ticketed supervisor to be within sight and sound.
PN511
At all times?---At all times, that they were operating anywhere that equipment that required WorkCover qualifications.
PN512
When an employee obtains a relevant WorkCover ticket, do you consider them to be more competent in their work areas?---The tickets - I suppose you'd say for the boiler assistant part of the job, more so than the crushing assistant part of the job. They - to be competent in their work areas they need - fully competent, they need to have those tickets.
PN513
In paragraph 29 you set out your estimation of typical training requirements of operators under the new structure?---That's correct.
PN514
Are you suggesting there that a person could walk in from the street and become a fully trained number 1 operator in six to nine weeks?---You can't read this, I suppose, as a serial - you can't just go through at the top and sort of finish up at the bottom. I don't think that would be realistic. I think at each stage we need to - well, labour it to an assistant operator, and assistant operator cross-training, that's possible in a contiguous nature. I think to make that next step they need experience as well as competence.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN515
So there's some degree of compression there in 29, is there, and you've set out that table?---Well, I've set out what the requirements were to attain each of those steps. I haven't looked at what comes in between them.
PN516
Yes. Would you agree that typically most of the training and learning for all of the classifications in the mill, including the steam operators, takes place on the job?---Yes.
PN517
And typically an operator would develop the relevant skills over a period of years by progressing through the relevant classifications?---The operators would pick up confidence and a lot of plant information by working on the job. As far as the tickets go, it's just straight, you've got them or you haven't, but you - it is desirable to progress via these assistant positions to the number 1 operator position.
PN518
So there's a type of career structure for the - - - ?---Yes.
PN519
For someone who's hired as a steam operator?---Yes, it's a career path. It's a very short one, but it is a career path.
PN520
When you say very short, do you mean in terms of - - - ?---Well, it's not a very steep management hierarchy. You go through assistant operator to operate it. That's what I mean.
PN521
Now, what would typically someone be before they were an assistant
operator?---A labourer.
PN522
On the job learning by the steam operators would be mainly through other qualified operators on the job?---Yes.
PN523
Now, in paragraph 31?---Yes.
PN524
Are you suggesting there that it requires four years' full time training to achieve a trade level qualification?---Trade level qualifications to my knowledge are done by - normally by block release. In some cases they used to be done on a weekly basis, a certain amount of time allocated by the employer each week to have that person off site and attending an educational institution.
PN525
And currently what are the off site training arrangements for the tradespeople, how long would they attend off site courses?---The engineers are in charge of the apprentices but I would think that it would amount to a month of block release per year. I may be out by a couple of weeks there, but one to two months, depending on the nature of the trade and where they are through that trade.
PN526
Would that mean that most trade level training takes place on the job?---A lot of trade level training does take place on the job but to attain a trade qualification you need to study structured modules or be assessed on a number of structured modules totalling a certain number of points to achieve a base level trades qualification.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN527
Yes, but the actual training and doing the tasks, most of that would occur on the job, wouldn't it?---I'd say to achieve a trade a lot of the knowledge that the apprentices pick up in the sugar mills wouldn't be necessary. I mean, for example you can train an apprentice electrician in a sugar mill. He'll come out with a whole swag of skills, the ability to program PLCs, deal with massive great motors, pull wires, do all sorts of things. Whereas a person wiring up houses would have an apprentice for four years and all he ever does is pull wires through and connects them up to switches. He still winds up with the same apprenticeship - the same trade qualification.
PN528
But are you suggesting there that your apprentices have to learn things that they don't necessarily use in the sugar mills?---No. I'm saying that they would learn more, they would learn skills beyond the trade training.
PN529
The block release is for, say, one month or two months, whatever it is,
per year?---Mm.
PN530
What are they doing for the other nine or 10 months when they're with
you?---Well, they're - - -
PN531
What are they doing on the job?---Well, they're doing productive work most of the time, under the loose supervision of other qualified tradespeople.
PN532
Is that how they develop their trade skills?---Yes.
PN533
Would you be aware that under the system of competency based training an apprentice can now become fully qualified in a shorter period
than four
years?---I'm not aware of that.
PN534
Now, the wage relativity of the assistant operator to the number 1 steam operator is currently 95 per cent. In the Co-Op's view,
is that the appropriate relativity, having regard to the current job requirements of the operator and the
assistant?---That's not my decision to make. That decision was made by corporate management when they set the wage rates for the
new positions that were created.
PN535
Well, in your view is that an appropriate relativity between the number 1 steam operator and the assistant?---I believe the assistant should probably earning less.
PN536
Or the number 1 should be earning more?---Maybe we should all be earning more, but - - -
PN537
It follows that - - - ?---I think that the margin between them is - indicates to me that the assistant got a pretty good rise, possibly more than was justified.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN538
So in your view it should be a greater gap than five per cent between the assistant and the number 1 operator?---I think it's - yes, okay. I'll concede to that.
PN539
You're not prepared to put a figure on it?---No.
PN540
In paragraph 36 you say you had - - -
PN541
THE COMMISSIONER: Just on that point, Mr Somerville, why do you consider that the assistant should be earning less?---I've said at one point in my statement, Commissioner, that after speaking to Mr Baxter, and this is - I don't know the outcome of your deliberations, but what Mr Bodkin said was hearsay, if I’m allowed to refer to that.
PN542
Yes, you are?---Okay. Mr Baxter indicated to me that the job that he was doing with the exception of when he relieved the number 1 operator was more like the old mill bed attendant which was the lowest on the totem pole as far as operators were, that those duties were more similar to the mill bed attendant's position than they were to the number 1 drivers, the old number 1 drivers' pay rate, which they wound up getting, and so based on that and my own observations and in the case of the assistant boiler operator the job, I don't believe, changed substantially from the old assistant water tender and there were a few changes here and there and he looked after some sampling and a little bit of analysis that he didn't before and an asphalter, I think, we gave that to the boiler assistant, rather than the number 2 driver used to look after that, but in general I don't think that the assistant water tender duties were substantially different from the new assistant number 1 operator boiler duties. So based on that I'd say the pay rise that we offered them and the new structure was very generous to the assistants.
PN543
MR BODKIN: Mr Somerville, in paragraph 36 you say you had a conversation with David Baxter, was that a one on one conversation?---Yes. Yes, it was.
PN544
Where is Mr Baxter currently employed?---I'm not sure of the company but he's up in the Gulf. He left the employment of our company.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN545
When?---End of 2003, somewhere round about then.
PN546
The end of 2003?---I think - I'm not exactly sure. It was around then some time.
PN547
Would this be a convenient time?
PN548
THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, certainly.
<LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT [12.48PM]
<RESUMED [2.09PM]
PN549
MR BODKIN: Mr Somerville, in paragraph 38 you deal with boiler samples and in 38 you say that the level of skill required for analysis of boiler water is no higher than that required by a home pool operator testing water. Do you have a backyard pool?---Yes, I do.
PN550
Do you know what a home pool owner tests for?---Alkalinity, Ph, chlorine, they'd be the three main ones.
PN551
How frequently would you test?---Weekly, fortnightly, in the swimming season.
PN552
Now, do the sugar mills have a set procedure for water analysis?---The procedures are written down and I have included one as an attachment to my statement.
PN553
Do you know of any backyard pool where the householder follows a similar testing regime to that?---If you take - well, just pick the middle one, OH alkalinity, you're being asked to measure 40 mls. A backyard pool owner would fill up in a little test kit to the mark, add eight drops of re-agent PA1 and swirl and look for a red/pink colour. Again, a backyard pool owner, say, in testing for alkalinity would add an indicator, that might give a blue colour. Step 3 we're adding barium chloride, 20 drops again to the citration jar and swirling to mix. A backyard pool owner might add a drop or two of a chlorine inhibitor in a similar test to this and holding a dropper bottle exactly upside down, add a re-agent one drop at a time, mixing between each addition, count how many drops. So the backyard pool owner would add, drop-wise, one of the re-agents out of the bottle counting the drops and then - until the colour disappeared. Then they would look up a chart that would give them an equivalent reading in alkalinity.
PN554
When you say they, who are you referring to?---The backyard pool owner. So that step, that procedure I've just taken you through is very, very similar to what a pool owner would use in testing an alkalinity level.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN555
How important is boiler water quality to the operations of the sugar mill?---Very important. The plant must be - well, boiler water has to be quite pure and has to have impurities within certain limits and it also has to have treatment to prevent corrosion.
PN556
What would be the consequences for the plant if contaminants were to enter the system?---The consequences could be quite severe. There could be plant damage, tubes could - depending on how bad the contamination was, tubes could pit and corrode. If there was a massive dose of contamination, very quickly the boiler could froth and that would introduce foam into the steam which would damage equipment down the line that depended on steam as its driving force, such as turbines.
PN557
So there is fairly heavy responsibility on the boiler assistant to assure that that does not happen?---There's a responsibility under his steam operator's ticket to ensure that boiler water is within the parameters that it's supposed to be. Ultimately the responsibility of the results, of it being within the correct parameters, is that of the supervisor. He'll be advised by the assistant operator and by the operator as to whether things are outside set limits.
PN558
Yes, but the assistant who does the analysis in first instance, would he have a chart which shows you what those parameters are?---Yes, he has a pro forma that he writes his results in to and there are ranges out to the side that the result must lie between, otherwise he's instructed to highlight the out of range condition and to advise the supervisor.
PN559
In paragraph 39 in the second line there you refer to normal duties. What do you mean by normal duties there?---That would be routine operations for just the day to day or shift to shift duties that are outlined in the position description.
PN560
Do you have in mind there that there could be other duties outside of those where there would be a change in skill and responsibility?---I don't think - no. The skill and responsibility that was required by the engine drivers which were the precursor to this position wouldn't have - there wouldn't be any additional skills to those under this new position.
PN561
When you say that the net result is no change in skill or responsibility, do you mean that some duties were taken away from the assistant and others added so that the net result is no change, is that - would you say - - - ?---I suppose the way I've looked at it is more or less of the same level of responsibilities of, let's just say, tasks and duties. They fit in the same scope of responsibility level, whether there are more things that he does or less things that he does, I think is just a matter of the productivity of the person in that position.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN562
In this paragraph, in 39, are you suggesting that those duties would equate with the duties of the mill bed attendant and the number 2 engine driver?---The duties of the old mill bed attendant were mainly keeping the mills clean, keeping the samples going or being taken on a regular rostered basis and the number 2 engine driver was required to monitor the engines, bearing temperatures, oil levels and a number of other things. So when you combine those two positions the new crushing system position is consistent with a combination of those two positions with select jobs out of them.
PN563
You're not suggesting are you that without the necessary training and qualifications a mill bed attendant could simply walk in and take over a number 2 driver's position, are you?---Under the old structure, no, no. The old structure, the progression from mill bed attendant to number 2 driver would have been similar now to the progression from labourer to crushing assistant, crushing boiler assistant.
PN564
In paragraph 39 are you suggesting that if a crushing assistant, in addition to his own skills and responsibilities, takes over the skills and responsibilities of other classifications, then the net result is no change in his level of skill?---Yes, that's what I'm suggesting. In this case, I think - in this case, that is what I'm suggesting, that that person has not taken on any additional skills and responsibilities that are relevant to a wage case such as this warranting an increase.
PN565
So you don't accept that units of skill should be aggregated rather than
absorbed?---No. What I'm suggesting is that there are certain skills and there are a number of tasks that would fit into that skill
classification. So whether you do more or less of the tasks, you may need no more skill to do an extra couple of tasks than you
did before.
PN566
Even though you may not have done those tasks before?---Yes.
PN567
Could I take you to paragraph 40. When did you and senior site technical staff conduct the skills analysis mentioned in 40?---This was in response to the CFMEUs submission by Messrs Mulcahy, Faulkes and Ellis.
PN568
So this was after you had read the ..... statements?---Yes.
PN569
You then set out to conduct that analysis at that time?---That's correct.
PN570
Did you consult any of the workers who were the subject of your skills analysis when you were doing that?---No, I didn't because they were undertaking a wage claim through the CFMEU.
PN571
So it didn't occur to you that, you know, in doing some sort of a skills analysis you might seek to verify your ideas with the operators themselves?---I verified the ideas with the other technical staff.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN572
But the workers themselves knew nothing about it at the time?---No.
PN573
Now, with the restructure, numbers of workers have been made redundant and others have taken voluntary redundancy?---That's correct.
PN574
And have some applied unsuccessfully for operator positions and missed
out?---Yes, there was that. Some of the people who were previously not permanent employees, they were fixed term people, applied.
There were more applicants than there were positions and some missed out.
PN575
When you say, you mentioned fixed term employees, what do you mean by
that?---Under the old structure where there were more people there was a three shift roster and a four shift roster for a crushing
season. The three shift roster was the number of people you would require to operate the factory for a crushing season using only
three shifts of employees and restricted hours of crushing. The four shift roster was a continuous 24 hour a day, seven day a week
roster, you know, where there were 21 shifts to roster, and what that did is bought in a number of people who were classified as
four shift employees. Over time, because of the development of skills in various positions in the factory, the four shift roster
was, I guess you would call them the junior employees, the ones that were last in the gate. Whether they were actually working in
a position that operated - that didn't operate a position on shift or not was immaterial. It was just a matter of last on, first
off principle. So that's what I call the four shift people, or the fixed term people. So at the end of the crushing season these
people would be finished up and they'd be bought back if and when work became available for them, either slack season work or most
would start just prior to the subsequent crushing season.
PN576
Did any of the senior people as distinct from the junior people, the senior people apply and miss out?---I can't remember - - -
PN577
MS FLYNN: I don't see the relevance of these questions.
PN578
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, Mr Somerville, I'll allow you to answer this question?---I can't remember any of the senior people missing out at the time. One chose not to become an operator under the new structure and he was accommodated as a day work labourer at a higher rate than labourer.
PN579
MR BODKIN: When one looks at the old job descriptions and the new job descriptions, so the old job descriptions for the water tender and the new job descriptions for the steam operator, would you agree that the number 1 operator is now required to have various language, mathematical reasoning and other skills and abilities which were not specifically required in the old water tender position?---The skill set that he needs now to do the job is similar to the skills set that he needed previously to do the job. He had to understand written instructions. He had to interpret numerical data. He had to interpret graphical data from an operator interface and he had to understand his plant in his area that he was operating. It's I think more of the same now.
PN580
But when you look at the old job description and the new one, would you not agree that there are significant differences?---There's a significant difference in the amount of plant that's under his control, under the number 1 operator's control, compared to, say, a water tender, because he is now controlling, monitoring and controlling operations of a feeding and crushing station that he didn't previously, under the old structure.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN581
Do you say that that's all the differences, that's the only significant
difference?---Yes. It's the amount of plant and a number of screens which are set up in a similar fashion to what he was already
looking at.
PN582
Would you agree that your selection criteria for employees who apply for the new positions has become more discerning than it was than for the old water tender position?---Yes, I'll agree with that.
PN583
More comprehensive?---It's become necessarily more comprehensive because of a number of disputes that we've had in the area and we've had to tighten up our procedures and defend them more often.
PN584
What type of procedures?---The CFMEU have bought a number of disputes in front of the Commission on this very subject.
PN585
What's the nature of those disputes?---The nature of those disputes is disagreeing with the person that was selected for the position.
PN586
In paragraph 41 - well, before we go on to that. Prior to the restructure were the water tenders paid a lower rate during the slack season?---They were paid, to the best of my knowledge, a labourer rate plus 10 per cent.
PN587
Which was lower than the water tender rate?---Yes.
PN588
That was just during the slack season?---Just during the slack.
PN589
In other words the water tender was paid the enterprise rate for a water tender only during the crushing season?---That's correct, yes.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN590
What about the assistants?---The assistants picked up a percentage as well. I'm not sure what, but they were paid at a different rate in the slack as opposed to when they did their operator duties in the crush.
PN591
Was that the situation at all mills or just - - - ?---That was the situation at all of the mills except Harwood which needed those people to operate 12 months of the year, some of them.
PN592
What's the position now in relation to the number 1 operators and assistants, are they paid the number 1 operator rate for the entire year or just for the crushing season?---Just for the crushing season.
PN593
That's not the situation at Harwood, I take it?---No.
PN594
But it is at Broadwater and Condong?---Broadwater and Condong.
PN595
They revert to a different rate during the slack season?---That's correct.
PN596
What date is that?---It is labourer plus 10 per cent.
PN597
In paragraph 41 you say that the only justification for a wage increase is the need to hold two WorkCover certificates?---No. I'm saying that there's little justification in claiming increases on the bases of skill responsibility, knowledge and conditions. I'm saying there is a change that two WorkCover certificates now need to be held instead of one.
PN598
Now, the amount of $20 which was the differential between the water tender and the number 1 operator back in 2003, the $20 increase in the agreed outcomes document, that figure of $20?---The $20, I don't know if the $20 was based on - water tenders, number 1 steam - water tender to number 1 steam operator, yes, I have that in my next paragraph, in paragraph 46 over the page as a demonstration of the percentage increase that was achieved.
PN599
The amount of $20 itself, do you know where it came from?---It came from the differential between those two rates.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN600
So it was not calculated by reference to any relativity with other
classifications?---No. The actual granting of the increase or the formulation of that increase by the corporate managers would
have looked at a number of other issues, including relativities to other classifications of employees.
PN601
So it was not calculated by reference to skill level classification in the Metal Award?---No, the corporate managers used existing pay rates to base those increases on, not by calculations and they looked at the rates for tradesmen at the time and looked at the increase and how appropriate that was in terms of relativities between tradespeople and other factory operators and even supervisor pay rates, just to make sure that the pay increases wouldn't put things out of whack or cause upward pressure in pay claims from other classifications.
PN602
So that was a big factor in possible flow on implications for other
classifications?---Flow on, yes, implications are always something that you need to be very careful about. The leap-frogging effect
can happen if one classification gets too far out of kilter with the others.
PN603
Nevertheless management obviously considered that the new position was worth more money than the old position?---Yes, and you can see an offer of $20.
PN604
So an offer of $20 was made?---That's right.
PN605
Which was not necessarily going to be the final increase?---No, that was subject to a review under the agreed outcomes with the CFMEU who negotiated on behalf of these operators. That would take place after a 12 week trial period of the new structure.
PN606
Yes, and do you have that agreed outcomes document in front of you?---Yes, I do.
PN607
Attachment C. You see the bottom dot point on the first page where it says, "The Co-Operative offer an interim rate for the assistant boiler and assistant crush." What do you understand the term interim to mean?---In between times.
PN608
When the amount of $20 was offered back in February 2003 did management or yourself expect that the CFMEU would seek a higher amount in that 20?---We had no idea. That was why that clause was written into the agreed outcomes document, why it was discussed at those meetings.
PN609
In paragraph 45 you say that the $20 was based on an analysis of the expected changes in duties and responsibilities?---Yes. The job descriptions at that stage had been formulated only in theory. There may have been changes that needed to happen to make them 100 per cent relevant. There may have been things missed out.
PN610
Yes, and that was in February 2003?---That's right.
PN611
So when you say expected changes, do you mean changes which management thought were likely to happen or were certain to happen?---In high probability, likely to happen.
PN612
And I think you've just said that at that point in time, had the job descriptions for the new classifications been finalised?---They'd been developed and they were under discussion with the various parties, the CFMEU, the operators and the managers who were developing it at the time.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN613
So they still weren't finalised, is that the case?---I'm not exactly sure when they were accepted but I believe - and all this took place while I was on leave - that the job descriptions were accepted at this meeting at 14 February.
PN614
I put this to you, that your use of the term expected changes indicates that in February 2003 management was not absolutely sure of the full extent of the changes in duties and responsibilities?---No, that will only come with time and practice. This was a theoretical exercise that was to be implemented the following season.
PN615
So the amount of $20 was put on the table without management knowing for sure the full extent of the changes that were to occur?---Management were reasonably certain that the changes were as specified in the documents. There haven't been or there wasn't expected to be any major surprises. These job descriptions, by the way, had been developed with the people who would have to work in these new jobs, so they were developed in consultation with the operators, the existing operators and who would become the new operators.
PN616
But as you say, they hadn't been actually implemented?---They hadn't been implemented, no.
PN617
Had they been trialled?---Well, they couldn't be until the following season because we finished operations in December 2002 and we started operations in June 2003 and in between times we had this restructure and this set of negotiations between the operators and the company to try and come up with some workable plan which included job descriptions and trial periods and all of the other stuff in that agreed outcomes document.
PN618
Do you think it's right that there should be close consultation between the management and the operators concerned as to their duties
and
responsibilities?---Yes, I do and I think that it was undertaken.
PN619
Could I take you to paragraph 46 now. In 46 are you suggesting there is a connection between the three and a half per cent annual EBA increments and the percentage increase which the $20 rise happened to represent?---No. The intention of that paragraph was to demonstrate that the pay rises that were offered were of a similar order to a pay rise that people expect under EBA negotiations each year.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN620
What sort of figure do they expect from EBA negotiations?---Well, the last three year enterprise agreement built in a three and a half per cent per annum increase and the previous two year agreement also built in a three and a half per cent increase per year.
PN621
You said earlier that you were part of the company's negotiating team?---At the time I was, yes.
PN622
For the last EBA?---Yes.
PN623
And previous EBAs?---One previous EBA.
PN624
Well, that general three and a half per cent EBA increase in the current agreement, what's that for, what does that represent?---It represents a pay rise for people that will - that hopefully keeps them at a similar level of income to what they were previously given movements in consumer purchasing power and other movements in community expectations. Basically it's keeping a similar pay rate going, just accounting for time and inflation, that sort of thing.
PN625
Is it a kind of cost of living adjustment?---It's more than a cost of living adjustment. It's a negotiated agreement. It's - the history of it is that it's worked out to be better by - I'm not sure exactly what amount, but say, between zero and one per cent per year or maybe zero to one and a half per cent over the cost of living, the cost of living - yes, to people's cost of living in the past few years has probably been round one per cent less than the EBA rise.
PN626
And everyone under the EBA gets that rise?---Yes, everyone who's working under the awards.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN627
Regardless of whether their work changes or not during that period?---That's right.
PN628
Could I take you to paragraph 48 and if you could just read that to yourself for the moment?---Okay, I've finished that.
PN629
Now, in 48 you say that the AWUs claim for fugal operators, is that the right pronunciation?---That's right.
PN630
Fugal operations concerned an insignificant change and it was resolved without any wage increase being granted?---That's right.
PN631
Did the AWU claim in that case arise from the 2003 restructure?---Can you just repeat the last part of your question?
PN632
Did that claim of the AWU about fugal operators arise from the restructuring in 2003?---No. No, this is something that was entirely separate to the restructure to the steam and crushing parts of the factory. The fugal section of any factory is in the process area which is - the steam and crushing people virtually make the juice and then pass it on. The fugal section is at the end of that juice processing section.
PN633
And this particular claim of the AWU, what year did that arise, in 2002?---2002.
PN634
So that would have been prior to the announcement of the steam operators restructuring?---Yes.
PN635
Was the AWUs claim in that case resolved through negotiation, conciliation or arbitration?---It was resolved through arbitration, yes, through the Commission.
PN636
Was there a decision given by the Commission?---The decision given by the Commission was that it didn't warrant an increase.
PN637
Was that published, or was it just - do you know?---It would have been published by the Commission.
PN638
On a work value basis does management consider the changes for steam operators to be as insignificant as the changes for fugal operators?---It's - when I say more of the same, I mean this is what the fugal operators were basing their case on. It's a similar operating principle. They previously operated fugals in this geographical location and that geographical location was operated by someone else. They were - they were given the additional two machines to look after and said, well, it's more responsibility and it's more this and more that, there are more fugals, it makes my job harder, I want more money and we offered them, I think, an amount of $10 a week. They said that's not enough. So they went through the Commission to try and get more, so.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN639
Did you pay that $10?---We paid the $10 until such time as it went to the Commission and that was withdrawn pending the outcome of the Commission hearing and the Commission didn't warrant an increase.
PN640
So they never got the $10 after that?---Not after that, no.
PN641
Which member of the Commission was that before?---I believe it was Commissioner Spencer.
PN642
In paragraph 48 again you say that in your opinion 5751 of 2002 relates to much of the CFMEUs present wage claim as it was more of the same and was an insignificant change not warranting a wage increase. So you're talking there about an insignificant change for the fugal operators?---No. I'm saying that there are parallels between that case and what's currently in front of the Commission.
PN643
Yes, but it can't be exactly the same, can it, because you offered the CFMEU a $20 increase?---Well, that - and it's not the same plant and equipment either, but I am saying that the principle is that simply the fact that you're looking after more bits and pieces and using the same skill set, doesn't warrant - doesn’t of itself warrant a pay increase.
PN644
Now in 48 you refer to other top level operators, that's the expression used, such as the sugar boiler?---That's right.
PN645
The number 1 steam operator currently receives a higher rate than the sugar boiler, doesn't he?---Yes, he does.
PN646
It's $18.61 versus $17.94 an hour in favour of the number 1 operator?---That sounds about right.
PN647
That's 67 cents an hour difference or about three and a half per cent in favour of the steam operator, would you accept that?---If you say so, yes, that sounds about right.
PN648
Do you consider that on the basis of skills and responsibilities that the three and a half per cent differential between a sugar boiler and a number 1 steam operator is fair and reasonable?---I think that's - yes, I think it's fair and reasonable.
PN649
Therefore would you agree that the number 1 operator is more highly skilled than a sugar boiler?---On that basis, yes.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN650
To the extent of about three and a half per cent?---Yes.
PN651
Now, in 49 you state that it's common for qualified tradespersons to seek employment as operators?---That's correct.
PN652
Steam operators?---Well, operators in general around the factory.
PN653
When you say that, that it's common for qualified tradesmen to seek employment as operators, are you referring to outside applicants or to your existing trades employees?---No, I'm suggesting that people come in from outside and look for employment as operators in preference to perhaps working as temporary tradespeople or even going for a permanent trades position.
PN654
Are there many tradespeople seeking employment in the mills at the
present?---We have a number. We have a number who have started this year. A small engine mechanic, we have - we've got motor mechanic.
There's another fellow that's been a metal fabrication tradesperson. I've mentioned a couple in here - three, to be specific, in
paragraph 49. All of these people prefer to work as operators for whatever their reasons are, but I daresay that if there was more
money on offer in their trades that they'd be looking at trying to pick up trades work and as positions have become vacant for trades
positions in the factory. People who are trades qualified in that area and who are working as operators, generally haven't applied
for those positions. They're happy where they are.
PN655
Do they give you reasons for seeking employment as operators rather than as tradespersons?---Well, at the moment there are no permanent trades positions on offer. But most people would say that with shift allowances and pay rates and overtime that the payment for being an operator or remuneration from being an operator can be considerably higher than if they were a tradesman working, say, a 40 hour or even a 40, 44 hour week.
PN656
Don't your tradesmen work shifts?---Our tradesmen don't work shifts. They're all day work and they do some rostered overtime on weekends because the factory operates on the weekends, we need a running crew to keep the bits and pieces turning.
PN657
So are you saying that a big attraction for them would be the shift penalties that are paid to the operators in addition to the base rates?---That's correct, yes. That seems to be attractive to them.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN658
Is the amount of overtime basically the same between the two groups?---No, because shift operators need cover. If one shift operator gets sick or assistant operator gets sick, he's covered by his contemporaries who are working shifts either side, or maybe someone on their days off. In general that's all double time when you're working on shift. Overtime shift people is double time. Trade workers pick up time and a half for the first three hours. There are a number of areas where being a shift worker gives a considerable advantage in earning capacity.
PN659
Do you say that you have no trouble getting tradespeople to come and work in the mills?---Well, no, we don't seem to and we're attracting from time to time now, I mentioned before, we've got at least two tradespeople and I think it's three that have started this year that have gone into labouring and operator positions.
PN660
Is this supply of tradespeople, are you referring just to Broadwater now, or is that the situation across all three mills?---I don't know what is happening at the other mills. I know that one person from Harwood has come and joined us and he's trades qualified as an operator. I imagine that a similar thing is happening at Condong and Harwood.
PN661
Do you consider persons with a trades background to be desirable applicants for the position of number 1 steam operator?---I would consider them to be better with relation to certain selection criteria than non trades qualified people, but I do look at an overview of a fit for the entire range of the selection criteria before I make my decision.
PN662
Which of the selection criteria for the steam operators would the tradespersons in particular fit in with?---In general they've got a better level of education than the people who come into operator positions through labourer ranks, having had post high school education, mechanical aptitude would generally be better, mathematical skills would generally be better and dealing with technology, I think more - easier, if you like. They would be less daunted by technology.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN663
So you wouldn't just overlook any applicant for an operator's position simply on the grounds that they were a tradesperson?---No, and neither would I discriminate the other way. I don't want a factory full of tradespeople as operators either.
PN664
Would you overlook them on the grounds that they were applying for a position for which they were demonstrably over qualified?---I'd have to think about how they would fit in to the culture and to the life - to the shift sort of lifestyle in making that decision. Like, what are you talking about? Someone coming to me as a fully blown engineer or someone like a labourer?
PN665
No, someone coming to you, say, as a qualified boilermaker or fitter, would you consider them to be over qualified for the position of steam operator?---No, I wouldn't.
PN666
As a steam operator they wouldn't be required to do maintenance work as such, would they, but the tradespeople normally do?---The tradespeople would normally just be expected during the season to work at their operator position. In the slack season we would expect them, if we needed people with those trades skills, to undertake duties that they were suitably qualified to do. So if a boilermaker worked as a number 1 steam operator, in the slack season we had a lot of boiler making work on, that is where we would direct them to work.
PN667
Would you agree that part of the attraction for the company in employing people with a trades background in these steam operator positions or training them into those positions is that you're looking for people with the aptitude and ability to occupy the steam operator positions?---I wouldn't say that I would bias towards someone for those positions just because they're a tradesperson. Some of the best people I've ever seen in those positions are not tradespeople - well, most of the people that I've seen in those positions that are best suited to them, but I wouldn't discriminate against a tradesman or I wouldn't give him an unfair advantage because he was a tradesman. It would be, in my estimation, the best fit.
PN668
In paragraph 50, if you might just read that to yourself for a moment?---Okay, I've read that.
PN669
In that paragraph are you suggesting there is a shortage of applicants for other operating positions within the mill?---Yes, I am suggesting that.
PN670
Which other positions are you referring to?---I'm referring to process operator positions.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN671
That's the AWU positions?---Well, I don't care what union they're in, but that's specifically at Broadwater the fugal operator, the evaporator attendant - - -
PN672
THE COMMISSIONER: How does that assist me, Mr Bodkin, in this matter?
PN673
THE WITNESS: And the triple boiler.
PN674
MR BODKIN: Well, the evidence is that there's a - in 50, is that it's become increasingly difficult to attract applicants into those other operator positions and he's relating this back to the wage claim of the CFMEU, which is considered to be relevant to explore that view.
PN675
When you say shortage of applicants, do you mean shortage of suitable applicants or any applicants?---Any applicants. I'm saying people are attracted by the pay rates that already exist in the steam and crushing operator and assistant operator positions.
PN676
Have you advertised many of these other positions internally or externally since June 2003?---Yes, quite a few.
PN677
How many, do you know how many you've been unable to fill?---I'm not - I've never been in a situation where I'm unable to fill one, but I don't attract the same number of applicants and because of that, the pool is shallower and I don't get the same quality of applicants overall that I do for the steam and crushing positions.
PN678
Now, in paragraph 50, there again you refer to what you call a leap-frog effect. What do you mean by leap-frog effect?---Well, I'm saying that in your submission to the Commission there is a substantial pay rise that requested that could take the earning capacity of the people in the steam and crushing areas to beyond where they are now and I'm saying that will increase the relativity or the difference between them and, say, process operators. It may even take them beyond trades pay rates. I'm saying everyone will want to play catch up because they'll look at these positions and say, is he so much better than me? I've been to trades school for four years, I've got 10 years' experience under the belt, I know every nut and bolt in the place, or another fellow who's an operator on the process side, may say, well, I've learnt something, I've learnt myself a job here that used to be the highest paying job in the factory. Take the sugar boiler, for example. That used to be the highest paying job in the sugar mill, and if he falls further behind, again, it'll increase pressure on wages. They'll want to retain the relativities and the status and importance of those positions.
PN679
Have they said that to you, has any of those people said that to you?---No, no one's said that to me directly. It's just something that I feel would be a risk if this wage - if the request of wage rate is granted.
PN680
So that's what you mean by leap-frog effect, is it, that there'll be claims for catch up for restoration?---Exactly, yes. So someone will - well, for example, if - and take the tradespeople particularly, if the rate for a number 1 operator became more than the rate for a tradesman, well, the tradesman would want to leap-frog over the number 1 operator rate to maintain his status and earning capacity in front of the number 1 operator.
PN681
Has any tradesman said that to you?---No, and I don't believe they need to. I think this is - Blind Freddie could see that this is going to happen. That's just my opinion and - this is an opinion.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN682
Having regard to the no extra claims provisions of the certified agreement, how could such a restoration of old relativities be achieved?---Through the next EBA negotiation.
PN683
Don't you anticipate that at the next EBA negotiation that various people will be making claims?---Well, I do expect that there'll be various logs of claims put on to the Co-Operative, but I would say that if this goes through, that process will be attracting a lot more claims than it would have otherwise.
PN684
There is a procedure for a negotiation of EBAs that will be followed?---There's a - I guess you'd call it a past history of the way that negotiations have happened, that is changing each time, and each time an agreement is signed, but there's an expectation on my part that claims would escalate.
PN685
Does the AMWU currently have a claim in relation to the implementation of competency standards at New South Wales Sugar?---The AMWU are working with the Co-Operative through this classifications structure.
PN686
And does that have the potential for re-classifications of tradespersons?---It does have that potential.
PN687
Does it also have the potential to alter existing relativities and wage rates for tradespersons?---Between tradespersons and others?
PN688
Yes?---Yes, you would have to say it had that potential.
PN689
And between one group of tradespersons and other groups of
tradespersons?---Yes.
PN690
But you don't say that the AMWU can't have that claim dealt with because of a possibility of a leap-frog effect, or flow on effect,
you don't say that, do
you?---No, we're not saying that.
PN691
Would you accept that if genuine work value changes occur for one classification but not for others, it's proper for the relativity of that particular classification to alter?---Yes.
PN692
MS FLYNN: Can I just have that question clarified. Who are we talking about in relation to the competency standard in relation to the positions the subject of this claim.
PN693
MR BODKIN: I'm not sure what my friend is getting at.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN694
THE COMMISSIONER: I think it's just a clarification in terms of the increases resulting, was it, to the people - or to the classification for the subject of this claim or the trades classifications in terms of result in increases from the competency standards process? Whose classifications rates would the pressure be put on?
PN695
MR BODKIN: Okay, now if the - - -
PN696
THE COMMISSIONER: I'm asking you to clarify it.
PN697
MR BODKIN: You're asking me.
PN698
THE COMMISSIONER: Well, are you going to clarify that in the question to Mr Somerville?
PN699
MR BODKIN: Well, I'm asking it of the witness. I - - -
PN700
THE COMMISSIONER: All right.
PN701
MR BODKIN: We're talking about or I was asking you about the - - -
PN702
THE COMMISSIONER: I'm not confining you from asking that question, you understand, yes.
PN703
MS FLYNN: We just need to know what categories of people you're talking about.
PN704
MR BODKIN: Well, when we talk about tradespersons, I'm referring here to metal trades in particular, is that - are they the - the implementation of competency standards and the negotiations you're having with the AMWU relate to metal trades persons only?---Yes.
PN705
Are you speaking with any other organisation representative tradespersons?---No.
PN706
So this is purely the implementation competency standards, purely relates to the metal trades, AMWU type work?---That's it.
PN707
MS FLYNN: Yes, that was what my question went to.
PN708
MR BODKIN: So would you accept that if a genuine work value change occurs for steam operator but not for a, for example, fugal operator, then it's proper for the relativity of the steam operators to change?---Yes, I accept that.
PN709
And would you accept that if there was a genuine work value change for a steam operator but not for a tradesperson, then it would be proper for the relativity to change in that circumstance?---Yes, provided it fitted all the guidelines.
PN710
Have there been any claims by the other unions for a flow on of the $20 already granted to the steam operators?---No.
PN711
Do you recall a decision of Commissioner Lawson in 2000 in which he granted pay parity between the assistant water tender and the number 1 driver at Harwood?---I don't recall that.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN712
Could I take you to paragraph 59. In 59 did you understand David Ellis to say that he is the only person operating the two boilers?---I read his statement and my interpretation of that statement as written was that he was wholly and solely operating the two boilers. I think it was just an unfortunate choice of words on David's part, but I felt that in rebuttal I needed to put the facts straight.
PN713
Would you accept that he was saying that prior to the restructure his work was wholly and solely connected with operating the two boilers, not that he was unsupervised and unassisted?---Yes.
PN714
That's another way you can look at it?---Another way you could look at the wording would be that, yes, he was involved with operating boilers, not crushing plant.
PN715
And that later way would be the correct - - -
PN716
MS FLYNN: I object to this. Are we trying to reconstruct David Ellis' statement through this witness?
PN717
THE COMMISSIONER: No, I think in fairness it is simply a clarification of this witness, his interpretation.
PN718
MR BODKIN: Would you accept that that latter situation was the
correct - - - ?---I'd accept that as a reasonable interpretation.
PN719
In paragraph - are you finished there?---Yes, yes.
PN720
In paragraph 61, would you just have a look at that and I take you to line 7.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN721
THE COMMISSIONER: You'll let me know, Mr Somerville, if you require a break, won't you?
PN722
MR BODKIN: In line 7 you say, "Competence is achieved after suitable training has been delivered and sufficient experience has been gained under full or part cover to perform the job alone"?---That's correct.
PN723
Would you agree that what constitutes sufficient experience varies between individuals?---Well, yes, and I've said that during my statement, that a number of people will be ready sooner than the average or later than the average and that in the estimation of the supervisors, the head operators and the managers, as to when, say, full time overtime cover will finish for someone being developed in a role.
PN724
The reasons why - would you accept that the reasons why it varies would include matters of aptitude?---Yes.
PN725
Intelligence?---Yes.
PN726
Previous experience in a related position?---Yes, all of those things.
PN727
The amount of training provided?---Yes, yes.
PN728
Can you think of any other reasons that might bear on it?---I'd say the size of a person's ego. A number of people are very nervous-Nellie types.
PN729
I think you said, you agreed earlier that you've never done actually, on a regular basis, any hands on operating work, is that correct?---No, that's correct.
PN730
Are you suggesting that in 61 that a person experienced in operating work would be unable to tell the difference between competence and comfort when performing new duties?---I'm suggesting there's a big gap between the two, that anyone who takes on any new role, depending on those factors that we discussed before, may take months or even years to be totally comfortable in the new position. Everyone is going to be challenged to a different extent by something new or by change. But the fact remains that once they are deemed to be competent, and I suppose I can relate this to driving, having trained a daughter and a son. One thought that he was ready to drive in the Grand Prix - I'll be very good with my daughter, but one of them thought that he was ready to drive in the Grand Prix after the first two lessons, where the other really leaned on having dad or having someone there for quite some time before she felt comfortable. Of the two I know which one I'd rather drive with.
PN731
There'll be a transcript on this?---The one who was slower to become comfortable. It's just a matter of degree. It's a matter of mindset.
PN732
But that example you gave is hardly comparable to the situation of an experienced - an operator of years of experience - - - ?---I don't now so much.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN733
You don't know so much?---You get a ticket to operate a vehicle, you have to qualify for an approved ticket and you go through an assessment. Some people are useless 30 years after they qualify. You know, it's all a matter - but society judges them competent to use the road.
PN734
Well, would you insist on telling an operator he's fully competent to do a particular task when that operator says he's not?---From time to time I may push a little. I would never withdraw the support from someone completely if they felt so unready as to be incompetent to do the job alone. I do believe that there comes a point where everyone will feel challenged, but ready to take it on solely, and that is the point that I would consider them to be competent, but they will still be learning many, many months and years later, bits and pieces of the job.
PN735
Yes. Now in paragraph 67 in relation to Matt Faulkes, you say there that the only change of any relevance is the need for the crushing assistant to hold relevant WorkCover tickets to enable him to relieve the number 1 operators?---That's right.
PN736
Wouldn't the fact that he is able and required to relieve the number 1 operator indicate that a higher level of skill and responsibility was present than was previously required in his old position?---Well, the old assistant water tender and the old number 2 driver were competent to relieve the water tender and the number 1 driver respectively. They could take over the operation depending on their own ability and length of experience in the job for a small relief, a toilet break perhaps, a lunch break with the operator still in the room, or some of them may have been even better at operating than the operator was. So I don't see that it's all that much different, apart from the fact that to relieve the operator now, they need two WorkCover tickets and not just one.
PN737
When you say they need it, who makes that requirement?---That would be required by WorkCover. If they're not under direct supervision they need to have the tickets to operate the boiler and to start and stop the turbines.
PN738
Is it the case that some of the mundane duties such as housekeeping and greasing were taken away from assistants and given to the day labour crew to enable the assistants to complete their additional tasks under the new system?---The day labour crew, the productivity of the day labour crew was increased. They were structured into a multi tasking sort of environment where they had a supervisor that dished out the various tasks through the day. We looked at areas where they were under utilised and areas where they were over utilised and we try to engineer our problems where they're spending too much time and too much labour. But in general, some of the cleaning duties around the gas conveyors and over in the sugar shed, some of those have been taken on by the day work labour crew. I don't think that there is a lot of duties that were done by the shift operators that the labour crew has taken over, but in some areas, some of the more mundane stuff, yes.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE XXN MR BODKIN
PN739
In paragraph 68 you say that since the restructure, Matt Faulkes has been required to function at a higher level of productivity. Do you believe that increased productivity is not relevant to work value?---No, I think everyone should be as close as possible to 100 per cent productive to earn what they're currently on.
PN740
Yes, but the question I asked you was, did you believe that productivity is not relevant to work value?---I don't believe it's relevant to work value.
Thank you, Mr Somerville. No further questions.
<RE-EXAMINATION BY MS FLYNN [3.22PM]
PN742
MS FLYNN: I'm only going to be brief, Commissioner.
PN743
Mr Somerville, you were taken to the agreed outcomes document which is annexure C to your statement and in particular reference was made to the $20 increase that was granted to the number 1 steam operators and you were asked when did you expect for that issue to be resolved about the wage rates. Do you remember being asked about that?---Yes.
PN744
What is your understanding as to when that was going to be resolved?---My understanding is that it was going to be resolved at or about the 12 week mark, that at least we would embark on a process of negotiation to see if there were any issues remaining with the job descriptions, any issues about the pay. I thought it important enough to make diary notes and I had discussed it with people and asked when these meetings would take place. I was waiting for someone to give me a reason to convene a meeting.
PN745
When no one - you said previously that no one had approached you about it, is that right?---That's right.
**** PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE RXN MS FLYNN
PN746
So what did you think that meant?---Well, my idea of that was that everyone seemed to be happy under the new structure, I suppose, with a few exceptions. We had generally a workforce that was more involved in what they were doing. They'd seen it themselves, they'd seen the inefficiency of the old structure and I think they felt more engaged and more actively helping the company make sugar more productively.
PN747
Thank you, no further questions.
THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you for your evidences, Mr Somerville, you are free to go.
PN749
THE COMMISSIONER: That completes the evidence for today and then we'll resume at 9.30 tomorrow morning then, and that is we'll start with Mr Lane, Mr Bodkin?
PN750
MR BODKIN: Yes, Commissioner.
PN751
THE COMMISSIONER: All right, and that will complete your evidence then?
PN752
MR BODKIN: Yes.
PN753
THE COMMISSIONER: And then we'll finish with Mr Tiller, all right. Any other matters at this time? No.
PN754
MS FLYNN: I don't think so, Commissioner.
PN755
THE COMMISSIONER: We'll adjourn on that basis, thank you.
<ADJOURNED UNTIL TUESDAY 23 AUGUST 2005 [3.25PM]
LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs
EXHIBIT #10 RESPONDENT'S WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS PN13
EXHIBIT #11 DOCUMENT FORM HUNTER TATE INSTITUTE FROM MARY ANN HILL AND JOB DESCRIPTION OF NUMBER 1 STEAM OPERATOR PN13
GREGORY JOHN PETERSON, SWORN PN13
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS FLYNN PN13
EXHIBIT #12 STATEMENT OF GREGORY JOHN PETERSON PN25
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BODKIN PN33
RE-EXAMINATION BY MS FLYNN PN276
THE WITNESS WITHDREW PN279
PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE, AFFIRMED PN286
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS FLYNN PN286
EXHIBIT #13 STATEMENT OF PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE PN291
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BODKIN PN295
THE WITNESS WITHDREW PN369
PAUL DAVID SOMERVILLE, RECALLED PN378
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BODKIN, CONTINUING PN378
EXHIBIT #14 PRINT NUMBER L1814 OF COMMISSIONER HOLMES' DECISION DATED 15/02/1994 PN404
RE-EXAMINATION BY MS FLYNN PN741
THE WITNESS WITHDREW PN748
AustLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/AIRCTrans/2005/1818.html