T5344
|
TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Industrial Relations Act 1984 The AWU-FIME Amalgamated Union, Tasmanian Branch and Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd
Industrial dispute - strike action in support of an enterprise bargaining claim RECOMMENDATION In this matter the Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Limited (TCCI) sought the assistance of the Commission in respect of resolving an industrial dispute between members of The AWU-FIME Amalgamated Union, Tasmanian Branch (the Union) and Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd Sorell (Inghams). The members of the Union involved in this dispute are employees of Inghams. In brief submissions Mr Fitzgerald of the TCCI appearing for Inghams and Mr Cooper for the Union outlined the background to this dispute. This was that subsequent to the expiry of an industrial agreement between the Union and Inghams, discussions on a new enterprise agreement to be filed in the Commission pursuant to Section 55 of the Act, failed to achieve an accommodation on the quantum of increase to be paid "up front" prior to negotiations being finalised. I was told that Inghams had offered 4 per cent pending the finalisation of the enterprise bargaining processes. The Union informed me that the employees concerned considered this insufficient. Having listened to the parties and in the absence of any negotiation processes between the parties to finalise an industrial agreement I have concluded that the employees concerned, members of the Union, have adopted an unreasonable attitude. That is they want an "up front" increase before entering into serious agreement negotiations. This is hardly negotiating in good faith. This Commission's Wage Fixing Principle contained in matter T5214 of 1994 sets out in Principle 4 the Role of the Commission In Enterprise Bargaining. It seems to me that the employees in this dispute have overlooked the fact that they have yet to negotiate an agreement. An "up front" payment is not a pre requisite to enterprise bargaining and this also appears to have been overlooked by members of the Union in this dispute. Quite clearly Principle 3 Enterprise Bargaining makes it crystal clear in 3.2.2 that any wage increases must be based on the actual implementation of efficiency measures designed to effect real gains in productivity. In all of the circumstances I consider that the offer of a 4 per cent wage increase operate from 16 January 1995 is generous and having regard to what I have said above, was an offer that was not required to be made by Inghams. I therefore strongly recommend an immediate return to work to obviate recourse to other measures available to the Commission. Striking employees are reminded that the Commission is available to assist in the bargaining processes. These processes will be greatly enhanced if the steps available to the parties to resolve any impasse are adopted instead of the resort to strike action which in this case appears unwarranted. I expect a report back on this dispute at 8.45 am on 17 January 1995.
R K GOZZI Appearances: Date and Place of Hearing: |