AG2006/4487, Transcript of Proceedings [2006] AIRCTrans 744 (15 May 2006)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

---

Workplace Relations Act 1996 14980-1

DEPUTY PRESIDENT IVES

AG2006/4487

APPLICATION BY CHUBB SECURITY AUSTRALIA PTY LTD T/AS CHUBB ELECTRONIC SECURITY
s.170MH pre-reform Act - Application to terminate agreement (public interest)
(AG2006/4487)

MELBOURNE

2.05PM, WEDNESDAY, 03 MAY 2006

Continued from 28/4/2006

PN1

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you all for your attendance and I guess you might be a bit bemused as to why you're here and what your function is supposed to be so I will attempt to enlighten you about that first of all. Predominantly the reason that you are here is that I need to take your views into account in relation to the two applications that are currently before the Commission, that is the application to terminate the two agreements which as I understand cover the terms and conditions of your employment. Can I just get an indication to the extent that you know it at first and perhaps just by show of hands will do. How many of the people in the room are covered by the services agreement? Right.

PN2

MR HANGER: Sorry, your Honour, they're actually half/half if you like.

PN3

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Right, so it's about 50 per cent split, is it?

PN4

MR HANGER: Yes.

PN5

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Okay, thank you. Look, just bear with me for one second. There are currently two applications before the Commission to terminate two agreements. One is the Chubb Security Trading As Chubb Electronic Security Agreement which is an agreement between the company Chubb and the ETU and the other one is the Chubb Security Australia Service Department Victoria ETU Enterprise Agreement 2003-2005, again an agreement between Chubb and the ETU. The provisions of the Act govern the way in which I need to consider that particular application. Both agreements have passed their nominal expiry date so it's open for an application or applications such as these to be made.

PN6

The relevant section of the Act requires the Commission to obtain the views of parties bound by the agreement. Now, the agreements bind essentially three parties. They bind the employer, being Chub, they bind the union and they bind the employees whose work is covered by the terms of those agreement and that is, they bind the people in this room. So it's incumbent upon me on receiving the application to take such steps as I consider appropriate to obtain the views of persons bound by the agreement about whether it should be terminated. That's the reason for having you come in here today. To enable that to occur without even the appearance that there might be any sort of influence I've excluded both the employer and the union from these proceedings so that in effect I am gaining the views of the individuals that are in this room.

PN7

Now, there's a couple of ways that we could progress with that. I will probably ask you - the point of this is for me to get your views, not for you to get mine, so I need to make that clear first of all. It's not a circumstance where I'm here to enable you to ask me what I think, it's quite the reverse. You're here so that I get to ask you what you think and then take those views into account. Well, to the extent that you don't have a view, well, you don't have a view, but to the extent that you do have a view this is your opportunity to have that view considered. There is a couple of ways we can do that and I think in the first instance it's appropriate that I simply ask questions and to the extent that you want to respond to those questions if you could simply stand and identify yourself first of all and then provide me with whatever view you have or whatever response to the question that you have.

PN8

That is recorded. It's recorded mainly for my benefit so that I'm able to see in fact what the views of people are after this hearing is completed. But I would also intend and I should advise you of this, subject to what any individual might have to say on the matter, to make the views available to both the employer and the union so that they those views as recorded could be perused by the parties themselves. Now, to that end I think if that's acceptable then we can probably deal with this simply by means of me posing the question and you simply standing, telling me first of all what you name is, telling me secondly which are the agreements you are bound by.

PN9

If we simply refer to them as the service agreement or the service department agreement first of all, that is matter AG2006/4487 but I will simply refer to it as the service agreement and the other one is the electronic security agreement. So I will refer to them in those ways. If you could simply stand, as I say, identify yourself and say that I’m covered by the terms of either the service agreement or the electronic security agreement that will be sufficient and then you can provide those views. Now, to the extent that anybody in here wants to provide the Commission with a view that firstly they want to be known to other people that are here, then I'm prepared to offer the opportunity once we've gone through the more public aspect of it to provide that opportunity to individuals.

PN10

I am further prepared to provide the opportunity in that context to have that view remain confidential in that I would record it, however I would not make that particular view available to the parties. So if there were somebody here who felt look, I want to give you a view about it but I don't want other people to know about it in the room, neither do I want it made available to the union or the company, then once we've finished with the first part of the proceedings then I can make that available to you. So you can provide a view with everybody here which will be recorded and made available to both parties, the union and the employer, you can provide a view independently with nobody else in here except myself and my associate and the transcript recorder which would then be made available to the parties, or you can provide a view independently without anybody else in here except for the parties that I've mentioned which would not be made available to the parties. They're the three options.

PN11

Does everybody understand that? It's probably easier to ask did anybody not understand it. Okay. Now, bearing in mind what I said about this being an opportunity for you to provide me with your views as to the termination of this agreement and I can't care who we start with here but I'll simply ask that if we take it one at a time rather than everybody speaking and if you simply stand and as I say, identify yourself. To date what have you been told about this application, does anybody want to respond to that?

PN12

MR HANGER: I might, your Honour.

PN13

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN14

MR HANGER: Patrick Hanger is my name, I'm part of the service department.

PN15

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN16

MR HANGER: We've sort have been in negotiations for a long period of time between the ETU and the company and it got to a point around about March this year with the new government regulations where the company found that they were in breach of the Building Code of Practice and I'm not too sure, and another piece of legislation which came in at the end of March. So the company, we were trying to go through the process of trying to get some sort of agreement up and virtually by the end of - or through that period. As a group we always said to the company that we would prefer to an ETU backed document, have whatever form that is and provided it was code compliant and the company was - well, our understanding that the company always said that that would be the case.

PN17

It wasn't until virtually the last week around about the end of April where we couldn't come to any agreement and the company then decide to terminate, that they would apply to the Commission to terminate the agreement and that's where we stand now. So as a group we pretty well understand why the company has to take this path, although we don't necessarily agree with and sort of that's where we are.

PN18

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. Does anybody have a different view from that? Okay. The next I have is what do you understand to be the implications of termination of this agreement in respect of your employment? What if anything have you been told by either the union or the company, or by anybody else for that matter, as to what will happen in respect of your terms and conditions of employment if the Commission does terminate this agreement?

PN19

MR ANDERSON: Ross Anderson, your Honour, from the service department.

PN20

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Right.

PN21

MR ANDERSON: From what Chubb's told us they'll honour our terms and conditions if it is terminated so they say it will go on, that's their word, and from the ETUs point of view they've told us that basically legally that will mean we've got nothing to fall back on and they could basically sack us all tomorrow I suppose if it's terminated from their point of view. So yes, basically as far as we know is we're just taking Chubb's word for things, it's terminated that our current terms and conditions will continue until such time we do get an agreement up.

PN22

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Right. So Chubb's advised you that the terms and conditions that apply under the existing agreement will continue?

PN23

MR ANDERSON: Yes, they've provided us with a couple of letters to that fact but yes, as far as we know that doesn't bind them legally or anything like that to do that.

PN24

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, that's right. I will come to that in a minute.

PN25

MR ANDERSON: Okay.

PN26

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Okay, thank you. Has anybody got a different understanding than that of the implications?

PN27

MR FRANGIOSA: Your Honour, Phil Frangiosa from the service department also. Just to say that's correct what he said but on that note it was mentioned that they'll abide by the conditions, et cetera up till the 31 December this year, just on the note given by the company.

PN28

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. That was actually the next question I was going to ask, is there a time frame and did you understand there would be a time frame put on. Does anybody have a different understanding of the time frame that the terms and conditions would apply for?

PN29

MR HANGER: Yes, your Honour, Patrick Hanger again. Well, we are now up to the third document and it doesn't have a time frame on it. I suppose one of the other issues too, the fact is we've got an acting general manager who's said one thing, we've got another document coming from the manager director of Australia which is good and at the moment too it just seems one of the problem, I mean I'm not here to bag Chubb, but one of the problems we've had through the negotiations is there really just hasn't been a consistent management representative through that whole process. I think that's one of the other things that the guys in some ways are very wary of, is that the acting general manager, well, as of next week probably won't be acting because another new general manager is today appearing to get around on the job.

PN30

So effectively what we're probably fearful of is one person signing out a document and then another person coming in the next week saying whatever the acting general manager said that's bad luck so - - -

PN31

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. If it assists in any way, I've received documentation forwarded to me today on behalf of the employer that states that it encloses a document and states that the company undertakes and has undertaken to each of the employees to apply the terms of this document that they've sent through to me until 31 December 2006 which is consistent with what was put to me at the end of the table. Has there been any indication given to any of you as to what would occur after 31 December 2006?

PN32

MR CHRISTIE: Sorry, your Honour.

PN33

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, you were first, you go ahead.

PN34

MR CHRISTIE: Michael Christie. The quick answer to that, no. I have asked the question and there was no answer, no response to that.

PN35

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: None, no response at all?

PN36

MR CHRISTIE: No, no response whatsoever.

PN37

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Okay.

PN38

MR CHRISTIE: I made the point to actually ring the HR person, officer, and ask that question and wouldn't answer the question.

PN39

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Has anybody got a different view? Has anybody - yes.

PN40

MR BLAIR: Ken Blair, electronics. There was mention about we're going back to awards of electrical trades which is basically a 15 year old award.

PN41

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: So there was mention of that by whom?

PN42

MR BLAIR: In an email.

PN43

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Right. And you say that was mentioned in the context of circumstances that would apply after 31 December 2006?

PN44

MR BLAIR: Well, it appears we'd based under the electrical trades or some award.

PN45

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Right, thank you. Yes.

PN46

MR COWELL: Your Honour, Shane Cowell from electronics. I'm under the understanding that by the end of December once the verbal agreement has expired that nothing would be legally stopping Chubb from reverting us back to an award which our wages and conditions would be shift right back and there would be nothing legally binding Chubb stopping them doing that. I think the turn out today is great and the only reason that we're all here is because we are very concerned about what they can do to us.

PN47

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN48

MR COWELL: I mean I've been with the company 11/12 years, I've seen a lot happen and so have a lot of these gentlemen here and our management consistently turns over and we're told one thing, they seem to leave and then nothing ever transpires and we're always left in the dark. So that's why we're all very concerned. In the three months we've been negotiating we've turned over general managers, state managers and HR people.

PN49

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Would it be fair and I don't mean this in any way to lead you or to put word in the mouths of anybody but I simply ask the question given some of the responses that have just been made, would it be fair to say that there is some doubt amongst you as to the company's commitment to abide by the undertaking that it's given?

PN50

MR STEVENSON: Alex Stevenson, electronics. Yes, I have a concern about that. The thing is the ball's been in their court and the fact that the IR laws are coming in and our agreement was going to run out, no-one wanted to pick that up and run with it at Chubb but it was something that was always going to happen. All of a sudden it came to a crunch where they needed something in by a particular date and then it was made - well, I don't know about these fellows, but I was made to held account and felt that it was my reason why we quote for jobs in others states because we don't have an agreement and we're holding up works in Chubb nationally. Right, I don't know if that's how you guys took it, but we were sort of saying you have to sign this, fellows, if you don't sign this document and ratify this agreement with us you aren't indispensable, and they were the words from the acting general manager at a meeting which really made me concerned about what's going to happen come the end of December and really between us all I don't see how we can actually then sort of act as a group when we're all of a sudden becoming cut into individuals, other than being with the ETU where we've always felt comfortable in the fact that the awards are there.

PN51

It's not like we're asking for anything more. We're just virtually all on just the average wage. It's not like we're making millions of dollars and the thing is we all work pretty hard. As it is, it's said is the company management have changed a lot over the course of time. At the moment we're got the other acting installation manager has come down from Queensland again who was down five years ago to fix everything up, as he came in the door he said hello to me and I said, "Yes, we're still here". We always have been, I've been there for 12 years and the thing is and that always changes and the thing is a lot of the faith that we give to management I don't think is ratified a lot of times, so I have leanings towards as a group ETU agreement that I prefer, is because I don't think that management have any indication or inclination to actually have a decent agreement for the workers in Victoria. Thank you.

PN52

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Yes, sorry before you - I will give you an opportunity in a moment and then the gentleman that stood first of all gave me a view as to why he saw the company making these applications, I just want to ascertain that that view is something that's shared by other people, except for the people that have spoken already. What is the view of the people here as to the company's reasons for warning to terminate this agreement? Perhaps you can answer.

PN53

MR MURRAY: Thank you, your Honour, Stuart Murray from the electronic department.

PN54

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The question I'm asking is why do you think the company has made these applications, why do they want to terminate these agreements?

PN55

MR MURRAY: I believe if they terminate the agreement they're then able to bid on government work and I believe they'll be one of the first companies that have done this which gives them a big advantage over any competitors. They'll be the first company to have this is in a private agreement with the workers and
therefore - - -

PN56

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: When were you provided with that information?

PN57

MR MURRAY: This is from talks with management, you know, we are going either force people to have entered into this agreement, like a non - - -

PN58

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Management told you - - -

PN59

MR MURRAY: They didn't say they were going to have an agreement at all but that's where all the implications seemed to lead to, that they'll the first security company in Victoria to have this agreement which then allows them to bid on all the government work more or less unopposed.

PN60

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, thank you.

PN61

MR HANGER: I would like to add to what Stuart is saying. Effectively the one contract that we do know of is virtually there's only two companies in Australia that provide the service for this government job and being security techs most of us know virtually about ….. probably someone in any other security company in Melbourne we sort of know people because a lot of them are ex Chubb, so we know what other companies aren't compliant and that's one of the things we really - I mean there's nothing wrong with Chubb trying to get the competitive advantage over these to try and get these contracts going. So we believe - we fully understand why Chubb's trying to do what they're trying to do.

PN62

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: So you know the effect of a company who is tendering on work for a government contract not having an agreement with code compliant, you know the effect of that?

PN63

MR HANGER: Yes, effectively they'll be denied the work. That's right, yes.

PN64

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, okay.

PN65

MR HANGER: Yes.

PN66

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: And what's your view on that? If I could just have somebody - yes.

PN67

MR PELLE: Dominic Pelle from service.

PN68

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN69

MR PELLE: From day one we've always been given an understanding that Chubb would provide us with a - or they would approve a code compliant agreement when it becomes available. At this stage there's not one around but the union is working on that. So we're always told that when a code compliant agreement would come about that they would be willing to sign on and authorise it, so we had the union approach Chubb a couple of weeks ago and presented a legal document in the form of a deed which simply stated that when a code compliant EBA would become available that Chubb would look at it and commit to it.

PN70

Chubb weren't interested in that at all, they sort of knocked it back, but they're willing to give us written documents saying that they would look at a code compliant agreement when it becomes available, but when we have a representative of ours because we're all union members, we basically put it to them formally by the union representing us and they didn't seem interested in that. So we're sort of thinking, you know, if they're interested in that sort of thing can we really trust Chubb in what, you know, when a code compliant agreement does come about what happens then, because at this stage we've only got, you know, words on paper which are as good as - you know, they're as good as verbal, you know, as words. But we really need something in writing that give us a bit more trust and confidence in Chubb. So that's where we're sort of, you know, where we're sort of a bit worried about that at this stage.

PN71

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. So the view as to whether the agreement should be terminated, which I suppose is the most important question that I have to ask, given that you've answered my questions about what the company has suggested will be the implications and what you understand to be the implications of such a termination, what is your view as to whether the agreements should be terminated? Yes.

PN72

MR PREIS: It's Robert Preis from electronics. I don't believe we need or wish to terminate it. The reasons why is because of management how we can't really trust them because I've been following my like pay slips and classifications and how it goes on each year and that and basically we're the ones that have to push it to get the payments through when its due and Chubb and management seem to hold off as long as they can. So if we terminate this sort of agreement we don't know where we're heading with and also at least if we keep this one going we've got something to back us up with all the classifications, all our protection and things like that.

PN73

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right.

PN74

MR PREIS: Because, yes, there's a lot of outstanding and we've got to apply for it each time and it's written in the ….. document.

PN75

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Feel free to answer that question either with a yes or a no or to add as this gentleman did, reasons for it, it's up to you. Anybody else? Your view as to whether the agreement should be terminated?

PN76

MR STEVENSON: Alex Stevenson, no.

PN77

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: And you're covered - - -

PN78

MR STEVENSON: Electronics, sorry.

PN79

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you.

PN80

MR COWELL: Your Honour, Shane Cowell. The answer would be no.

PN81

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you.

PN82

MR CARABOTT: Your Honour, Justin Carabott. The answer to that is no.

PN83

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you.

PN84

MR CHRISTIE: Michael Christie, electronics. The answer to that would be no.

PN85

MR MURRAY: Your Honour, Stuart Murray. The answer is no. Also I would like to add unlike all of these guys who have been here you know, five, 10, 12 years in the position, I'm only been in the company for 12 weeks with them. Now, in that 12 week period we have signed up with an enterprise bargaining agreement and I've gone from one company with an EBA to another company which also has a similar one and my wages have dropped slightly. On following that up there are some allowances that I haven't been paid or should have been paid with Chubb and they're in the process of trying to sort that out but that's taken 12 weeks.

PN86

They're still not fully sorted out and it's caused a bit of trouble at home as a result. My wages have fallen, savings have eroded slightly and my wife just had to cancel her private health insurance last week to make everything meet and she's in the process of looking for full time or part time as we have two young children. Having the benefit of having an agreement there in front of me I can see that this is what I should be getting, six months I should be here and this would have been 12 months. If that's removed it puts a lot of pressure and worry on our family.

PN87

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Anybody else?

PN88

MR BLAIR: Ken Blair. I've been with the company a bit over 16 years and my answer is no.

PN89

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: And you're covered by the?

PN90

MR BLAIR: Electronics.

PN91

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you.

PN92

MR MATTHEWS: Craig Matthews, electronics. I've been with the company five years and I can understand the way that the company is taking this path to make the agreement. I don't agree with it at all and like Stuart, I've got a seven month old son, I've been married almost two years and I can't afford to save enough to get a deposit for a house just to get set up in life. It's hard enough as it is with house prices let alone to save and it's a putting a lot of pressure on at home. Like my wife doesn't want to go back out to work but if she has to, she has to and I'd much rather her be at home looking after my son in this early stage of his life and then maybe we can sort things out, but it's put a lot of undue stress on the situation at home.

PN93

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Anyone else? Yes.

PN94

MR FRANGIOSA: Your Honour, Phil Frangiosa from the service department. As you've seen, no, I don't hope the agreement isn't terminated but I would like to add the fact that with the discussions that we've had so far, you see, it's not a case of we don't like Chubb or we're against or against the union. It's nothing to do with that really. It's a case of no confidence. It's of a case of you're saying there's confidence with the way things seem to happen in a very shabbily sort of way, starting mainly with November, yes, we have to sort of get a new agreement intact and it went in limbo for about three or four months and then start again and it's misrepresentation and information that we've had that keeps changing, people changing.

PN95

It's a case of we really don't know where we stand. We know where we stand now and we don't have confidence with where we're going to be in six months time. It's basically about that I think. I've been with Chubb for 12 years; I've seen a lot of things. I think I'm pretty loyal with Chubb, I always have been, but we don't know what we're getting.

PN96

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. You were going to - - -

PN97

MR ANDERSON: Yes, Ross Anderson from service. I would like to say no as well. I would just like to add why we don't feel confident. We had a meeting last year with both our then managers at Chubb. They weren't happy with us going to a 36 hour week then which is now what is in the agreement but that changed when we came round to this new set of negotiations a few months ago after they dropped the ball and let it go for months and then realised they had to get something together. All of a sudden they were happy with that and that's good.

PN98

They were happy then as long as they had a code compliant agreement to sign it but like Dominic was saying before, when the ETU presented them with a deed that they would as soon as that agreement came about they would sign it, but they seem reluctant now to sign a deed to say that they'd do it. A couple of months ago the then HR guy who came down from Sydney, he's no longer with Chubb as well, he said that if he could give me anything to sign now he would do it, but at that time he didn't have the deed but when the deed comes available they don't want to sign it.

PN99

So it just makes us feel, you know, you say one thing and then you change your mind and - - -

PN100

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Anybody else? All right. Look, that provides me with a good summary of where people stand. If there are people that wish to express some views beyond that which have been expressed here and wish to do it privately then could I ask that you just stay behind? I don't think there's anything further that I need as far as the rest of you are concerned. I simply say or repeat what I said at the outset that it's a requirement upon me that I obtain the views of people bound by the agreement and take such steps as is appropriate to get those views and you've assisted me greatly with that.

PN101

The actual consideration as to whether the agreement should be terminated brings into a play an assessment by me of whether or not such a termination would be contrary to the public interest. Now, that's the basis upon which the Commission under the statute must consider it. So based upon all the materials which are ultimately before me I will have to come to a view in respect of the public interest. I don't at this stage want to take it any further than that because I've had not the views of either the company or of the union provided to me in any comprehensive way at this point in time.

PN102

So can I thank those of you that have already provided a view. As I said, if anybody wishes to remain can I ask the rest of you to just vacate now and anybody that wants to provide a view separately please remain. So each of you people that are here now would like to independently give me a view, is that correct? On that basis I will start with - yes, sorry?

PN103

MR HANGER: Yes, sorry, yes.

PN104

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, okay. On that basis I will start with you and then I guess in the order that you're currently sitting at the table. So if the other four of you would just like to wait outside briefly.

PN105

MR HANGER: Will I sit at the table?

PN106

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well, it will be taped in any event for my purposes.

PN107

MR HANGER: That's fine, yes.

PN108

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: However let me just ask you, the view that you're about to express to me, is that a view that you have any problem with me providing access to the company and the union?

PN109

MR HANGER: No, not at all.

PN110

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. That being the case, go ahead.

PN111

MR HANGER: Yes. No, just a couple of points. I made a heap of notes. I think one of the things too, I think we were aware that it was going to be the public interest too and it's one of those where - - -

PN112

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Sorry, you better just identify yourself again for the record.

PN113

MR HANGER: Patrick Hanger, sorry.

PN114

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you.

PN115

MR HANGER: Patrick Hanger, part of service. It's one of those things too I think because we're now involved in a more political environment whereas years ago with an EBA it was just signed off and we just did what we had to do and because of the legislation, the changes to legislation, people are very worried about what's going to happen in the near future. So we've sort of used the ETU as a little bit of an insurance policy so if we had a dispute with the company we could always fall back on the ETU. Now, I'm sure that's not going to change. In theory it doesn't change because if you're still a member of the union you can then go to the union, but of course we all know what happens in reality, that it always nice to have an agreement because you've actually got a strong document you can use.

PN116

The 36 hour week which has recently come in, it's actually been good for, well, the public interest. We've now employed two technicians, Stuart, the new guy, and we've also got a new guy in service as well, so if you regard that as a public interest, I mean it's providing more employment so - - -

PN117

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well, let me stop you at that stage. I wasn't intending that this be an opportunity to provide me with submissions on whether I should consider it in the public interest or not. It's really more an opportunity for you to provide me with your views as to whether the agreement should or shouldn't be terminated, so if you can just restrict yourself to that.

PN118

MR HANGER: Yes, fine, your Honour. Yes, okay. My basic concerns then is the fact that with the EBA we had effectively pay increases over that period of time which I think they were a little bit above the CPI because the CPI doesn't normally - sometimes doesn't include petrol and housing, so there's things like that. Also our pay rates have been above, between 20 and 30 per cent is my understanding above the other states for people doing similar jobs, so that's certainly one thing we certainly don't want to go down, and also I think someone else did say I mean we're not earning a million dollars, but the thing about it, we are very skilled in what we do.

PN119

There's also a distinct shortage in what we do and you've probably noticed by the people that were there here, there's a few of us under 30 but a lot of us over 40. So there's those sort of issues that I think that the union has probably been trying to cover in their EBA as well, so that's about it. Thanks, your Honour.

PN120

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. If you can send in the next gentleman. Look, I will get you to identify yourself in just a moment.

PN121

MR WILLIAMSON: Yes, no problems at all.

PN122

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: However this is being recorded, as you've already been advised. It's really a matter for you as to whether you have any problem with that transcript being made available to the company and to the union once you've - - -

PN123

MR WILLIAMSON: No, no problems.

PN124

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. Well, if you would just like to rise and tell me who you are first of all.

PN125

MR WILLIAMSON: Yes, Shane Williamson from service.

PN126

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN127

MR WILLIAMSON: My only question is regarding the ETU, it's mainly from a company point of view national, does Chubb want to deal with the union from a national level. What are the management in Melbourne being told? You know, I mean we've been told that they want to get an ETU code compliant agreement down here in Melbourne but what are they being told from Chubb National? Do they want us to have a union thing or Chubb doesn't want to deal with the union full stop Australia wide?

PN128

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well, are you asking me that question?

PN129

MR WILLIAMSON: Well, that's sort of - - -

PN130

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Or is that a circumstance that you're at this stage not sure of?

PN131

MR WILLIAMSON: That's what I'm not sure of, yes. Sorry, yes.

PN132

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Because if you're asking me that question I don't know the answer to it.

PN133

MR WILLIAMSON: But I'm not sure of where, yes, where Chubb or if they want to have an ETU Australia wide agreement or not and they don't want to deal with the union. That's my only concern.

PN134

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Okay, thank you.

PN135

MR WILLIAMSON: All right, thanks very much.

PN136

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: If you can send in the next - - -

PN137

MR WILLIAMSON: Yes.

PN138

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I'll get you to identify yourself in just a moment once again. However before I do, the matter is being recorded and it will be recorded for at least my purposes. Do you have any objection to the recording or the transcript of this being made available to the union and the company?

PN139

MR PREIS: No, that's okay.

PN140

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Okay. Just rise and go ahead.

PN141

MR PRIES: It's Robert Preis, I'm electronics. Just by my experience with the company, I've been there for quite a few years now, it's about 11/12 years. Once again like the different levels of pay and things like that I would be chasing that up. Secondly is the tricks that management play and they of course alternate and change all the time and that, but one was that they wanted to know the expertise of all the employees. We went through an assessment and we got RMIT, the university to come in. They did the statements, worked out what levels. Basically they used that to do some sackings of half the department which that wasn't the interpret of the exercise.

PN142

But I was one of those ones that got the sack and basically all the project managers which are our bosses and some of the workers basically said no, we going to quit if Rob leaves because he is one of the good ones out there. There's others that should really leave if anyone has to. Management said that basically let - see if anyone else wants to leave. Lucky there was someone that left, wanted to leave anyway, so they left and they put me back on, which is all fine, but that's my impression that since day one you had to fight your pay increases and that that's documented down and then they also played tricks and I'm not blaming individual management because they keep changing and it might come from Sydney.

PN143

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. So how do you say that what you've just told me is relevant to this application in respect to terminating the agreement?

PN144

MR PREIS: It's more that on their word it doesn't mean much to me. Things that are short term there's a bit of a risk with the family issues as well and that. Things like when they say that we might be going back to a 38 hour week and that hours isn't between us at the time because I've got a son that lives with me, I can only start work at a certain time and leave. Now, if they start shifting that to say you can start work at 9 o'clock from the time and that, well, basically I can't do that so I'm going to have to change jobs because I've got a son that lives with me.

PN145

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. All right, thank you. If you can just send in the next person. Are you the last or the second last?

PN146

MR PELLE: No, I'm probably the third last now.

PN147

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Right, okay. Look, just before you start, it's being recorded principally for my purposes, or at least for my purposes, however the opportunity exists if you object to this transcript being made available to the employer or the union or both, for you to object to that, if you have no - - -

PN148

MR PELLE: Yes, I don't object.

PN149

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Okay, go ahead.

PN150

MR PELLE: I just wanted to reiterate the point on stability. At the moment we've got this current agreement and it's basically all we've got. We've fought pretty hard over the years to get the benefits that we enjoy now, like a 36 hour week and the flexi time and all the pay rates and all those sorts of things, there's a number of things and the union has helped to get those things so it's added to our family and quality of life in terms of family life as well. We get to spend more time with our kids because we've got that RDO that we can draw upon. So we're trying to hang onto those things anyway and if they leave the current agreement as it is we've got that and sure, when the union does come up with a code compliant agreement, well, then we can start looking at that.

PN151

So we strongly believe that - or I strongly believe that if we can hold onto it now we've got something still to fight for, whereas once they terminate that agreement it adds a lot of uncertainty to our employment because like I said, there has been a high turnover of managers. We don't know whether these decisions are coming from Victoria or whether they're coming from New South Wales and New South Wales is basically a non unionised state in terms of the service, electronics, security sector. So we're in the dark and the thing that where I lost a lot of confidence is when the union basically came forward with a simple - just a couple of sentences just stating that, you know, as soon as we've got an EBA ready to go that Chubb would look at it and go forward with that.

PN152

Had Chubb agreed to that we would have happily probably said look, terminate the current agreement or - I'm not sure on that but we would have been happy to cooperate with Chubb and say okay, as long as you give us that undertaking that when does become available that you'll look at it we're willing to maybe, you know, take a few things away in the best interests of the company so that you can tender for government contracts and all that sort of thing. Now, we're always being told that we're the only state holding Chubb up for tendering for government work and, you know, from the start, but there has been another state which has been Queensland that they weren't code compliant as well and I believe they're signed onto a contract, a non union contract with Chubb and in the belief that it was code compliant but it still isn't code compliant.

PN153

So even though if you terminated this current agreement this week, I still believe there could be Queensland still there with an agreement that's not compliant, so it still wouldn't allow them to tender for government work.

PN154

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you.

PN155

MR PELLE: And for them not to tender for government work it's a pretty big thing because, like I said, Chubb and Honeywell are the major two companies that service for instance the Australian Tax Office. Not many other companies can do that because we have a lot of proprietary equipment in those areas. So if they were to, you know, terminate, if the ATO were to terminate our service agreement, well, they can't go to Honeywell because there's non compliant as well, who do they go to, so it's a pretty big thing. But I just wanted to voice my opinion in terms of if we left things the way we are at least we've got that stability.

PN156

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right, thank you.

PN157

MR PELLE: Okay. No problems.

PN158

MR FRANGIOSA: Your Honour, Phil Frangiosa again.

PN159

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes. Are you satisfied to have whatever views you are about to express made available to both the company and the union?

PN160

MR FRANGIOSA: Preferably not. Look, it's really not a case of hiding anything.

PN161

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, that's fine.

PN162

MR FRANGIOSA: But preferably not.

PN163

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I'm simply asking the question. So you'd prefer to have them kept confidential?

PN164

MR FRANGIOSA: Yes, please.

PN165

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Can we have this particular part of the transcript kept confidential, please.

CONTINUED IN TRANSCRIPT IN CONFIDENCE