C2004/6431, Transcript of Proceedings [2005] AIRCTrans 47 (4 January 2005)

AUSCRIPT AUSTRALASIA PTY LTD
ABN 72 110 028 825

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

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS


O/N 9542

AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS COMMISSION

DEPUTY PRESIDENT IVES

C2004/6431

WADEPACK LIMITED

and

AUTOMOTIVE, FOOD, METALS, ENGINEERING,
PRINTING AND KINDRED INDUSTRIES UNION

Notification pursuant to section 99 of the Act
of a dispute re alleged threat of the union and
its members that employees working in the Cutting
and Gluing departments will not perform work as
directed

MELBOURNE

10.04 AM, MONDAY, 20 DECEMBER 2004

Continued from 29.10.04

PN102

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: You have changed the appearances?

PN103

MR REID: Your Honour, before you last time was Tom Heal. Tom is not here today, your Honour.

PN104

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, so you are appearing, MR REID.

PN105

MR REID: Yes, indeed, your Honour.

PN106

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Yes, now I think where we left things last time was there was to be some discussions between the parties with a view, as I recall, to seeing whether some system could be achieved in the organisation whereby people could, by the achievement utilisation of skills, move through the various classifications that exist and the purpose of today is really just to report back on where you have got with that so I don't care who care goes first.

PN107

MR REID: I would be happy to go first, your Honour, if - - -

PN108

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, okay, Mr Reid.

PN109

MS CLEARY: That is okay, it is your application.

PN110

MR REID: Thank you, your Honour. There has been a number of meetings with the company. The union - the company presented us with a breakdown of the various job functions and skill levels that are currently in existence at the site. We believe it is flawed, it is flawed in terms of the wage rates that were attached to it, your Honour. It is a fairly sort of - it is almost sort of put together to justify the current anomalies in the wage rates, you know, for example, the wage rates that referred to here as $500 odd when in fact people are actually being paid 700 odd dollars for the job the company is saying should be paid 500 so it is really just an attempt here to reduce wages all around and on that basis we rejected it.

PN111

We come up with, your Honour, another system where we have identified a number of different job functions in each area being the cutting department, the gluing department and to an extent the printers assistants and we have come up with like a - there is an entry level and five levels above that. It provides for wage rates set out at those various levels and also provides for a method for people to move between the levels by way of picking up a training wage so you move from level 3 to level 4 and you would be an interim training wage whilst you were in training to move up to that next level. We have also suggested, based on the wage rates that are currently applied, we have suggested a wage rate structure as well which goes from, if you take for example level 3, $650 up to $700.

PN112

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, Mr Reid, my recollection of this is this wasn't to be an exercise in going into the circumstances that currently exist in the organisation with respect to wage rates. This matter, as I recall, emanated from some dissatisfaction by certain individuals about the pay rate they were receiving - - -

PN113

MR REID: That is right.

PN114

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: - - - as compared to certain machine operators who they claim receiving a higher rate for doing essentially the same job that they were being required to do.

PN115

MR REID: Yes.

PN116

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I think the discussions that we had were then centred around seeing if some mechanism, some consistent mechanism, could be found by which people could progress.

PN117

MR REID: That is right.

PN118

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The exercise wasn't, as I recall, an exercise to re-visit the rates that exist within in the company, I mean you have got a certified agreement, Mr Reid.

PN119

MR REID: Yes, your Honour. Your Honour, could I just say that we are actually trying to do what you suggested. We are actually trying to put some logic into the current wage structure and I think that what you would find if you - if we could maybe - if you could maybe have a look at this at this point, your Honour, is the - it is just to put some logic into it to provide - to identify where the level should be if you operate one machine, if you operate two machines, operate three machines, there should be a natural progression in skills and - - -

PN120

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes. Well look, that may well be the case, Mr Reid, but that seems to me to be a matter that is most appropriately addressed by the union in negotiations for a further agreement. You have got one, an agreement at the moment and as I understand it that agreement lasts until May 2006 or thereabouts. A major exercise like re-visiting all of the wage rates attaching to particular classifications is something that seems to me that is a matter that is beyond the scope of what was intended here and certainly is something that I would view as more appropriate for some future agreement.

PN121

MR REID: Well I understand what you are saying, your Honour, but if you remember the issue we came to you first on was the fact that, as you say, that some people were working above the level they were being paid for and what this exercise has identified just that, you know, and actually much broader than the position we originally came to you on.

PN122

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well it probably has but the difficulty that I have got with this, Mr Reid, is that it seems to me to put the company in a position where they have no certainty of anything if this process is allowed to continue. They have entered into an agreement presumably in good faith with the union some, whatever, 18 months ago or whatever it was and this exercise, if it goes the way you are intending it to go, re-opens that whole circumstance which is something if I was in the company's position I wouldn't be inviting.

PN123

MR REID: Well the question amends, your Honour, is how do you address the current anomalies that we came here to raise with you in the first place.

PN124

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well I think where we left it last time and what I had expected to happen between the parties would be it seemed to me last time that there was no set of circumstances, transparent circumstances, where individuals could know what was required of them to make a transition from, I don't know what the classification was, but for the sake of the argument assisted operator up to operator so an individual sitting in the role of assistant operator, it seemed to me, that it was fair and reasonable that that individual should have some knowledge as to what he or she had to do to get to the next step.

PN125

MR REID: Sure.

PN126

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: And whether or not they got there or not would obviously be whether the company had opportunities and so forth for that to occur but at least there would be a set of criteria there rather than, at least as far as the employee is concerned, it is just some arbitrary selection mechanism which they had no idea how that mechanism worked.

PN127

MR REID: Which it still is, your Honour. Without the company addressing the very issue that you are talking about it is going to remain so. When I look at - - -

PN128

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well it possibly will, Mr Reid, but what it seems to me you are asking the company to do is to visit its entire wage structure throughout the organisation.

PN129

MR REID: Well, your Honour, the company have got a major problem, I mean this is an issue that it is simply not going to go away and we were suggesting that there would be, if there were going to be any adjustments to be made, there would be no - we are not seeking here, at any point, Commissioner - sorry, your Honour, to raise the wage levels at the higher end but simply to say that where there is an agreed wage rate for a particular level, if anyone falls below that wage - that particular wage rate then they should be raised up to it. We are not seeking to move wages right across the board and in fact with the wage structure that we have developed it is actually less in some cases than what the company is currently paying.

PN130

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, but, Mr Reid, the reality of this circumstance from your point of view is that you have an agreement and if my memory serves me correctly you also have an award underpinning that agreement.

PN131

MR REID: Yes, that is right, your Honour.

PN132

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Is that correct?

PN133

MS CLEARY: Yes.

PN134

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I think it was the 1995 - - -

PN135

MS CLEARY: That is right.

PN136

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: - - - Graphic Arts Interim Award.

PN137

MR REID: Yes.

PN138

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Underpinning the agreement. Now unless there is some breach which you have every right to prosecute then you are stuck with a circumstance where you, and I am talking of you now as the union and its members, have signed on the bottom line to a particular set of circumstance. You don't get to come back to that during the term of the agreement and say, well all of that off the table, let us now have a look at seeing if we can set the wage rates right throughout this organisation. It seemed to me to be fair enough that if you had a dispute, as you did have and probably still have between people who are saying well I think I am doing as much as this person is doing and what have I got to do to get that rate of pay, that there would be some, if it was possible, some mechanism come up with that people could say, well okay now I know what I have got to do.

PN139

MR REID: Sure, which is - - -

PN140

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: But this was never to be an exercise, in my view, Mr Reid, where you essentially start negotiating a new agreement.

PN141

MR REID: I don't think that is what we are trying to do, your Honour, you know, I mean I think that - I mean we can leave this, your Honour, and I mean if the company wants to, you know, say look, we don't want to address the issue until the EBA, that is fine, but I suggest that - you know, the company has got some itself some major problems because even with its own structure, there is as much as $300 a week difference between people who are classified on the same level so these are major problems, Commissioner, we are not talking about $50 a week, we are talking about a cutter, a person who runs a dye cutting machine, this lowest level on 677 and the highest level on 951.

PN142

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, well presumably those circumstances didn't eventuate in the last couple of weeks, Mr Reid.

PN143

MR REID: No, no, certainly not.

PN144

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: And presumably when the union entered into the certified agreement that it entered into with the company, it was well aware of the circumstances that pertained in the organisation at the time.

PN145

MR REID: No, no, no.

PN146

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: It would be a very strange circumstance for a union to enter into an agreement with a company and not know what was going on as far as payment to its members were concerned.

PN147

MR REID: Well in this instance, Commissioner - sorry, your Honour, that was certainly the case, that we did not know because, we don't as a matter of course, just do wage rate inspections just on a willy-nilly basis, we don't.

PN148

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, but presumably there was a negotiation process for an agreement.

PN149

MR REID: There - yes, yes, your Honour, but not - - -

PN150

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: And you are telling me, Mr Reid, that you negotiated an agreement without knowing what people were being paid?

PN151

MR REID: Well I didn't negotiate this particular agreement, your Honour.

PN152

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I am talking about the AMWU.

PN153

MR REID: But the union did not know there was an disparity of between $300, no, we didn't.

PN154

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right.

PN155

MR REID: And I would find it quite unusual that there should be such a big difference so I suppose at the end of the day, your Honour, if we are not able to fix this by putting in a, you know, some sort of logic into the structure, I should say as well, your Honour, that we suggested that perhaps we should get RMIT as well or someone like that to oversee the process and to put some fairness and equity into the process and the company rejected that. That is fine, the company certainly don't have to accept that but we thought that would be a good idea to put some - RMIT have certainly got the respect of the industry to come in and oversee it. But at the end of the day, your Honour, we can either try and resolve it here or else, you know, at the end of the day when people find out there is $300 a week here difference in their wages then I am sure they will be coming to knock on Mr Rowe's door for an explanation.

PN156

So, your Honour, I am happy enough to - if the company don't want to address this issue here today, that is fine, we will report back to our members about the discussions that we have had and there is no resolution to the issue and I suppose we will, you know, we will take it from there.

PN157

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well I will hear from Ms Cleary in a moment as to what the company's position is, Mr Reid.

PN158

MR REID: Sure, your Honour.

PN159

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: But it may be appropriate if we have some further discussion about this off the record.

PN160

MR REID: Sure, your Honour, thank you.

PN161

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN162

MS CLEARY: Thank you, your Honour. My clear instructions, your Honour, that there have been I think approximately three meetings to try and resolve this issue and at the first meeting the company did hand up its proposal. Would you like to see a copy of it, your Honour?

PN163

PN164

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, you can hand it up.

PN165

MR REID: It is the same one, typewritten.

PN166

MS CLEARY: Your Honour, as you can see, the company attempted, as a result of discussions that we had previously before you, to distinguish the different levels between a process worker and particularly in the gluing department initially, your Honour, between level 1, level 2 and level 3 to show how people could progress through the classification structure and the same logic applied to the cutting department as well as the print assistants and the storemen.

PN167

Obviously, your Honour, as you have heard this morning, the company and the union came to a stalemate because the focus of the union has always been in relation to wage rates and my clear instructions are is that the company is prepared to discuss the classification structure and will do so as part of the next round of enterprise bargaining negotiations. The proposal put by the union and I do have a copy if you would like me to hand that up to you. Have you got a spare one? Thank you. Your Honour, my instructions are is that the proposal put by the union would result in a potential cost impact to the company of $188,285.60. Now obviously the company is not in a financial situation to accept those claims and in relation to the assertion made by Mr Reid today that operators within the gluing department, is that right? It is about the wage rates and the different levels.

PN168

Bear with me, your Honour, I have got figures here for you, that the operators within the cutting department doing the same work, there is a variation of $300 per week, we strongly reject that assertion because looking - comparing what the gentleman does who earns $600 per week and comparing the gentleman who earns in excess of $900 a week, there is clearly a distinction on the day to day functions required of them and we say that the classification structure proposed by us which we always at all times said it was for further discussion points and the company was prepared to discuss the difference between a process worker entry level and a level 1 operator in both gluing and cutting is something that really reflects what is actually occurring within the workplace.

PN169

It is on that basis, your Honour, we say that we are not here to discuss wage outcomes, we have made that quite clear right from the beginning and as you recall at the last conference before yourself that we are here to discuss a transparent classification structure so people understand the differences in the classification levels but at no stage can we agree to that wage outcome sought unless it is part of enterprise bargaining negotiations. If the Commission pleases.

PN170

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, thank you, Ms Cleary. Is there anything you wanted to comment on while we are still on the record, Mr Reid, I might as well go off - - -

PN171

MR REID: Yes, I do, your Honour.

PN172

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN173

MR REID: I mean Ms Cleary, you know, can argue as much as you like that the levels, the $300 a week level doesn't reflect what the company is doing. I have actually got a copy of the wage rates, Commissioner, that the company provided to you, perhaps you would like a copy of and this is the company's document, your Honour, which quite clearly and I will mark it for you, it quite clearly says, level 2 and the wage rates are less than the - on the way down from there and that is the company's document, your Honour, not the union's so pretty difficult to stand here and say that, you know, there is - that those anomalies don't exist when it is the company's document, it clearly shows level 2, all those people on level 2, and there is $300 a week almost of a difference so - - -

PN174

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN175

MS CLEARY: Your Honour, I would just like to make one point, it is obviously in reference to any company documentation issued to you, the classification level refers to the relevant award rate.

PN176

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I am sorry, say that again, Ms Cleary.

PN177

MS CLEARY: When the company refers to level 2, your Honour, the relevant classification underneath pursuant to the Graphic Arts Award is level 2 and that is why they are classified accordingly.

PN178

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, thank you. All right, I will go off the record, thank you.

NO FURTHER PROCEEDINGS RECORDED