AG2006/4513, Transcript of Proceedings [2006] AIRCTrans 1014 (30 August 2006)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

---

Workplace Relations Act 1996 15582-1

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT ACTON

AG2006/4513

APPLICATION BY ELIOTT ENGINEERING PTY LTD
s.170MH pre-reform Act - Application to terminate agreement (public interest)
(AG2006/4513)

MELBOURNE

10.10AM, WEDNESDAY, 16 AUGUST 2006

Continued from 8/8/2006

Hearing continuing

PN45

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Changes in appearances?

PN46

MS S JONES: I seek leave to appear on behalf of the AMWU.

PN47

MR M ADDISON: No objection, your Honour.

PN48

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Okay. Mr Addison.

PN49

MR ADDISON: Your Honour, I think we put our position in the main last week. I think the matter was adjourned to allow the AMWU to then put its position and I guess that's what we're here for this morning.

PN50

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: You've nothing further to add at this stage?

PN51

MR ADDISON: Not at this stage, your Honour. I understand that Ms Jones proposes to call two witnesses. There were no directions that witness statements be generated or any of that. Depending on the evidence that's given I may seek an adjournment at the end of each examination-in-chief just to get some brief instructions but it will be a brief adjournment I would be seeking. If your Honour pleases.

PN52

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Ms Jones.

PN53

MS JONES: If the Commission pleases, the application by Mechanical Engineering Services Pty Ltd or MES to terminate the Skilled Engineering Limited Mechanical Workshop Agreement has been put and I'm having regard to the written application, your Honour, on one ground and that is that having regard to the history of negotiations, there are no reasonable prospects of concluding the negotiations and arriving at a replacement agreement. It is then asserted that the termination of the agreement will promote bargaining and will not be contrary to the public interest as employees will have access to the award. There are no other grounds advanced.

PN54

We note that the applicant's case, which was put before your Honour last week has been made without any evidence either by way of documentary material or oral evidence as to the contention that there is no reasonable prospects of concluding negotiations. From the transcript, there was simply a short submission made from the bar table as to certain state of affairs in relation to their grounds. We intend to call two witnesses in relation to the matters asserted in the application and from the bar table by the applicant and if I may, your Honour, I call the first witness, Steve Dodd.

PN55

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

<STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD, AFFIRMED [10.12AM]
<EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS JONES

PN56

MS JONES: Mr Dodd, you have given your full name and address and I won't ask you to repeat that. Can I just ask you, what's your position that you hold in the AMWU?---The position I hold is metals organiser for division 10.

PN57

What's division 10?---Division 10, that's the division for - that's made up of an area that includes Latrobe Valley or the Gippsland area.

PN58

You're responsible for the MES Latrobe Valley workshop site?---Yes, I certainly am.

PN59

How long have you been responsible for that?---Possibly about four to five years.

PN60

Her Honour asked at the last proceedings she wished to have some evidence as to the number of employees at that workshop who were members of the AMWU. Can you answer that?---I believe - I haven't done a current check, but I believe the majority of the employees are members of the AMWU.

PN61

When you say majority, what sort of majority? How many would not be?---I'm not sure. There may be one or two that are not members. I think that's - currently there's about 80, 80 or some members at that workplace. It fluctuates, I think depending on the work that they do there. I understand they bring casuals in so the numbers actually move.

PN62

That's talking small numbers?---Very small numbers.

PN63

Who are not?---Yes. I would be surprised.

PN64

Mr Dodd, were you responsible for the workshop site when MES purchased the business from Skilled Engineering?---I certainly was.

PN65

When was that, roughly?---Roughly about 18 months ago I think, something like that.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XN MS JONES
PN66

What was the major concern of employees at the time in relation to the purchase by MES?---There was two major concerns that they had. The first one was obviously what would happen to their accrued entitlements. That was number 1, I think. People had a view that - you know, that their entitlements were secured and their long service leave and annual leave and all the other bits and pieces, and the second one was the terms and conditions that they would work on on that site going into the future.

PN67

What steps did the union take in relation to those concerns?---Well, what we did, we had a series of meetings with Anthony Eliott and also Graham Herbert, the local shop stewards, myself and the meetings were sponsored by the local council down there with input from Graham Middlemass who I understand was the mayor or councillor at the time. He come to us with the proposal that this company was going to buy out Skilled Engineering and we sat down and had some discussions prior to them taking over the site.

PN68

What was the consequence of those meetings in terms of the concerns that you identified?---Well, the consequence of it was that there was a commitment given by Eliott Engineering that they would continue on with the terms and conditions of the Skilled Engineering agreement and there was also a commitment given that they would look at a process for securing people's entitlements. We went through that process with Eliott Engineering and there was a deed, I understand put up. It took some time to do it but there was - I understand they secured the entitlements of the members to some of the land that they purchased at the time as a guarantee of their entitlements.

PN69

Your Honour, I'm going to ask the witness to identify .....

PN70

Are you familiar with that?---Yes, I certainly am. That was an offer of employment to the employees of Skilled Engineering that was made on behalf of Eliott Engineering or MES as they call themselves under that enterprise.

PN71

Your Honour, I seek to tender that as an exhibit.

EXHIBIT #J1 DOCUMENT DATED UNDER THE LETTERHEAD OF MES FROM MR ELIOTT DATED 12/11/2004

PN72

MS JONES: Mr Dodd, there is a name at the top of the letter, Alan Verhajio?
---Yes, that's right, Alan Verhajio.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XN MS JONES
PN73

Who is he?---Alan Verhajio was a current shop steward of - at the site. He was the main shop steward at that site at that point in time. He was also the person along with myself and the deputy steward who was involved in discussions with Anthony Eliott and Graham Herbert. Nick Nakonski, I believe, was at some of those discussions and also Graham Middlemass.

PN74

Did this letter, offer of employment, go only to Alan Verhajio?---No, it didn't. My understanding is that it went to every employee of what was currently Skilled Engineering at that point in time.

PN75

The letter of offer says - requests the person - which is the second-last paragraph on that particular exhibit J1, requests them to sign and return to MES a copy of that letter as acceptance of their transfer of employment. Are you aware of how many of the employees who were sent this offer, signed and returned it?---I'm aware that it was sent to all of the unionised employees at that site, that I was responsible for, and my understanding is that they all signed it and returned it to MES.

PN76

How many of the permanent employees currently employed by MES received and signed this letter and returned it?---I believe that the majority of permanent employees have received and signed the letter. I don't believe there has been a big turnover of permanent employees but there may be some that they've taken on as permanents since this acquisition.

PN77

When you say permanent employees, how many would there be now at MES?
---I can't really - I think there's roughly about 80 or so.

PN78

When you say a majority, can you be more specific?---Well, I believe that every permanent employee actually signed this letter, who was there at the time, who was an employee of Skilled Engineering and sent those - - -

PN79

This is in 2004?---Yes, this is 2004. I believe that every permanent employee who was there in 2004 signed this letter and returned it back to MES on the basis that they accepted part of the - or the offer to go forward with this company..

PN80

If you can be as precise as possible, how many of those permanent employees would be currently employed by MES?---I believe the majority of permanent employees up there - - -

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XN MS JONES
PN81

When you say majority, is that 90 per cent, 99, 50?---I would say up - at least a
90 per cent would be permanent employees. I'm not aware of new employees that have been taken on but there could be some.

PN82

I want to turn to the history of the negotiations in relation to a replacement agreement. When was the first time that you saw the company's proposed draft replacement agreement?---It was sometime after March in '06 that I - well, I received a copy from the steward in regards to a replacement agreement.

PN83

Who was the steward?---O'lando Berry.

PN84

What happened then?---Obviously we went through the agreement and that was not what was the current agreement. There was significant omissions from it and we sought to have some discussions with the company to try and get us a bit closer in regards to what we currently had in place and what the company's draft was.

PN85

You sought discussions?---Yes.

PN86

At what point were you able to have discussions with the company or meetings with the company?---Without referring to my notes, I - we did have a meeting with the company at - we met with our members and we had a meeting with Russell Briggs, the workshop manager, and we sat down with him. I believe that we had one discussion at one time - this is just going by memory - with Russell and I think Anthony was there at one stage. We also sought to set down a date and time to come back and have another discussion with them, a bit more in-depth discussion. Unfortunately, I got delayed from that meeting and couldn't make it on that day, but I understand that discussions did happen and there was a discussion about the log of claims that our members had previously endorsed at a meeting.

PN87

If I could just be clear about that, you said that after you got the EBA you sought discussions?---Yes, I did.

PN88

You had one lot of discussions with Russell Briggs who is the?---Plant manager.

PN89

Then you sought further discussions to have more detailed discussions?---I certainly did, yes.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XN MS JONES
PN90

It was at that meeting you were supposed to attend but you were delayed?---That's right.

PN91

Having not been able to get to that meeting, what happened next?---I attended the site the next day. I had a discussion with Russell Briggs about where we were going with the EBA. I said obviously we need to have some more discussions. We were looking at coming back together with them at some time but they - he basically said, "Well, I'll get back to you" but it never ever happened.

PN92

The meeting you had with Russell Briggs after the meeting you couldn't attend, who else was there?---O'lando Berry and myself.

PN93

Your Honour, I would like the witness to identify a document.

PN94

Are you familiar with that, Mr Dodd?---Yes, I am familiar with this document. It was given to me by - well, it was sent down to me by the shop steward from - by the shop steward from Eliott Engineering.

PN95

Your Honour, if I may tender this as an exhibit.

EXHIBIT #J2 DOCUMENT DATED 1/04/2006 FROM MES TO ALL PARTIES BOUND BY CERTIFIED AGREEMENT

PN96

MS JONES: You said that this was sent to you by the shop steward, Mr Dodd, which shop steward?---O'lando Berry.

PN97

What did he say in relation to how he received that?---My understanding is that this was put up on the noticeboards in the factory. That's - and he had some concern with it as did the members at that point in time and I asked him to obviously send it down to me.

PN98

What was your reaction to it?---Well, I didn't think it was very constructive considering that we were talking about an EBA. We'd had some discussions prior to Christmas and I didn't think that was very constructive in the process of being able to agree on a new EBA.

PN99

The application to terminate the agreement was made on 26 June 2006. Based on the history of the negotiations you've given me, how many meetings had you had in relation to the contents of the EBA at that point?---I believe I possibly had two meetings, maybe three. I would have to refer back to my diary, but two that I know of that I've had with the company at that point of time.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XN MS JONES
PN100

The first hearing in relation to this matter was on 10 July 2006 and as you know it was adjourned?---That's right.

PN101

Following that meeting what steps did you take, if any, to further negotiations?
---Well, after that I attended the site over another issue regarding the shop steward and a couple of local matters. I had a discussion with Russell Briggs, who was the manager of - up there and I said, "Well, you know, we need to get together to, you know, basically close out the agreement." He said, "Well, you know, you need to give us dates and times" and I then give him some proposed dates and times to meet.

PN102

Okay, if I could just halt you there. I want you to - your Honour, if I may get the witness to identify - do you recognise that?---I certainly do. That's an email that - after my visit to Yallourn that I sent off to - sorry, that's an email that's come from Russell Briggs. Prior to that I had sent him off an email suggesting Friday, the 21st, Tuesday, the 25th and Thursday, the 27th at 1 pm.

PN103

If I may tender the exhibit, your Honour.

EXHIBIT #J3 EMAIL TO ELLEN MALONE FROM RUSSELL BRIGGS AND THE ONE UNDERNEATH IT IN REVERSE DATED 18/07/2006

PN104

MS JONES: In fact, on that document which is exhibit J3, there's at the bottom your email through an Ellen Malone. Just to clarify, who is Ellen Malone?
---Ellen Malone is the secretary at Latrobe Valley union office.

PN105

I assume that those are the dates that you were suggesting at the bottom?---They certainly were.

PN106

Mr Briggs says there that he can't make one day but will confirm another day. What happened then?---Well, basically he said that on Friday, the day he couldn't make, that he would confirm either the Tuesday or the Thursday of the next week.

PN107

Did he?---No, he didn't.

PN108

What did you do then?---I then sent some correspondence off to him again via an email or a letter at the time. I think it might have been a letter.

PN109

Your Honour, may I have look at this? I .....

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XN MS JONES
PN110

Are you familiar with that?---Yes, I'm familiar with that, yes. I certainly am.

PN111

What is it?---It's a letter that was sent to Russell Briggs basically - obviously - well, you know, I was disappointed about him not confirming the future dates for meetings and also giving him the option of some other dates being the 31st or 1 August for suggested meetings.

PN112

May I tender that as an exhibit, your Honour.

EXHIBIT #J4 LETTER TO MR BRIGGS FROM MR DODD ON AMWU LETTERHEAD DATED 26/07/2006

PN113

MS JONES: What happened? Was there any response in relation to that letter?
---I believe there was. There was an email sent back, an email sent back from Russell Briggs to myself.

PN114

Your Honour, may I have the witness identify another document.

PN115

Is that the email that you just referred to, Mr Dodd?---Yes, it is.

PN116

If I might tender that as an exhibit.

EXHIBIT #J5 EMAIL TO ELLEN MALONE FROM
MR BRIGGS RE MEETING DATES FOR EBA NEGOTIATIONS DATED 26/07/2006

PN117

MS JONES: Mr Dodd, in that email there is a reference by Mr Briggs to a Tuesday, 25 July information received by MES from the shop floor or from delegates that the shop floor was not going to have this meeting as the company would let, and I'm quoting from that email, that "casuals" - I assume that means:
"Would not let casuals attend during work time":

PN118

Would let casuals attend during work time however, was not prepared to reimburse them.

PN119

What was that about, as far as you know?---Well, my understanding it was about a draft that the company had put forward and they wanted to have some discussions and - with the work group, obviously with a view to them, I believe, accepting the draft or rejecting the draft or whatever. My understanding is that the casuals were, not excluded but basically they said, "Well, if the casuals come to the meeting, we're not going to pay them," and I believe that the work group took a decision that they would not attend that meeting.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XN MS JONES
PN120

What was the position with the permanents?---The permanents also, I believe - I believe the permanents were going to get paid for that meeting.

PN121

Is that some policy or right that these people have?---I have no idea what their ideas was around it. I've never struck - - -

PN122

It's not a right under the - - -?---I've never struck - - -

PN123

- - - certified agreement?---No, it isn't. No, it isn't.

PN124

At that point the matter was relisted. Now, the company says - first of all, I should say what are the - you've had some series of negotiations , what are the outstanding issues?---I think the only issues that we wanted in the EBA was obviously the guys want a pay rise, they - because of the new laws they obviously want to incorporate some of the award into their current EBA so they can continue to have some of a - the conditions of award protection in their EBA. I think that was basically it and they wanted an agreement similar to the one - the terms and conditions that they have at this point in time.

PN125

In relation, though, to what the company has put forward, what are the outstanding issues as between - you say you want a rollover agreement, what - - -?
---Yes, okay. Well, I believe and I've only had a bit of a look at the document that the company has put forward, the draft that we seen last week in the Commission. I believe that there's an issue there in regards to income protection. There is also an issue there in regards to one of the RDOs that the guys work and the other issue is obviously the award will move as the government strips it back.

PN126

You said just then that there was a draft put in the Commission. Is this a new version of the proposed EBA by the company?---I think there's been a number of drafts that have moved over the last few months, a bit a tweaking that the company has done, I suppose you could say.

PN127

Is it to fair the summarise the issue as one of wage rates or wage increases, outstanding issues?---Yes, wage rates is one of the issues, yes.

PN128

The question of an RDO, is that a shift from a nine day fortnight or what's the issue there? What does the company want?---Yes, that is a shift from the current arrangements which I believe is basically an RDO every fortnight.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XN MS JONES
PN129

Then the issue of income protection?---The issue of income protection, yes, that's an issue where I understand that there's been some increase in the insurance premiums which the company has got some angst with but I believe that, you know, our members at that workshop give away a pay rise in the past to secure that income protection.

PN130

The other one is the incorporation of award provisions?---It certainly is. The incorporation of the award is obviously an issue that's dear to the hearts of the members up there.

PN131

The company says in its application that there is no reasonable prospect of concluding negotiations and arriving at a replacement agreement. What do you say about that?---I say that it's very hard to negotiate an agreement when one party won't come to the table. I believe that there is an ability to conclude an agreement. It's always been, I suppose you could say, fairly arduous to get an agreement up at that site. Previously we negotiated with Skilled Engineering and we always ended up with an agreement obviously that people could work to so yes, I do believe that there's an ability to come to an agreement.

PN132

Mr Addison for the company said on transcript at the hearing last week that negotiations had and I quote:

PN133

Got to the point where a couple of matters were outstanding and the employees refused to even consider their position with regard to the outstanding matters.

PN134

Do you agree with that point?---I agree that the employees did not go to the meeting on the basis that the casuals weren't allowed to go to the meeting. What I don't agree with is that the employees are - would not consider any matters in regards to the current EBA or the current proposed EBA from the company. We haven't had those discussions yet.

PN135

Thank you. That completed my examination-in-chief.

PN136

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Mr Addison.

PN137

MR ADDISON: Your Honour, I seek a very short adjournment, five minutes, 10 tops.

PN138

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I'll adjourn briefly.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XN MS JONES

<SHORT ADJOURNMENT [10.39AM]
<RESUMED [10.53AM]

PN139

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Mr Addison.

<CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR ADDISON [10.53AM]

PN140

MR ADDISON: Steve, have you got J1 in front of you?---I never - sorry, mate,
I - - -

PN141

J1 is the letter of offer dated 12 November 2004?---Yes, I have.

PN142

J1 said to employees that the - and I think Ms Jones pointed this out to you, in the fourth paragraph:

PN143

An employee of MES, Skilled Engineering Limited Mechanical Workshop Certified Agreement 2003-2006 in conjunction with the award will continue to govern your employment.

PN144

That has been the case, has it not?---It certainly has.

PN145

The Skilled Engineering Mechanical Workshop Certified Agreement passed its nominal expiry date on 31 March of this year, you would agree, would you?---I certainly would.

PN146

I think you said in your evidence-in-chief that prior to 11 November 2004 the employees had two concerns. One was about the accrual of their entitlements and the second was about the continuation of the terms and conditions of employment. That's correct?---That is correct, yes.

PN147

In terms of those two matters, the terms and conditions of employment have continued to be governed, I think you've just said, by the certified agreement and the award. You agree on that?---I agree on that, yes.

PN148

Secondly, the accrued entitlements in terms of the employees' severance, annual leave, long service leave, et cetera, has been secured, you agree?---I agree, yes.

PN149

In fact, a caveat is in place over the unencumbered land that the workshop stands on in favour of the employees. That's correct, isn't it?---I believe so, yes.

PN150

In terms of securing employee entitlements, I put it to you, Mr Dodd, that nobody - no company in this state has gone as far as MES in terms of securing employees' entitlements. You would agree with me, wouldn't you?

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN151

MS JONES: Your Honour, I might object to that. Nobody in this state nowhere is a tall call for an organiser of the AMWU to actually answer - - -

PN152

MR ADDISON: I'll withdraw. In General, Steve, can you tell me - you're an organiser of the AMWU?---I certainly am.

PN153

You've got broad experience in terms of the metal mechanical industry?---Yes, I do.

PN154

Eliott Engineering or MES is part of that industry?---They certainly are.

PN155

In terms of securing employee entitlements, how many companies to your knowledge have secured their employees' entitlements?---I'm not aware of companies that have gone as far as MES, but I do know that there are some arrangements with some companies that other organisers deal with. Currently, I think, in the companies that I deal with, most of the employees are covered by industry schemes which secure their long service leave and their severance - or redundancy schemes such as Incolink, Co-invest. There are schemes also in regards to Protect and I understand there's also some employees entitlements that are secured in what they call NEST which is the National Entitlement Schemes Trust. Yes, there are different arrangements at different companies.

PN156

How many companies that you are responsible for have their entitlements secured in NEST?---None at this point in time - sorry, one.

PN157

How many companies have secured employee entitlements by taking out caveats over unencumbered property?---None that I know of, that I'm in charge of.

PN158

One?---One besides - - -

PN159

Eliott Engineering - - -?---Obviously Eliott Engineering, but I take it that your question was excluding Eliotts.

PN160

The first draft agreement for the replacement of the Skilled Engineering Mechanical Workshop Agreement was sent to you directly by Eliott Engineering, I put to you, on or around 1 April of this year?---I can't answer that.

PN161

An agreement came to you directly, didn't it?---There's been a number of agreements that have been sent to me.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN162

Let me just go back. The first draft replacement agreement was sent directly to you, was it not?---I have a number of draft agreements that were sent to me via a steward. I have had draft agreements put in front of me when I've had meetings with Eliotts.

PN163

I put it to you that in or around 1 April of this year, Eliott Engineering - sorry, my apologies - MES directed a draft agreement directly to you, not through the delegate but it was posted to the AMWU to yourself. That's true, isn’t it?---As I said before, there's been a number of draft agreements that have come to the office at different times from Eliott Engineering. Some of those have been - and in regards to Eliott Engineering, I'm not aware that they have mailed one to me but that could be the case.

PN164

The negotiations for a replacement certified agreement have been on foot from prior to the expiry of the Skilled Engineering Certified Agreement. You would agree with that, wouldn't you?---I would agree that we have spoken to Eliott Engineering in regards to a replacement agreement way back in October when we had a dispute up there, when Eliott Engineering restructured their workshop and some people left the organisation, including Allan Verhajio, who was the current shop steward at that point in time, because of the restructure. There was a dispute up there in November that went before Commissioner Hingley. There was an agreement that - or a recommendation from Commissioner Hingley in regards to going forward and obviously during those discussions we sought to talk to Eliotts about what happens after 31 March.

PN165

You agree that various draft documents have come across your desk between
31 March this year and today?---There has been - yes, there has been several draft documents that have come across the desk. Yes.

PN166

I put it to you that the draft document that was tabled in the Commission last week was in fact draft 7?---That may be so but I can categorically say that I have not had seven draft documents come across my desk.

PN167

That may be the case but you don't disagree, though, it's draft 7?---I don't know, mate. How can I say that if I haven't sighted the ones previously?

PN168

It may be a question for Mr Bloom. If you don't know, you don't know?---Well, obviously.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN169

But you agree it's certainly not draft 1, 2 or 3, don’t you?---I'll say again, Morris, that unless I've seen it, and I've seen I think about three copies with different draft things on them, on the headings, fairly similar documents with a bit of tweaking. As far as draft 7, I can't say, mate. I can definitely say I haven't had seven documents passed in front of me.

PN170

You said in your evidence-in-chief you had sought discussions with the company, that you then had a meeting with the members and then you'd spoken to
Mr Briggs with regard to a replacement agreement?---Yes.

PN171

When was that?---That would be - I would have to refer back to my diary but I had a meeting with the members - - -

PN172

Do you have your diary with you?---Yes, I do.

PN173

I certainly wouldn't object if Mr Dodd needs to refresh his memory, your Honour.

PN174

Do you want to get it?---Going by my diary, there are some meeting dates in there in May and also in June, Obviously there was some meetings prior to the expiry of the agreement which would be obviously in my other diary, which I don't have here.

PN175

You said that you didn't meet with Eliott Engineering between 1 April and May?
---I believe I actually did have a letter where I nominated the times and the dates. There was a letter that was - that I sent to Dave Oliver and I think it went to yourself.

PN176

Yes?---Here it is here, it's a letter.

PN177

What, do you say you met with the company after the expiry of the agreement and prior to May or do you not?---I would have to check - I would have to check that letter.

PN178

Okay. Is it possible that you met with the company between 1 April and the beginning of May?---There was a period of time where we didn't meet because there was some negotiations or there was some meetings that were held on site that I wasn't available for.

PN179

That's correct. The delegates met with the company during that time, didn't they?
---I believe there may have been some meetings but obviously you'll have to put that to the delegates.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN180

You were contacted by the delegates during that period of time?---Yes.

PN181

Yes, and you were asked for advice with regard to the negotiations?---I was asked for - yes, I was asked for advice in regards to the award protection and things like that.

PN182

The delegates rang in and said, "We're having negotiations with the company, the company are putting X, Y and Z, what's your view?" That's correct, isn't it?---I believe that they asked for advice at different times and obviously they would seek my view on where they were - or the status of where they were in those negotiations.

PN183

That's right?---Of course.

PN184

And that's how you came by the draft agreements from time to time during that period of time, isn't it?---There were draft agreements pushed forward at - a couple of times. I don't actually have the copies - I have copies - or I think I've got copies here in the file, but there was no way there were seven drafts that I had sighted.

PN185

Yes, but the delegate would ring you after a meeting and tell you what had occurred at the meeting and send you a copy of the draft agreement and seek your comments, wouldn't he?---He would, yes.

PN186

Between 1 April and 22 June, when the first application in this matter was listed, how many times did that occur?---I don't monitor every phone call I get, Morris, but obviously there would have been times when he rang me over issues that were going on up at that site.

PN187

You had three direct meetings with Mr Briggs with regard to these matters?---I believe I was there a number of times at that site, not only over the EBA but obviously over other issues.

PN188

On 22 June - excuse me I'll withdraw that question at this point in time. In terms of J2, which is a letter which sets out the company's intention to have the agreement terminated after three months of negotiations, that was sent directly to you, wasn't it?---No.

PN189

No?---No.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN190

I put it to you it was sent directly to you and I put it to you it was sent to the Melbourne office of the AMWU as well?---Not to my knowledge. It was not sent to me. The first I became aware of this letter was when it was put to me from the stewards that it was put on the noticeboard at the workplace. It may subsequently after this date. I'm not sure what happened after that but prior to this being put on the noticeboard at MES I had no knowledge of it.

PN191

When did you become aware of this letter?---When the steward rang me and said, "We've got a notice on the noticeboard that says that the agreement is going to be terminated after three months."

PN192

Was that in April?---It certainly was.

PN193

What did you do about it?---What did I do about it?

PN194

Yes?---I obviously sought to have some discussions with the company and obviously sought to get a model agreement for that company incorporating the award.

PN195

Haven't you just - - -?---Unfortunately - go on.

PN196

Haven't you just given evidence that you didn't meet with the company between 1 April and sometime in May?---That's right, but I spoke with the stewards. The stewards sent this document to me and I sought to get an agreement that was based on the model - based on their agreement and I sought to get a draft agreement done at the Melbourne office which incorporated the award and all the other bits and pieces.

PN197

Is it fair to say that J2 engendered some urgency with regard to renegotiating a new agreement at this workshop?---Beg your pardon?

PN198

Is it fair to say that J2 engendered some urgency - - -?---It certainly did.

PN199

- - - with regard to renegotiations?---It certainly did. It put a timeframe on it in my view that come the 1st - or the end of June that the company intended to terminate the EBA.

PN200

Given the fact that you didn't meet with the company, you directed your energies through the delegates to the company. Is that correct?---That is correct in some circumstances, yes, but I also sought to - obviously to - once we had an appropriate document to meet with the company to have some discussions.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN201

Indeed?---As you would be aware the members did meet and send in a draft log to the company.

PN202

I put to you the log of claims actually didn't hit the deck until 5 July. That's correct, isn't it?---I believe so, yes.

PN203

The bargaining period notice and the log of claims were served on this company on 5 July 2006. That's correct, isn't it?---I believe so, yes.

PN204

In terms of the negotiations in April, May and June, there was no log of claims as such, it was the draft document. There was then a series of meetings with the delegates and the company and you were involved in those meetings at a distance. You would agree, wouldn't you?---I would certainly agree, yes, but not in all of them.

PN205

No, and as I understand your evidence, you met with Mr Briggs on three occasions?---I believe so, yes.

PN206

You made an arrangement to meet with Mr Briggs on the fourth occasion but you couldn't make that meeting?---That's right.

PN207

That meeting went ahead with the delegates though, didn't it?---It did and I met with Mr Briggs immediately the day after.

PN208

In terms of those meetings, the document that was the subject of the negotiations, the proposed agreement, I think you've already given evidence on this point, but it changed on a number of occasions and you were sent a number of drafts. I think you said you received at least three?---Yes, at least three. That's right.

PN209

Following the company's application on 22 June - 22nd of - just bear with me. It was June, wasn't it? - 22 June, the matter was listed for 10 July. Do you recall that?---Yes, I do.

PN210

Her Honour listed it for that day. You sought an adjournment of those proceedings, didn't you?---Yes, I did.

PN211

Or through Mr Oliver?---Well, through the union, yes, Mr Oliver, yes, Dave Oliver, the state secretary.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN212

The state secretary wrote to Workplace Legal representing its client MES and sought an adjournment of those proceedings?---I believe so, yes.

PN213

That adjournment was sought on the basis of further discussions. That's true, isn't it?---that is true, yes.

PN214

Those proceedings were then adjourned, weren't they?---That's correct.

PN215

A mass meeting was convened of the employees at Yallourn for the company to put their position to those employees, wasn't it?---I believe so, yes.

PN216

That meeting didn't go ahead for whatever reason. That's correct, isn't it?---I believe so, yes.

PN217

But a negotiating committee of four employees, plus the delegate, was established following that meeting. That's correct, isn't it?---I believe there was a group of four and the delegate that were put in place. Actually the exact timeframe when that happened, when those people were sat with the company or when it happened, I have - obviously I wasn't there when it happened but the delegate did inform me that the guys had decided to get four guys from the workshop to be in the meetings with the company.

PN218

The employees had elected - and I think you said Mr Bloom had confirmed with you that the employees had elected a negotiating group of four, plus himself?
---That's it.

PN219

Correct?---That's what I understand the situation was.

PN220

That group met with the company on, I put it to you, at least three occasions?
---I believe they met with the company. I don't know whether they met with them three times or 33 times. I have - but I understand that they did meet with the company. I am aware of one meeting that they had with the company but obviously there was some angst at that meeting and the company sought after that meeting to give our shop steward an official warning.

PN221

Were you consulted by the negotiating group during the course of their discussions in the way you had been consulted prior?---No, I wasn't, but I did have some contact with the shop steward but I wasn't consulted about the content of the negotiations. What I was - did become aware of that there was going to be a meeting and obviously that didn't take place.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN222

Let me just go back a step. You've got a matter before the Commission, the matter is adjourned on the basis of further discussions?---Yes.

PN223

There's then a meeting which the company convenes to put its position to the employees - - -?---Yes.

PN224

- - - which falls apart and I put it to you it falls apart because the delegate says, "We're not having this meeting." That's correct, isn't it?---I believe that the meeting did fall apart on the basis of, what I was informed, was the company's position - - -

PN225

Were you at the meeting?---No, I wasn't and I wasn't and just so you understand, too, I wasn't invited to the meeting. I wasn't aware that the company had - until late that the company proposed to have a meeting with the employees to push their draft.

PN226

When you say you weren't informed until late, when were you informed that there was going to be a meeting of the employees?---Look, I think it might have been either the day before or maybe on the day. It was very, very late that I found out.

PN227

You had an MH application before you, which you obviously take seriously?
---Yes.

PN228

You know 24 hours in advance there's going to me a mass meeting of the employees yet you don't go. Any reason?---I would have to check where I was at that point in time but obviously I have responsibilities for a whole range of other places.

PN229

I wouldn't argue that. There's then a negotiating committee elected by the employees in lieu of the meeting, one presumes, and that committee meets with the company. The delegate is involved in that committee. You agree with that?
---I agree that the delegate - that there was a committee. When they were elected, whether it was prior to the proposed meeting for the draft or post that meeting, I'm not sure when that actually happened, but I do agree that the delegate, along with those people had some meeting or meetings with the company at particular points of time. Yes.

PN230

Did the delegate tell you what was happening at those meetings?---The delegate informed me that the company had put up their draft or their latest draft at that meeting and that obviously the majority of the members at the workshop were against the company's draft.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN231

Did the delegate ask you for advice with regard to that?---The delegate, I understand - yes, he sought my advice and part of my advice was to - that I would try to set up some meetings with the company so I could become involved with the negotiations.

PN232

Can I put it to you you were already involved in the negotiations by giving advice to the delegate?---If a phone call from a delegate is negotiating with the company, then I would suggest that that's not - what I was after was direct, sit down negotiations with the company as I have done with the whole previous range of agreements, sitting down to negotiate and go through the issues and try to identify where we were apart.

PN233

This committee came to a position after a series of meetings where they were. three outstanding issues between the parties. Those three outstanding issues were the wage increase, the RDOs and the IUS, do you agree?---I agree now, but at that point in time I was not aware that they were the three outstanding issues. My understanding was that they were apart on what the company's draft model was and what the wishes of the workforce was. I am now aware - - -

PN234

.....?---I am now aware, after you've given us a document that there are substantial issues in regards - well, I suppose the three identified issues are obviously the income protection, the RDO and obviously the pay rise and from our point of view, obviously the award protection for those members.

PN235

We'll get to that. May as well deal with that now?---Yes, all right.

PN236

I put it to you there's no difference between the parties on the award matter, none whatsoever?---I haven't had that discussion with the company but going by the draft that you put forward the other day, I don't see the award incorporated in that draft.

PN237

I put it to you that it was put very clearly to you, to you personally, that the award matters, the prohibited content, was a completely acceptable proposition?---I believe that the company has never pushed that they wanted to strip back the award. I don't believe that's ever been a serious issue between the company and ourselves.

PN238

Sorry, say that again, I missed that?---I don't believe that that's been an issue between the company and ourselves in regards to the award - how the agreement is built. In other words, the agreement is built on the Metal Industry Award.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN239

Yes, there's no difference between the parties on that?---No, I believe so.

PN240

It's not an unsettled issue, I put to you?---In my view it isn't.

PN241

We get to a point where there is a clear difference between the parties on those three matters, wages, IUS and RDOs?---That's correct.

PN242

The company asked the negotiating group to go back to the employees, the permanent employees that is, and ask the permanent employees what their position was with regard to those three matters so that the negotiations could continue. That's true, isn't it?---The meeting that was convened up there in regards to those three issues, I'm not aware that that was the scope of the meeting. My understanding is that they were to go back with the draft that the company put up and have some discussions.

PN243

Were you at the meeting?---No, I wasn't.

PN244

Were you asked by the company to convene that meeting?---No, I wasn't.

PN245

Fair enough. I'll ask Mr Bloom that question then. Did you have contact with the delegate just prior to that meeting at all?---No, I didn't. When you say prior to that meeting, he informed me that they were going to have a meeting, that the company was proposing to have a meeting to take their draft forward and have discussions with the work group.

PN246

Did Mr Bloom tell you what the proposal was with regard to the casuals at that meeting?---He did tell me that the company's proposal was that they wanted to - casuals - they wanted to exclude the casuals from that meeting or as been suggested here, that casuals would not get paid for the time to attend that meeting.

PN247

That's correct. There was never a question of excluding the casuals, was there?
---I believe that there was some inference that if casuals go to the meeting - I don't know. It's obviously the company's proposal for the meeting.

PN248

You've got J5 in front of you, haven't you? J5 is pretty clear in its terms, isn't it? Casuals can attend if they want but they won't be paid for the time they're there?
---Yes, I believe that's so.

PN249

You knew that was the case?---I do now.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN250

Can I ask you how many casual employees were on site at that point in time?---I have no idea how many were on site but I - who knows? I mean, it fluctuates up there at that - and I believe it was an information meeting on the EBA.

PN251

In your evidence-in-chief you said there was no obligation on the company to provide casuals with access to that meeting. You agree with that?---I agree that - well, the EBA does go to - there is a cluse in the EBA in regards to union matters. that talks about there can be information meetings if it's agreed between the parties.

PN252

If it's agreed between the parties?---That's right.

PN253

It wasn't, was it?---Well, obviously it wasn't agreed with the company.

PN254

The company told you of its intent, did not?---The company never contacted me, Morris.

PN255

What's this email then? Is this not an email that's telling you what the position is - no, I withdraw that, it's after the event?---Of course.

PN256

I withdraw that?---You know that.

PN257

In terms of the meeting, it didn't occur, did it?---That's what I've been informed and that's what the email says.

PN258

Did you give any advice to the delegate with regard to not having that meeting?
---No, I didn't tell them not to attend the meeting but I did say to the delegate that we had a position that if there was to be a meeting on an EBA, it should be the right of all union members to attend.

PN259

What did the delegate say to you when you said that?---He said that the company would not pay - would only pay for the casuals - sorry, the permanents, but would not pay for the casuals. That in our view was obviously unacceptable.

PN260

That was unacceptable in whose view, in your view and the delegate's?---Well, obviously we would expect that if our members are called to a meeting by the company to be informed on an EBA, that they would be paid.

PN261

Did you tell the delegate not to have the meeting?---I told the delegate that they needed to make a decision on whether they attended or not.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN262

Or not?---Yes.

PN263

You knew that would kill the negotiations, didn't you?---No, I didn't say that was going to kill the negotiations.

PN264

You've asked for an adjournment of Commission proceedings on the 10th; you're aware that a negotiating group has been established; you're aware that there are some differences between the parties, we might debate what those differences are, but you're aware of that?---Obviously.

PN265

The company then says to the delegate, go take the straw poll of the permanent employees and find out what the position is on these matters and you then advised the delegate not to have the meeting. That's correct, isn't it?---No, I didn't advise the delegate not to have the meeting. The company sought to exclude a section of the workforce from that meeting on the basis that they would not pay them. That was the company's call specifically on that and obviously our members had a view on that.

PN266

You would agree, of course, that the casual employees currently in place in the shop may or may not be employed when the matter comes for final determination?---Obviously, as casuals, they could be terminated at any point in time.

PN267

That's right, and they're employed by the hour effectively, aren't they?---I believe so. I believe that's the terms and conditions of their employment under the current EBA.

PN268

So the eight employees who are there as casual employees at that point in time may or may not have a say at the end of the day as to whether the agreement is approved or not, you agree?---If they're not there obviously at that point in time, yes, they may not have a say.

PN269

That's correct?---And if they are there, then obviously they will have a say.

PN270

Sure. I put it to you that it's perfectly logical and perfectly sensible for my client to seek the views of its permanent workforce with regard to matters that are outstanding between the parties. That's perfectly logical, isn't it?---Of course it is.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN271

Of course it is. The meeting didn't occur to make that determination?---I believe that's correct.

PN272

That's correct. My client then reinstituted its application or asked for the matter to be called back on and the matter was then listed for last week, you agree?---I agree.

PN273

The employees have been - I withdraw that. You're aware that the company then posted notices to the employees seeking further discussions, aren't you?---No, I'm not.

PN274

You're not? Okay. Were you contacted by the delegate after the reinstitution of this application?---After the reinstitution I contacted the delegate.

PN275

Once the matter was relisted, and I think it was - the request for the matter to be relisted was sent to her Honour on 25 July. Are you aware of that?---I'll take your accuracy on the dates.

PN276

It was copied to you on that date and also copied to the state secretary on that date?---Yes.

PN277

The matter didn't come back on till, as I say, last week. Were there further discussions between the parties in that intervening period?---I did attend that site and have some discussions with Russell Briggs regarding another matter. At that discussions I was sought to set up meeting dates with the company to forward the negotiations in regards to - or forward the negotiations with the company in regards to finalising a document and obviously you have that documentation. The company - Russell obviously sought advice from wherever he seeks it and he said, "I'll come back to you on Friday." The following week on the Wednesday, when I hadn't heard from him, I then sent him a letter seeking to put in place some more dates for meetings, as you would be aware of.

PN278

On 8 August the matter came on before her Honour, last week?---That's correct.

PN279

Without going into any details, you would agree that my client sought to have further negotiations directly with yourself and Mr Terzic?---We did have some talks in the Commission on that day, yes.

PN280

You were directly involved in those negotiations with the decision-makers of my client. That's correct, isn't it?---That's correct. That's correct. We did try to conciliate, yes, and that failed.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN281

That failed to reach an agreement. The matter was adjourned?---Yes.

PN282

Once again without going into any details, have there been attempts to resolve the matter between then and now?---I believe that there's been some contact with yourself in regards to setting up a meeting. That was - I understand the meeting was to take place on Tuesday. That meeting didn't take place obviously and obviously we're back here.

PN283

I put it to you that there are three matters between the parties. I put it to you that the IUS remains an outstanding matter. I put it to you that if the company maintains its position that it will not pay more than the 1.4 per cent it's obliged to pay, then the prospect of reaching agreement on that matter between yourselves and my client are extraordinarily limited?---I don't agree with that.

PN284

You don't agree with that?---No.

PN285

You don't agree with that?---No, and part of the reason is obviously you're quoting what the company currently has with a particular insurance company. I'm aware of the fact that there's a number of insurance companies out there that provide a number of - a range of cover for a range of percentages.

PN286

RDOs remain an outstanding issue?---I believe that RDOs is one of the issues that we need to sit down and discuss. From our point of view or from the membership point of view, I believe that that is an outstanding issue and that is a claim that your client has put on us in regards to taking away of that RDO. I understand the arrangement at the moment is that the members work a 42 and a half hour week and your client has put to us that the members go back to the 38 hour week and forgo one of those RDOs.

PN287

Correct?---That is an issue that we are apart on, yes.

PN288

The final issue that's outstanding is the wages?---Yes. That's obviously the quantum that your client has offered and obviously what the members are seeking is obviously apart at this point in time.

PN289

They're the three matters that my client believes are outstanding. Are there any other matters that you believe are outstanding? I think you've said the award matter?---The award protection, and I don't think we're apart on that. I think you'll find it's - well, he can obviously talk for himself, but I don't think we're apart on the award, about incorporating the ward in the current agreement, putting the appropriate protections in there.

**** STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD XXN MR ADDISON
PN290

You agree that the three matters are the three matters that are outstanding?---I believe that the three main matters that we're apart on at this point in time are what is currently the wages, the RDOs and obviously the income protection.

PN291

Just bear with me a moment. I have nothing further, your Honour.

PN292

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Ms Jones.

PN293

MS JONES: I have just one question that arises out of the cross-examination.

<RE-EXAMINATION BY MS JONES [11.37AM]

PN294

MS JONES: Mr Addison referred to a meeting that was arranged between last week, when the matter was adjourned, and this week and you agreed that it didn't go ahead. Why didn't it go ahead, Mr Dodd?---It didn't go ahead because obviously we asked the company, in the spirit of negotiations, to withdraw their termination of the EBA.

PN295

What was the company's response?---They would proceed. I believe that's their position. Obviously their counsel can talk for them.

PN296

Thank you. I have no further questions.

PN297

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Mr Dodd?---Thank you, Commissioner.

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [11.38AM]

PN298

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Should I take this evidence as a broad hint that I should chair another conciliation conference?

PN299

MR ADDISON: Your Honour, we've never made any secret of our position. It's in writing to you. We're happy to have negotiations. We're happy to try and resolve the matter but it's really up to the AMWU.

PN300

MS JONES: Your Honour, my instructions are these, that the state secretary has said that he's prepared to have a meeting to, if you like, settle these outstanding issues. There's a view that they can be and you can see from the evidence that there is a capacity there still to go, but the position is that they wish this application to be withdrawn before the state secretary gets involved, otherwise from their point of view, and you've seen 1 April notice, this has been something that's been a threat over the negotiations for sometime. The view is that negotiations aren't genuine, absent the removal of the application so the position is that there is certainly scope for settlement but there is an outstanding issue and that's the withdrawal of the application which is not a big step to take because obviously matters can be listed again and application made again, but that is the position, your Honour.

PN301

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: What do you say, Mr Addison?

PN302

MR ADDISON: Your Honour, I say that's a nonsense. The company has its rights under the Act. The company has - and the evidence from Mr Dodd is there have been multiple meetings over the period of three months and it's a nonsense to say there haven't been genuine negotiations here, absolute nonsense. There have been genuine negotiations, there's been a genuine attempt. Even as far as last week it was my client that said, "Let's go into conference. Let's see if we can fix this," and it was the AMWU that wouldn't come to the party, so to speak.

PN303

There have been discussions between the parties over the week. We are more than happy to try and resolve this matters, more than happy, but we don't have to give up our rights under the Act to do that. We're happy to put this matter on hold and have some discussions and try and resolve the matter. If it doesn't resolve, then we reserve our right to pursue our application.

PN304

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Ms Jones, let's assume for the moment that the application is withdrawn, when is Mr Oliver available, do you know?

PN305

MS JONES: I believe he's just settling an Amcor matter at the moment but within the next - before the end of this week certainly.

PN306

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: He's not available this afternoon?

PN307

MS JONES: He may well be available this afternoon.

PN308

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I'm going to adjourn so you can seek some instructions from him.

PN309

MS JONES: As to his availability?

PN310

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes. One of the options that may be available to me is to call a compulsory conference in respect to the matter. I'll adjourn so you can make that necessary contact.

PN311

MS JONES: Right. Thank you.

<SHORT ADJOURNMENT [11.41AM]
<RESUMED [12.11PM]

PN312

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Ms Jones.

PN313

MS JONES: Your Honour, I have contacted Mr Oliver. The situation is, in summary, that he understands the obligations under a compulsory conference. Friday afternoon is the earliest for this reason. He's at a picket line at Amcor at the moment. They've had a court injunction so it's not some small matter. He is being required to get the blokes back to work. He then has a meeting with Visy Board in relation to another EBA, then he's back at Amcor and tonight at South Pacific. Thursday, he's in Sydney, Friday morning at the car company and so Friday afternoon. He says, however, he can make the assistant state secretary available and direct him to attend the conferences if your Honour so wishes, but he does apologise. It's just the nature of the EBA everywhere that is happening at this point in time.

PN314

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: What time is he available Friday afternoon?

PN315

MS JONES: Friday afternoon I would say from two onwards, as a safe bet.

PN316

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: What do you say, Mr Addison?

PN317

MR ADDISON: Can I take a minute, your Honour?

PN318

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes. I'll adjourn briefly.

<SHORT ADJOURNMENT [12.13PM]
<RESUMED [12.15PM]

PN319

MR ADDISON: Your Honour, we're available Friday afternoon to meet.

PN320

THE SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. I'll adjourn this matter then until Friday afternoon at 2 o'clock for a conference involving Mr Oliver and any other representatives from the union they wish and appropriate representatives from the company at 2 o'clock. I now adjourn.

PN321

MR ADDISON: If your Honour pleases.

<ADJOURNED UNTIL FRIDAY 18 AUGUST 2006 [2.15PM]

LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs

STEPHEN WILLIAM JAMES DODD, AFFIRMED PN55
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS JONES PN55
EXHIBIT #J1 DOCUMENT DATED UNDER THE LETTERHEAD OF MES FROM MR ELIOTT DATED 12/11/2004 PN71
EXHIBIT #J2 DOCUMENT DATED 1/04/2006 FROM MES TO ALL PARTIES BOUND BY CERTIFIED AGREEMENT PN95
EXHIBIT #J3 EMAIL TO ELLEN MALONE FROM RUSSELL BRIGGS AND THE ONE UNDERNEATH IT IN REVERSE DATED 18/07/2006 PN103
EXHIBIT #J4 LETTER TO MR BRIGGS FROM MR DODD ON AMWU LETTERHEAD DATED 26/07/2006 PN112
EXHIBIT #J5 EMAIL TO ELLEN MALONE FROM
MR BRIGGS RE MEETING DATES FOR EBA NEGOTIATIONS DATED 26/07/2006 PN116
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR ADDISON PN139
RE-EXAMINATION BY MS JONES PN293
THE WITNESS WITHDREW PN297