TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act 1984
s.29 application for hearing of an industrial dispute

Federation of Industrial, Manufacturing and Engineering Employees,
Tasmania Branch
(T.4613 of 1993)

and

Pasminco Metals-EZ

Industrial dispute - retrenchment and redundancy at Pasminco-EZ Risdon

RECOMMENDATION

Following many conference proceedings between the parties and the Commission where improvements to the retrenchment package offered by Pasminco Metals-EZ (EZ) were discussed, the position has now been reached where talks have been exhausted. It is the strong opinion of the Commission that no further conciliated gains in retrenchment benefits can be achieved. The Commission has come to that view after extensive rounds of negotiations during the course of which not insignificant advancements in the total payments available to employees were conceded by EZ. These included increases in paid notice from 25 October 1993 to 29 October 1993 and payment in lieu of notice from 1 week to 3 weeks pay. The net effect of this is that employees who were retrenched on 18 October 1993 will be paid to 29 October 1993 and in addition receive a further 3 weeks pay in lieu of notice. Also pro rata long service leave will be paid from 12 months employment onwards.

Having regard to the outcome of the negotiations and the improvements in the quantum payment now available to retrenched employees I recommend that the following revised package be accepted:

(a) Period between 18.10.93 when retrenchments were made and 29.10.93 inclusive to be regarded as time worked.

(b) Three weeks pay in lieu of notice.

(c) Employment period from 12 months and onwards to be counted for long service leave purposes.

(d) Weeks per years of service to remain unaltered.

(e) The above benefits (a) to (d) are to be regarded in the context of a one-off package conciliated by the Commission in respect of this particular matter.

Job Guarantee

For the sake of completeness I acknowledge the intention of the parties to enter into written job guarantee proposals for remaining employees post the finalisation of the current retrenchment program. The Wharf and Fertilizer Departments are not included in these arrangements.

Transfers

This recommendation confirms the agreed arrangements whereby those employees transferred to other jobs have 3 weeks to accept the new arrangements without prejudicing their option of taking a voluntary retrenchment package.

Volunteers

Employees who have volunteered for retrenchment before the close of voluntary applications on 15 October 1993, and who have confirmed their intention to leave should be permitted to do so on request.

In addition I recommend that in the event other employees wish to take voluntary retrenchment, and provided the final number of employees to be retrenched in this matter has not yet been reached, those employees be permitted to leave the employment of EZ ahead of any other employees who may otherwise be forcibly retrenched. This recommendation is not intended to apply to the Wharf or Fertilizer Departments which are subject to separate discussions.

Forced Retrenchments

There are a number of applications before the Commission concerning claims for unfair dismissal on behalf of employees forcibly retrenched. It is my recommendation that the parties discuss those claims ahead of reinstatement proceedings in the Commission. Regard should be had in those discussions to the by now well established Commission principles applicable to cases of this nature. Inference should not be drawn from this latter comment that the overall number of retrenchments would be reduced in the event a reinstatement claim is successful. The most likely outcome would be, leaving my recommendation on volunteers to one side, that a further retrenchment selection would be required to be made. This would be by far the worst option and therefore the parties are urged to seriously apply themselves to this issue.

ARA Agreement

Clearly there is a need to review the Auxiliary Resources Agreement and its implications for the use of contractors. I recommend that appropriate arrangements commensurate with a reduced trades workforce be pursued between EZ and appropriate unions.

Skills Acquisition

Given changed working arrangements and expectations of employees it may be that training matrixes require fine-tuning to properly comprehend training

for the acquisition of additional skills consequential to job redesign. This should be co-operatively reviewed by the parties as a matter of some priority.

Other Retrenchment Issues

I noted that the Automotive, Metals and Engineering Union and the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union wish to retain their rights to pursue retrenchment arrangements for "non award" and clerical employees identical to the above package recommended by the Commission. Leave reserved is granted to those organisations on that issue.

Conclusion

The foregoing recommendations are the product of many hours of intense negotiations under the guidance of the Commission. I am of the view that all of the issues have been considered in great depth to the extent that I feel satisfied that the interests of those who have been retrenched have been fairly balanced against the future interests of EZ and those employees in ongoing employment.

A report-back hearing has been set down for 9.30am on 8 November 1993.

R.K. Gozzi
COMMISSIONER

Appearances:
Mr G. Cooper with Mr J. Glisson and Mr J. Long for the Federation of Industrial, Manufacturing and Engineering Employees, Tasmania Branch.
Mr G. Adams for the Automotive, Metals and Engineering Union.
Mr K. Becker for the Electrical, Electronic, Plumbing and Allied Workers Union of Australia.
Mr M. Clifford for the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, Tasmanian Branch.
Mr A. Grubb for the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union.
Mr M. Nally with Mr A. Fenech and Miss E. van Emmerik for Pasminco Metals-EZ.

Date and Place of Hearing:
1993.
Hobart:
November 1