C2006/4021, Transcript of Proceedings [2007] AIRCTrans 35 (1 February 2007)

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

---

Workplace Relations Act 1996 16409-1

DEPUTY PRESIDENT IVES

C2006/4021

AUTOMOTIVE, FOOD, METALS, ENGINEERING, PRINTING AND KINDRED INDUSTRIES UNION
AND
CAMPBELL’S SOUPS AUSTRALIA
s.170LW -prereform Act - Appl’n for settlement of dispute (certified agreement)
(C2006/4021)

MELBOURNE

1.59PM, THURSDAY, 18 JANUARY 2007

PN1

MR J WIELADEK: I appear for the AMWU.

PN2

MR G BEIKOFF: Appearing with MR V PRICE and we appear on behalf of Campbell Soups.

PN3

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. There's been some considerable discussion in conference about this matter prior to formally going on the record and for the purposes here I don't intend to go into details of the dispute suffice to say that the two employees of the employer at the heart of the dispute are
Mr Harvey and Mr Ors. As a settlement of the dispute the Commission recommends that in accordance with the direction of the company Mr Harvey and Mr Ors report for day shift this coming Monday morning which is 22 June, is that correct? Yes, Monday, 22 June. June, how did I get to June? 22 January 2007.

PN4

The Commission further recommends that Mr Harvey and Mr Ors remain at the company's direction on day shift for a period of six months. After that time at the request of the union or of the employees concerned the company will consider, subject to a review of Mr Harvey and Mr Ors conduct and performance during the preceding six months, reinstating them to afternoon shift. Such reinstatement is further contingent upon vacancies existing on the afternoon shift. I have been advised by the company and I accept that Mr Harvey's move to day shift is in no way related to any complaint or grievance Mr Harvey may have lodged previously with the company.

PN5

I add finally that should a dispute arise after the elapse of the six months period regarding the reinstatement of either employee to afternoon shift the Commission will on application of either the company or the union reconvene to hear such dispute. Is there anything that I have missed there or the parties wish to add?

PN6

MR WIELADEK: Your Honour, I would just like to clarify after speaking to my friend that the dispute remains open for further conciliation.

PN7

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, well, that I think is what I said in the final paragraph, if not precisely in those terms, whether this particular application file remains open is really neither here nor there. It's open to the parties to make an application. I can keep this particular file open if the parties are happy with that circumstance.

PN8

MR WIELADEK: Sir, the other thing I just need to clarify, I didn't catch in your statement whether they were as industrial cleaners or was it just - - -

PN9

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I did say that the request is subject to being made either by the employees or by the union. Presumably neither the employees nor the union are going to be making any request in respect of any shift that they don't wish to return to.

PN10

MR WIELADEK: Thank you, your Honour.

PN11

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: So the short answer to your question is, yes, it's the cleaning shift. Is there anything from the company's point of view,
Mr Beikoff.

PN12

MR BEIKOFF: We're fine, thanks, your Honour.

PN13

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. That being the case I think we can adjourn. Thank you.

<ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [2.04PM]