C2017/7075, Transcript of Proceedings [2018] FWCTrans 140 (2 May 2018)

	Home \| Databases \| WorldLII \| Search \| Feedback Fair Work Commission Transcripts

PN1

THE COMMISSIONER: Good afternoon, parties, this is Wilson C speaking. Just letting you know that we're recording the matter for the purposes of a transcript if it becomes necessary. I'll just now formally announce the matter which is six matters being C2017/7075 being Trevor Roberts, C2018/151 being Adam Wright, C2018/161 being David Harris, C2018/501 being Shane Bailey, C2018/817 being Timothy Wells and C2018/1389 being Travis Harris, all pertaining to the Country Fire Authority. Now I'll just check who I've got on the line. Mr Roberts, you're there?

PN2

MR T ROBERTS: Yes, Commissioner.

PN3

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Mr Wright, you're there as well?

PN4

MR G WRIGHT: Yes, Commissioner. Gavin Wright here.

PN5

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Mr Harris, David Harris that is. Are you there?

PN6

MR D HARRIS: Yes, Commissioner.

PN7

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Mr Bailey, are you there? Shane Bailey, are you on the line?

PN8

MR S BAILEY: Yes, good afternoon, Commissioner.

PN9

THE COMMISSIONER: Right. Thank you. Timothy Wells?

PN10

MR T WELLS: Yes, Commissioner, I'm here.

PN11

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, and Travis Harris I believe is there as well?

PN12

MR T HARRIS: Yes, Commissioner.

PN13

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. All right, and for the CFA I understand I've got on three separate lines Mr Koletsis, you're there are you?

PN14

MR N KOLETSIS: Yes, I am.

PN15

THE COMMISSIONER: And Mr O'Grady and Mr Ferguson?

PN16

MR C O'GRADY: Yes, we're here.

PN17

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, and Ms Gulle as well on another line?

PN18

MS K GULLE: Yes. Thank you.

PN19

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, and I understand I've got Ms Moore from the UFU on one line?

PN20

MS G MOORE: Yes.

PN21

THE COMMISSIONER: With Mr McKenna also for the UFU on another line?

PN22

MR J McKENNA: Yes, Commissioner. Thank you.

PN23

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Thank you. Thank you for bearing with me going through that list. Parties, as you're aware or some of you may be aware that there has been correspondence received in the Commission - to the Commission, rather, from the CFA and the UFU this afternoon. I understand that the communication from Mr Koletsis has gone to all of the applicants. I don't need to repeat that and won't do so unless I'm asked to. But then in addition to that I've received correspondence just a few minutes ago from Ms Moore at the UFU which was sent to Mr McKenna and Mr Koletsis but not others, and that reads:

PN24

Dear Commissioner, In light of the below advice received by CFA earlier today, the UFU is writing to confirm our view that the existing disputes currently before the Commission no longer have utility. We support the proposal that the scheduled dates for hearing should be vacated in light of the rationales provided by the CFA below. We look forward to your advice. Sincerely, Gina Moore, Industrial Officer.

PN25

Now I think in the circumstances it's appropriate that I start first with the CFA representatives just so that I can understand their perspective on things, and then also in the circumstances I'll turn to Mr McKenna and then following that I'll turn to each of the applicants to understand their views as well.

PN26

So Mr O'Grady, do you wish to speak on behalf of the CFA?

PN27

MR O'GRADY: I think Mr Koletsis is probably in a better position to do so than I am, Commissioner, in that he has been involved in the correspondence.

PN28

THE COMMISSIONER: Fair enough. All right, okay in that case I'll turn to Mr Koletsis

PN29

MR KOLETSIS: Thank you, Commissioner. Over the last week and a half, two weeks, there has been some conversations between the UFU and the CFA looking for a solution to these matters, and we determined that there was some chance of reaching some settlement but we need - to do that we needed a bit more time with the applicants so that we could discuss this, you know, with the UFU present and try and seek a solution. So as a result of those discussions the CFA and the UFU decided that it would be useful to seek an adjournment to the matters and therefore I wrote to you on Thursday of last week seeking that - requesting an adjournment.

PN30

Since then of course, as is the right of the applicants, they were opposed to an adjournment and the consequence of that was it was determined that it would be best in the circumstances if we decided not to proceed with the establishment of the positions that are the subject of the grievances, and as a result of that today the chief officer, Mr Warrington, has decided that we will not proceed for the time being with the 10/14 operations officer positions and the advertisements will be withdrawn and there will be no - we just won't be going ahead with them.

PN31

And if we decided to go ahead with them at a future point of course we will have discussions with the union and also will notify the applicants so that they can be involved in any future negotiations or discussions regarding the establishment of those positions. So we've come to the view that if we're not going to proceed with these positions then the grievances really have no basis to proceed, and we've essentially met the requirements of - the initial grievances were to stop the advertising of these positions. We're actually going to not proceed with these positions for now, so we're saying there's probably no further point in continuing.

PN32

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Thank you, Mr Koletsis.

PN33

Now Ms Moore or Mr McKenna, did you want to say anything in respect to this situation?

PN34

MR McKENNA: Thank you, Commissioner. I'm happy to (indistinct) anything (indistinct) echo what Mr Koletsis has said about there not being any utility in proceeding in circumstances where the CFA is not seeking to implement the creation of those positions at this point of time. The disputes really go to the implementation of the positions and absent that, the basis for the dispute and utility in the Commission arbitrating any dispute falls away.

PN35

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Thank you. Just let me look up one matter, please, if you don't mind. All right if I can turn to the applicants, if you don't mind. Ordinarily I'd go through the list in chronological order as to the time that the application was made to the Commission, which means I'd start off first of all with Mr Roberts. If however there's someone within the list who wishes to be a spokesperson or has been a spokesperson for the rest then maybe if you let me know, otherwise I'll turn to Mr Roberts in the first instance. No? All right, in that case I'll turn to Mr Roberts.

PN36

What's your attitude about the approach that Mr Koletsis has put forward that in effect the matter should be not proceeded with at this time?

PN37

MR ROBERTS: Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner, I think it's pretty well all parties have the intent that they wish these 10/14 positions to come to fruition. I don't think anybody is opposing their implementation, it's just the manner in which they're advertised and the role statements and so forth. Therefore I believe there is still opportunity for open and frank conversations to be had and if we could continue to facilitate those conversations before yourself, because since December I have struggled to be able to have conversations with CFA. I believe that we could actually continue to progress this issue before yourself in a hearing, to be able to reach an outcome.

PN38

THE COMMISSIONER: All right.

PN39

Do any of the other applicants wish to say anything? Mr Wright perhaps?

PN40

MR WRIGHT: Yes, Commissioner, if I just support what Mr Roberts has just said and in the weeks leading up to today's mention there has been (indistinct) the union to some of the parties indicating that there perhaps was a way forward and a way to resolve the matter, and certain offers or ideas were made. I would have thought that if not through arbitration, at least through perhaps a conciliation conference in front of you those matters could have been worked through and that everyone may have walked away happy from that and certainly may well have got the position that they have been trying for six months almost to implement, and it would have also been satisfactory for the other parties, myself and the other individuals, would have been my thoughts.

PN41

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Thank you.

PN42

Mr David Harris?

PN43

MR D HARRIS: Yes, Commissioner. I understand the CFA and the UFU's position, by removing the positions therefore our disputes don't necessarily stand and I know your jurisdiction isn't to judge on the fairness of that, but that does seem unfair then to those other personnel and third parties that had applied for those positions. With regards to the eligibility requirements, which was the thing we were actually disputing, it was not the positions. It was never the introduction of the positions, it was more the eligibility requirements around those positions.

PN44

So by removing them, yes, I agree that they have now dealt with those disputes but they haven't necessarily fixed some of the problems within the CFA. With respect to a conciliation conference, that was always something that the applicants I think had generally seen as an option, where we could be before the Commission with the assistance of the Commission and the other parties and the respondents to try and work towards an outcome. I don't think this is generally the best outcome, but if that's what the CFA and UFU have decided then I don't know that we're in a position to influence that.

PN45

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you.

PN46

Mr Shane Bailey?

PN47

MR BAILEY: Yes, I just echo the comments made by the other parties. It was as late as Friday afternoon I was still receiving phone calls from Ms Moore and other UFU representatives trying to I suppose influence my way forward through open and frank discussions, and obviously I highlighted back to them I'm open for open and frank discussions and I think through transparency we can get to a resolution that pleases everyone. But it was my preference that that be done through the Commission in one way or another, whether that be through an arbitration or by agreeing just in the presence of yourself, Commissioner.

PN48

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Thank you, and Mr Wells, do you have anything to say about the matter?

PN49

MR WELLS: Thank you. My understanding so far is that the positions are only being suspended because of the grievances and so I'm still trying to work out what that means for me. look, I suppose the thing that concerns me in the email Mr Koletsis sent an hour ago he talked or he said with a view to avoid a hearing that might impede the ability of CFA to revisit the issue in the near future should the position of the UFU change, and so yes, I'm sort of not sure what that means for me and hoping that that's not going to impede my ability to negotiate in the future. And I'd feel more comfortable with a discussion being facilitated by the Fair Work Commission because I haven't been contacted by the CFA or the UFU throughout my grievance process. I've had to initiate all contact and so at the moment I would prefer that we proceed.

PN50

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Thank you, and finally Mr Travis Harris?

PN51

MR T HARRIS: Yes, Commissioner. I'm also of the opinion that - I suppose I'm a bit in shock that the positions have also been pulled. It was mentioned to me by a BCOM member that this may be a stance that would be taken if the grievances weren't to be dropped, which I still can't understand why we would pull these positions when it's agreed all of the parties I don't think have any issues with the positions at all. I think we're all a hundred per cent in support that these positions need to exist. It is more to do with the fairness and inclusion of people and the eligibility requirement. So I suppose I'm a bit in shock that they have actually been pulled.

PN52

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Thank you.

PN53

Can I just turn back to you perhaps, Mr Koletsis, or one of the other people with you. In making his decision to withdraw the positions, you said Mr Warrington has decided he will not proceed with advertising and that instead they will be withdrawn. Is that expected to be a permanent withdrawal?

PN54

MR KOLETSIS: For the foreseeable future, Commissioner. We may have further discussions with the UFU and obviously the applicants would need to have a say in that and I'm sure they'll do that through the UFU. But we're not talking about putting them back into place in the next month or two or three. It would be a longer timeframe than that and it would involve further consultation before we did that.

PN55

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Now Mr Koletsis a number of - - -

PN56

MR C O'GRADY: I'm sorry, Commissioner, could I - it's Chris O'Grady here - could I just add something to what Mr Koletsis has just said?

PN57

THE COMMISSIONER: Of course.

PN58

MR O'GRADY: The position as I understand it, Commissioner, is that absent the support of the UFU it is not sensibly open for CFA to proceed with these positions and as Mr Koletsis indicated in his email this morning, the UFU has indicated that they are no longer going to support the introduction or implementation of these positions. In those circumstances the CFA position is that there is, with respect, currently no dispute before the Commission.

PN59

It's not clear what form any future 10/14 operation officer role will take if the CFA decides to try and implement such a role some time in the future, and that poses a very real problem in that absent knowledge of what form any such role will take it's very hard for the Commission, with respect, to resolve a dispute about the roles because it may be that in the future the concerns that have been agitated by the applicants won't arise or will arise in different circumstances. So it's really for those reasons that in the current position my client is of the view that there really is no utility with the matter proceeding.

PN60

THE COMMISSIONER: I think you though are putting something firmer than that, aren't you? You're not necessarily saying there's no utility. You're saying that there is no dispute.

PN61

MR O'GRADY: Well, sorry, you're right. We are saying there is no dispute and even if there are general concerns that have been raised by the applicants we would say that they're not matters that can be sensibly the subject of arbitration or conciliation before the Commission at this juncture, given the uncertainty about what may be proposed down the track.

PN62

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. All right, look, thank you and I accept and understand what it is that you're saying.

PN63

If I can put this to the applicants please. My assessment is in line with that of Mr O'Grady which is that at this time it appears to me if the advertisements have been withdrawn and there will be no steps to be taken by the CFA to fill those positions then it seems to me that the basis upon which you've made your dispute application to the Commission falls away. That is that it's not a question of there no longer be a utility in proceeding, it's simply that there is no - it's arguable, I think I need to put it in that way, that there is no dispute before the Commission.

PN64

Now in moving forward it may be that it's appropriate to seek a formal communication from the CFA to each of you confirming that that is the situation, but I think upon receipt of that then the point that Mr O'Grady puts forward is correct. Now if that is the case then I would do two things, one of which is to say that I would invite you to each discontinue your application. If I can put it in another way; if someone comes to the Commission and says that "The enterprise agreement is not being complied with because we were not paid public holiday rates on the last public holiday that took place", once there's overwhelming proof that the public holiday payments in fact have been made there's not much dispute before the Commission about the implementation of it.

PN65

There's an acceptance that there was a public holiday, there's an acceptance that a person worked on that day, there's nothing which can come of the hearing. Now it's in a similar sort of situation here in that if the dispute that you've brought to the Commission is "We don't believe that the enterprise agreement is being complied with because there's an unnecessarily narrow advertising that's taking place" and it's the case then that that advertisement is not proceeded with and I don't think there's a dispute before the Commission.

PN66

Now on that basis I invite you to withdraw your applications to the Commission which would be done through filing a notice of discontinuance with the Commission. If you don't do that, and sometimes people don't do that for a number of reasons. They want to think through the advice which might have been given to them, they might want to seek advice from some other source, they might want to seek confirmation of what has been said in writing. However at some point if the matter is not withdrawn it may be that the Commission needs to consider dismissing the applications pursuant to another section of the Fair Work Act, section 587(1), which enables the Commission to dismiss applications because there was no reasonable prospect of success of the matter if it were to go forward.

PN67

Now at this time, given the proximity of next week, I think the appropriate thing for me to do - and I'm putting this to you essentially as a question at this time - I think the appropriate thing to do at this time is for me to both set aside the directions which have been made in this matter which would require the CFA and the UFU to file their material today, to then also vacate the notices of listing for next week, and then invite that process which I have indicated to you. That is for you to consider notices of discontinuance or to seek external advice, and if that advice doesn't take you anywhere then ultimately the Commission to consider dismissing the matter.

PN68

Now that's one set of issues I need to put to you. The other set of issues which is probably a broader question perhaps for the CFA more than yourselves, based upon what you've said this afternoon, another question that the CFA might properly be asked to consider, and the UFU for that matter, is whether or not there's any utility in the foreshadowed conversations about the framing of the job description for the future being under the auspices of the Commission. Now in putting that forward I need to make it clear that I think that that is something which is quite separate to the prospect of the individual matters being withdrawn at this time.

PN69

Can I first of all start off with Mr Roberts. How do you feel about that advice that I've just given you?

PN70

MR ROBERTS: Yes, thank you, Commissioner. Look, it's a lot for me to digest I must admit, considering I've only just received the email, and I do have to accept that my issue was somewhat different to the rest of the parties. My issue can be resolved if I can facilitate a meeting with the appropriate members of CFA. I have discussed my issue with the UFU and the UFU have somewhat supported my view in an attempt to move forward. So I believe my issue could be resolved relatively easy, which would then get withdrawn. But as I say the other issue with the other parties is somewhat different to mine.

PN71

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Thank you indeed, Mr Roberts, you've just jogged my memory about your particular case and I recollect that part of it was about the matters of the other applicants, but not all of it. So, thank you for reminding me of that situation.

PN72

Mr Wright, how do you feel?

PN73

MR WRIGHT: Yes, Commissioner, look I've only just become aware on this teleconference now of the CFA's position of the intention to withdraw the positions. But I think I probably need some time to digest that and then think about where and how I will go forward. My concern is I guess in withdrawing from the matter that these positions just re‑emerge in a slightly different form in the near future and we're potentially right back where we started. So it's something I would need to think about. I'm not sure I can give you an answer straight up now, unless you're absolutely insisting, Commissioner.

PN74

THE COMMISSIONER: No, I'm not absolutely insisting but I just want to take the opportunity to understand where people might lie.

PN75

Now Mr Wright, do you have anything to add?

PN76

MR WRIGHT: Sorry, that was me.

PN77

THE COMMISSIONER: I'm sorry, I've gone back. Yes, I apologise.

PN78

MR WRIGHT: Yes.

PN79

THE COMMISSIONER: Mr David Harris. I was looking at the wrong list.

PN80

MR D HARRIS: Yes, Commissioner, so I understand the position of CFA and what they've said, that they will - well, I think it's what they're saying, that they will introduce these positions at some point in the future. And given that they're included in a schedule of the proposed 2016 agreement I think we all know that they are going to be put in place. By not having these discussions now before the Commission, by not addressing our disputes, I don't know that it's particularly fruitful but, yes, look there's nothing more we can do. I'll consider it in terms of the withdrawal or the subsequent dismissal of the dispute. I just need a bit of time to think about it.

PN81

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Thank you.

PN82

Now Mr Bailey, do you have any views?

PN83

MR BAILEY: Again probably mine's somewhat slightly different to Mr Wright's and Mr Harris' but it's obviously we can only base it on the eligibility requirement as now, and if they were to reintroduce these jobs some time into the future I would be eligible because I would meet the requirements based on time in the position. So on that ground I would have to put some thought towards withdrawal of my application. That obviously - the CFA and the UFU have come to a position with withdrawing the position.

PN84

I suppose from a personal aspect, and I know it's obviously not something that would be your consideration, but whether the cohort of individuals on here today against I suppose the rest of the membership or the CFA workforce who are all for these positions, we could be somewhat identified as being the catalyst of these positions being withdrawn and I think that's something that needs to be considered.

PN85

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Thank you.

PN86

Mr Wells, do you have anything to add?

PN87

MR WELLS: Well, I don't think so but I'd just like a bit of clarification, Commissioner. Did you suggest before that CFA and the UFU file their outline of submissions by today?

PN88

THE COMMISSIONER: Look, I could be wrong but I thought that was what the directions originally required them to do.

PN89

Is that the case, Mr O'Grady, do you happen to know? I don't have it in front of me right now.

PN90

MR P FERGUSON: Yes, that's the case, Commissioner. It's Paul Ferguson speaking here. The directions required the filing of submissions and evidence this afternoon, which we are in a position to do.

PN91

THE COMMISSIONER: All right.

PN92

Now Mr Bailey, does that answer your question?

PN93

MR BAILEY: So I think that was from Mr Wells.

PN94

MR WELLS: Yes. Yes, that does.

PN95

THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Wells, I'm sorry.

PN96

MR WELLS: Because I've also got the concern that we might as a group get unfairly demonised. But if - yes, if the process is clear and transparent therefore then that, yes, alleviates some of my worry.

PN97

THE COMMISSIONER: All right.

PN98

MR O'GRADY: Sorry, Commissioner, just so that - - -

PN99

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, of course.

PN100

MR O'GRADY: - - - I understand what's being proposed. It was our position that we would seek that the directions and the hearing be vacated and in those circumstances we would not be filing our material this afternoon. Part of the reasoning for that, as was set out in Mr Koletsis' email of earlier today, is that that would avoid us taking a formal position in respect of a number of the issues that have been raised, and our concern was by taking a formal position in respect of those matters that could impede further discussions in respect of these positions down the track. So obviously we're in your hands, Commissioner, but if you were of the view that in the circumstances there was no dispute and that in the circumstances there was - and/or that there was no utility in the matter proceeding, our preference would be that we would not file our material this afternoon.

PN101

THE COMMISSIONER: All right, thank you Mr O'Grady, and look, that position is what I assumed you'd be putting and when I was - I may not have used the best words to the applicants but certainly what I was putting to them was that where I'm headed is to in fact not require the filing of submissions by the UFU and the CFA. But I just wanted to have the applicants put their views forward before I get precisely to that point.

PN102

MR D HARRIS: Commissioner, it's David Harris.

PN103

THE COMMISSIONER: Yes?

PN104

MR D HARRIS: It may assist us with the withdrawal of our complaints if we were to understand the outline of submissions the CFA and UFU were going to put. Then we could better understand when we make our next decision.

PN105

THE COMMISSIONER: All right, I hear you.

PN106

Can I turn finally to Mr Travis Harris?

PN107

MR T HARRIS: Yes, Commissioner. Yes, I support everything said by everyone but I also agree that I would like to have seen the submissions from the CFA and UFU as they have obviously had ours for two weeks now and any further (indistinct) those discussions that have occurred they've had time to view our submissions and concerns yet we haven't had a chance to understand the sort of feedback from the CFA and UFU.

PN108

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Thank you.

PN109

MS G MOORE: Commissioner, it's Gina Moore from the UFU. Can I just make a point at this stage?

PN110

THE COMMISSIONER: All right.

PN111

MS MOORE: Sorry, there's a bit of feedback and a bit of interference on somebody's line there. Look, for what it's worth just in context of a number of comments that have been made I do need to say that our branch committee of management members and myself as the industrial officer have made a number of attempts to engage in discussions, granted not with all of the applicants. I haven't been able to speak with all of the applicants but with I think all but one of the applicants. There's been a number of discussions and the intent was to engage in discussions with the applicants with a view to understanding how these matters might be resolved. We were of the understanding that the applicants were comfortable to do that.

PN112

It appears that that's not the case based on the emails that we received on Friday and on that basis, you know, I just wanted the Commission to be aware that this hasn't been a circumstance where people have been receiving calls - I think one of the comments before was to apply pressure on the position they were taking. It was the UFU's intent to provide assistance to members of the UFU who had made applications, had not contacted the union for the purposes of seeking assistance - having said that I will correct what I've just said by saying that one of those members did contact us for assistance - and that has been our intent all along. So I just need it to be on the record in terms of what our approach has been here.

PN113

THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you for that, Ms Moore. That's appreciated.

PN114

Very well can I - well, before I do that I just want to ask one further question perhaps of Mr Koletsis or Mr O'Grady. I have got obviously the email which was sent by Mr Koletsis today at 12.58 and that's appreciated. Beyond that what I'm wondering is whether or not the CFA would be prepared to write formally to each of the applicants just elaborating its position about the advertisements. What I am interested in is when I look at the file, is that the applications themselves pertain pretty directly to advertising that took place on a date in December that escapes me, and relates specifically to four positions which are identified by number. What I'm looking for is whether the CFA would be prepared to write to the applicants and formally indicate that those advertisements have been withdrawn. So that was a long-winded question, but do you think you can do that?

PN115

MR KOLETSIS: Commissioner, yes I can say yes, we'll certainly do that.

PN116

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Thank you.

PN117

All right, look in that case - and I am speaking directly to the applicants about this - in that case having had the discussion with the CFA, it being put to me fairly clearly what their intention is, I am prepared to accept that as the position of the Country Fire Authority as such, and I accept that in the good faith that it is put forward. When Mr Koletsis says that the intention is to withdraw the positions at least for the foreseeable future, or the words that he used, I am prepared to accept that and I think that creates the situation that Mr O'Grady discussed with me, which is that more than likely the jurisdiction of the Commission to proceed with these matters is now gone or will go.

PN118

Now to bring that about what I request is the CFA to confirm its position in writing to each of the applicants in the next few days. I will then set aside the directions that have been given in the matter thus far. I have taken into the account the propositions that a number of you put forward about wishing to see the CFA and the UFU submissions. I understand why you might say that but at the same time if I am proceeding on the basis that the advertisements have been withdrawn then I do not think there is a proper basis for me to request that those things be filed, and so I will not require that they be filed. The directions are set aside.

PN119

Further, the notice of listing for Monday 23 and Friday 27 April 2018 2018 will be vacated. I note a couple of matters, one of which is that if you do discontinue the matter then I think it has to be strictly on the basis that the discontinuance does not affect your right to re‑agitate the dispute in the future if you believe that a new dispute about the same subject comes up; and then I should also give liberty to apply to any party in the event that the matters are not discontinued, in which case the Commission would proceed to determine whether or not they can survive.

PN120

All right, now that's one set of matters. Completely unrelated to that I would indicate to all the parties that if there is considered to be any utility in the Commission assisting with discussions about the position descriptions in the future, I'm prepared to work with you to find a way to do that. One way obviously is for a fresh dispute to be lodged but, in the absence of a dispute if there is utility in the Commission at least chairing discussions I'm prepared to do that as well.

PN121

All right now if I can just turn to any of the applicants, do you wish to say anything further to me at this time? No? All right, in that case anyone from the CFA?

PN122

MR KOLETSIS: Commissioner, Nick Koletsis here. I just want to say one of the issues that was raised or the concern they may be victimised for taking these matters forward, you know, the CFA - I know the chief officer and senior management support people exercising their rights so there's certainly no problem from a CFA perspective.

PN123

THE COMMISSIONER: All right. Thank you, and anyone from the UFU, do you wish to say anything? No? All right.

PN124

MS MOORE: No thank you.

PN125

MR McKENNA: Not from me, Commissioner. Thank you.

PN126

THE COMMISSIONER: All right, thank you.

PN127

Well, look, thank you very much. What I'll do following this conference is to confirm the setting aside of the directions and the vacation of the notice of listing and we'll proceed on the basis that I've outlined moments before. All right, thank you for your attendance this afternoon. I'll now adjourn. Thank you.

PN128

MS MOORE: Thank you, Commissioner.

PN129

MR McKENNA: Thank you.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [2.38 PM]

Fair Work Commission Transcripts

C2017/7075, Transcript of Proceedings [2018] FWCTrans 140 (2 May 2018)