C2005/5546, Transcript of Proceedings [2005] AIRCTrans 2638 (30 December 2005)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

---

Workplace Relations Act 1996 13659-1

COMMISSIONER FOGGO

C2005/5546

APPLICATION BY AUSTRALIAN MUNICIPAL, ADMINISTRATIVE, CLERICAL AND SERVICES UNION
s.113 - Application to vary an Award
(C2005/5546)

MELBOURNE

12.52PM, WEDNESDAY, 07 DECEMBER 2005

PN1

MR N HENDERSON: I appear on behalf of the ASU.

PN2

THE COMMISSIONER: I have correspondence also from the AMWU in relation to the Australian Water Technologies Pty Limited Interstate Award 1999. That’s in C2005/5546 and that’s in relation to the AMWU having no objection to the award being set aside as proposed. But perhaps if we deal with the applications first regarding the variations concerning the safety net review and then get on to the setting aside.

PN3

MR HENDERSON: Yes okay Commissioner. Would you like to deal with the AWT first or?

PN4

THE COMMISSIONER: At your convenience.

PN5

MR HENDERSON: Well, we’ll deal with Melbourne Water if the Commission pleases, the two awards both effect the same employer. I hand up to the Commission copies of the letters which were sent to Melbourne Water in relation to both awards, which enclosed the notice of listing application and the draft order. Halfway down the pile of paper is the copy of the registered mail receipt, evidence of service in accordance with the rules.

PN6

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes.

EXHIBIT # H1 BUNDLE OF DOCUMENTS IN BOTH FILES

PN7

MR HENDERSON: Good thank you Commissioner. The application is to increase the wage rates in both awards to be consistent with the 2005 safety net review and to also increase the supported wage in both awards consistent with the decision of Commissioner Gay from August this year. The ASU has forwarded the draft order to the employer and we’ve heard no reply in relation to it. I’ll hand up a separate copy of the draft order to be marked if the Commission pleases.

PN8

THE COMMISSIONER: Would you normally expect Melbourne Water to be present?

PN9

MR HENDERSON: Normally Commissioner, they would come or the AIG has previously appeared for them, but I understand their Human Resources arrangements have just changed recently, so who knows.

EXHIBIT # H2 DRAFT ORDERS OF MELBOURNE WATER IN BOTH FILES

PN10

MR HENDERSON: Thank you Commissioner. We’ve requested the Commission make an order along the lines of the order submitted. The ASU gives it's commitment in relation to absorption as required by the principles. We note that 12 months will have passed by the time the order comes into force which we’ve sought for the first pay period commencing on or after the 10 December but in any event there are certified agreements in operation which mean that the employees will actually receive an increase. I’ve also spoken to Mr O’Louglin at the APESMA about these matters and I understood he was going to send the Commission a note indicating their organisations or that organisations commitment to the principles, so I will pursue that because that becomes relevant in the next matter.

PN11

THE COMMISSIONER: No, we’ve received nothing from APESMA.

PN12

MR HENDERSON: No. So subject to APESMAs commitment Commissioner, we’d ask that the order be issued. I’ll undertake to pursue some written notification to the Commission of their commitment to the principles. In relation to Australian Water Technologies - - -

PN13

THE COMMISSIONER: Well let’s just dispose of these two. I note that in both the awards relevant to Melbourne Water that the appropriate notice has been done and evidenced by the registered mail receipts contained in the bundle of documents at exhibit H1. I also note that the draft order has also been the subject of correspondence, well to the extent that it’s been sent out so the parties – all parties to the award are aware of the effect of the variations. I’m satisfied on the basis of both applications that I should vary the awards. Both applications go to decisions arising from the safety net review by the Full Bench in June 2005 regarding the safety net wages and also to the wage for the supported wage. On the basis of the Full Bench decision and pursuant to section 113 of the Act the Melbourne Water Senior Officer’s Award 2002 is varied.

PN14

The variation will be in the terms of exhibit H2. The award will be varied to come into force from the first pay period commencing on or after
10 December 2005 and to remain in force for a period of 12 months. In relation to C2005/5544 the Melbourne Water Award 2000 is varied in terms of exhibit H2. The variations to the award will commence from the first pay period on or after
10 December 2005 and remain in force for a period of 12 months.

PN15

MR HENDERSON: Thank you Commissioner. In relation to Australian Water Technologies I wont prove service given the correspondence - I’m sorry Commissioner did you indicate that you’d received a letter from Robert Hutchinson the Senior Industrial Advisor from Sydney Water?

PN16

THE COMMISSIONER: No, Mr Ferrier

PN17

MR HENDERSON: Yes sorry Mr Ferrier’s the signatory to the letter, that’s right. So in the light of the correspondence Commissioner I won’t take you through the proof of service but we have provided a draft order which I understand is agreed to so I’ll hand that up to be marked if the Commission pleases.

PN18

THE COMMISSIONER: So why are we going to vary it if we are going to set it aside?

PN19

MR HENDERSON: I wasn’t – that’s I think that’s the point Commissioner. It seems to me in the light of the correspondence and fact that the ASU agree with the position put by Mr Ferrier that the award has no longer any work to do our colleges in the AMWU have also kindly indicated that they consent to that course in correspondence to the Commission. I had asked the APESMA to write to the Commission giving their commitment in the other matters so that they could also indicate their view on this as well. Unfortunately that hasn’t occurred. But perhaps I can suggest this course Commissioner, that by consent the award be set aside and I’ll seek advice from the APESMA to be forwarded it to the Commission as soon as possible confirming their view on that which I understand is consistent with the other parties and that the application be otherwise dismissed.

PN20

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes thank you that seems to be the wisest course. Particularly where I have written guarantees that it is the consent position of the parties to set aside the award and that course is open to the parties pursuant to section 113 of the award. The Australian Water Technologies Pty Limited Interstate Award 1999 is set aside and as you say, as a matter of caution I’ll get my associate to chase this matter up with APESMA to ensure that there is written notification in relation to that. Sydney Water – I beg your pardon Australian Water Technologies and the AMWU have provided the correspondence you’ve indicated on transcript and so for matter of completeness we’ll get written authority from APESMA.

PN21

MR HENDERSON: Yes thank you Commissioner.

PN22

THE COMMISSIONER: The award will be set aside effective from today’s date.

PN23

MR HENDERSON: Thank you.

PN24

THE COMMISSIONER: These proceedings are now adjourned.

<ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [1.02PM]

LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs

EXHIBIT # H1 BUNDLE OF DOCUMENTS IN BOTH FILES PN6
EXHIBIT # H2 DRAFT ORDERS OF MELBOURNE WATER IN BOTH FILES PN9