IN THE TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act 1984

This was an application by the Transport Workers' Union, Tasmanian Branch (the Union) for amendments to the Carriers Award (the Award) to "increase wage rates and allowances consistent with the (second 3Z) Structural Efficiency Principle and first minimum rates adjustment" and for a 3% Occupational Superannuation clause to be provided in the Award.

At the final hearing Mr B Hansch, who appeared for the Union, produced an exhibit which contained all the proposed Award conditions amendments reflecting (a) an agreed change in the scope clause which removed areas covered by the new Transport Workers General Award which had been covered previously by the Award under an extension provided in the Regulations and (b) quite a number of changes implementing an agreement between the parties under the Structural Efficiency and Occupational Superannuation Principles the terms of which are set out briefly as follows:

• A commitment clause and an award modernisation clause both really aimed at providing much more flexibility in dealings and operations between the parties and for local or enterprise level agreements to be made;
• Payment of wages clauses introducing by majority agreement payment of wages through electronic funds transfer;
• A starting times clause allowing for greater flexibility by agreement;
• A comprehensive shift work clause not previously appearing, but specifying requirements in great detail;
• An occupational superannuation clause specifying the TWU Superannuation Fund solely.

Mr Hansch produced another exhibit which outlined in detail the proposed changes to the Award wages clause which in particular divided each of the wages into three parts, minimum wage, supplementary allowance and total wage. The exhibit also clearly indicated how broad-banding would be implemented. Further, with the aid of two other exhibits, Mr Hansch explained how it was proposed that four minimum rates adjustments would be made at six monthly intervals in the future taking the date of the decision in this matter as the first instalment date.

As to the proposed Superannuation clause Mr Hansch submitted that, as the overwhelming majority of the Union's members throughout Australia were benefitting from the provisions and contribution amounts prescribed in the fund sought to be endorsed - the TWU Superannuation Fund - the relatively small number of transport workers covered by the Award would be disadvantaged if the same benefits were not passed on to them. The Fund and its prescriptions had been approved a number of times by the Federal Industrial Commission, including two full bench matters1, he said. Mr Hansch also submitted that the Union sought the TWU Superannuation Fund for the Award separately from its claim in the Produce Award superannuation case2 because that matter involved a different industry and a number of unions and other parties outside the transport industry generally; in this case he submitted it was appropriate that the TWU Superannuation Fund be prescribed in the Award as the parties to it related only to the transport industry.

Mr J Blackburn who appeared for the Australian Road Transport Industrial Organisation confirmed his organisation's agreement to the proposals reflected in the various exhibits.

Mr K Brotherson, appeared for the Tasmanian Confederation of Industries (the Confederation) and he also expressed consent to the agreed items reflected in the Union's exhibits. Mr Brotherson supported the amendments to the Award proposed by the Union saying that they would be of benefit to all parties especially in the areas of shift work and the payment of wages. He also confirmed agreement to the occupational superannuation proposals, but, stressed that such agreement applied only in the Award's area, not anywhere else. This was different to the Produce Award case and others he said. The Confederation had adopted the attitude that the occupational superannuation provisions for transport workers in this case were acceptable in all the circumstances, he said.

Mr Brotherson was also anxious to confirm and record that the new wage rates to be shown in the Award should be offset against any over-award payments.

Mr Brotherson also expressed agreement to the operative dates proposed by Mr Hansch.

I endorse the agreement between the parties in this matter made under the Structural Efficiency Principle specified in the October 1989 State Wage Decision in that I consider the agreement conforms with both its letter and spirit; in particular in the words of the Principle, I am "satisfied that the parties to an award (the Carriers Award) have cooperated positively in a fundamental review of that award and are implementing measures to improve the efficiency of industry and provide workers with access to more varied, fulfilling and better paid jobs." This is not to say that implementation of the aims and ideas of "structural efficiency" have been completed in the Award, but, I believe enough has been done to warrant the second 3% increase.

Specifically, I endorse the agreement between the parties made under the Superannuation Principle in the October 1989 State Wage Decision. I am satisfied that the parties have complied with the requirements of the Principle. I note that there could be a question as to the amount of contributions involved, but in the light of precedent and because I believe it would be unfair to deny to some few transport workers something already granted to the overwhelming number of them, this aspect of the agreement is also accepted.

The operative date for all the amendments to the Award embraced by this decision will be the first full pay period commencing on or after 14 August 1990.

P A Imlach
COMMISSIONER

1 C Nos 1063 of 1986 and 34039 of 1988
2 T.2129 of 1989