T1
|
IN THE TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Industrial Relations Act 1984
REASONS FOR DECISION
This matter was brought before the Commission under Section 29 of the Industrial Relations Act 1984. Following initial submissions put before me by the parties on the claim for double tally after 97.5 sheep are processed in a day, I was requested to adjourn the parties into private conference under my chairmanship. It was evident that there were a significant number of "other" issues which required resolution and which had contributed to a build up leading to an unsatisfactory industrial relations environment which culminated in strike action and a claim for higher payment for a certain part of the over tally kill. As a result of private conference discussions, and at the request of the parties, my decision in this matter will incorporate, as an attachment those matters agreed in private discussions and which the parties wish to formally record. The attachment referred to is titled Memorandum of Agreement between Australasian Meat Industries Employees Union and Richardsons Meat Industries. This memorandum has been incorporated into the proceedings as Exhibit E.3. Whilst on this latter point, I wish to congratulate the parties that they saw fit to grasp the nettle on the issues identified in private conference and to resolve them by agreeing to put into place arrangements which I sincerely trust will be endorsed by employees and the company as a whole. In chairing the private conferences I was impressed with the earnest willingness expressed by the parties to work more closely together for the benefit of the company and employees alike. This augers well for the future. It is indeed heartening that in this, the first matter to be brought before the Tasmanian Industrial Commission, the vexatious matters underpinning this dispute, have been resolved in a manner envisaged by the dispute-settling mechanism contained in Section 29 of the Act. I would ask that the parties convey to me the response to the initiatives developed as a result of the conferences and meetings held, and which have led to the resolution of a range of issues which, as I stated earlier, probably contributed in some not insignificant way to this dispute. DECISION ON THE CLAIM Now to deal with the actual claim for payment of double tally when in excess of 97.5 head of sheep are processed in a day. The award provision contained in Clause 5 (c) of the Award of the Abattoirs Industrial Board stipulates - "When stock is required to be processed in excess of the above tallies (sheep in works registered for export tally is 78 per day per man) the excess tally shall be paid for at one and one half times the ordinary rate." (The brackets are mine) Not only is this rate specified in the appropriate award but demonstrably it is the rate paid for over tally in the industry. In other words it is the Tasmanian industry standard. I feel that it needs to be stated that in an enterprise which clearly operates in a competitive environment, and which is looking to its competitiveness to maintain, or at the very least give it the opportunity to aspire to viability, I am of the opinion the granting of this claim would not be in the best interests of anybody. Quite apart from these observations, it is important for employees involved in this dispute to be reminded that their union, along with all other unions in this jurisdiction gave a commitment to abide by the wage fixing principles in the following terms: "That the union undertakes that for a period of two years, it will not pursue any extra claims, award or overaward, except where consistent with the Principles outlined in Decision C.R. No. 5 of 1983 of this authority." (The underlining is mine) I emphasize the importance of this commitment and its implications in respect of this claim made at this particular time. In my view the claim is not within the framework of the principles. Having regard to all of the circumstances canvassed above and also having regard to the repercussive effects that the granting of this claim would have on this industry in Tasmania, I feel it is inappropriate to grant this claim and accordingly it is refused.
R. K. GOZZI MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT between AUSTRALASIAN MEAT INDUSTRIES EMPLOYEES UNION and RICHARDSON MEAT INDUSTRIES This document represents the final agreed position of the parties in relation to the grievances presented as part of Dispute T No. 1 of 1985. 1. Concern over Double Standards The parties agree that there should be one common set of standards applicable to all employees of the Company. The Company undertakes in the future to monitor this situation and avoid any double standards occurring. 2. Preference in Recruitment to Regular, Experienced Part-Time Employees The parties agree that preference in recruitment of parttime personnel will be given to experienced and regular employees. The Company has implemented this as a matter of Company policy and advised the appropriate foreman accordingly. 3. Full-Time Manning Levels The parties agree that manning of key locations should, wherever possible, be by full time weekly hired employees during the peak of the slaughtering season. The parties agree that the Works Manager, Shop Steward and Foreman agree on the key locations to be so manned. 4. Penance Procedure - Part-Time Employees The Company advised that the penance procedure complained of by employees was contrary to company policy and gave an undertaking that such a situation would never arise. This statement was accepted by A.M.I.E.U. representatives. 5. Delays on Chain The parties agree that the vast majority of problems causing stoppages and gaps on the chain could be overcome by better utilisation of current labour. The Company undertakes that appropriate action will be taken through the Foreman to minimise such problems. 6. Recording of Part-Time Employees Overtime on Fridays The parties agree that overtime worked on a Friday will be recorded by the Foreman on an employee's card for the following Monday. 7. Penalty Carcases - Appointment of Umpire The Company advises that the Company representative for determining penalty carcases (e.g. double woolled sheep) will be the Works Manager. This was agreed by the A.M.I.E.U. representatives. 8. Relief Labour on Annual Leave from other Employers The parties agree that the Company will not employ any person who is on annual leave from any other employer. 9. Part-Timers utilised when Full-Time Employees were taking Forced Leave It was explained by the Company that this matter, when it was originally raised, was taken up with the then Shop Steward, who authorised the Company's actions. This explanation was accepted by A.M.I.E.U. representatives and it was agreed that all possible endeavours will be made to guard against any recurrence of this practice. 10. Breach of First Offer of Re-Employment Undertaking The Company concedes that some confusion existed at the time this matter arose and gave an undertaking that there will be no repetition. The A.M.I.E.U. representatives agreed with this undertaking. 11. Fear of Victimisation It was agreed by the parties that the fear of victimisation by the Company of employees bringing forward grievances was totally without foundation. The parties resolved that this matter can only be redressed over time in conjunction with the formulation of a Works Committee (see point 17 herein). 12. Overtally being processed in excess of agreed numbers Neither party was able to offer any explanation as to how 19 additional overtallies were processed in direct contravention of the slaughtermen's stated intentions. An undertaking was given by the Company and accepted by the A.M.I.E.U. that this would never reoccur unless prior agreement was reached. 13. Unsatisfactory Maintenance Both parties recognised that every endeavour is being made by the Company to enable speedy and competent maintenance and repair of machinery. These endeavours are crystallised by the engagement of a new Fitter. 14. Insufficient Company Flexibility The Company explained that the comments of the Works Manager that gave rise to this issue were being taken out of context. The Company re-affirms its policy that it will adhere rigidly to the award in relation to payments and tallies, but would be flexible in all other regards. This was accepted by the A.M.I.E.U. representatives . 15. Security of Employment The Company explained that it was unable to give any firm guarantees in relation to future employment security and in so doing highlighted a number of significant problems it saw affecting the viability of the Company. The Company further highlighted initiatives currently being undertaken to alleviate its perceived problems, including several representations to Government. The Company further advised that all endeavours that can possibly be made are being made to re-establish viability and that the situation will be continuously monitored and conveyed to the workforce through the Works Committee. 16. Alleged Guarantee of Jobs Remarks attributed to the Manager were accepted as having been a misconstruction of actual terminology used and the Manager undertakes to again address employees at the plant to explain current circumstances. The Company re-iterated that it will do its utmost to maintain current employment levels. 17. Works Committee The parties have agreed to immediately establish a Works Committee to improve communication between the Company and its employees and to provide a forum for the airing of grievances and the discussion of matters of mutual concern to both parties, including regular reports by the Company on the viability of the plant and Company initiatives to improve its future viability. The Committee would initially comprise the following persons:- Employee Representatives - N. Langford, S. Kelly and S. Salter with provision for up to three accompanying representatives. Employer Representatives - P. Davis, B. Roberts and a Foreman with provision for other representatives relevant to any particular aspect to be discussed. The parties agree that with total goodwill and commitment from both sides, the Works Committee will provide a forum to improve communication and to restore industrial relations and trust at the plant to a more appropriate level. 18. Grievance Procedure The parties agree to the need for the formulation of a clearly defined procedure to be followed by either party in the resolution of grievances and disputes arising at the plant. The grievance procedure agreed upon shall be in the format attached hereto. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE The following procedure shall be observed in the resolution of grievances and in the settling of disputes. (a) In the event of a grievance or dispute arising, the matter should first be discussed between the worker(s) concerned and the appropriate foreman. (b) Should the grievance or dispute not be settled by the discussions referred to in sub-clause (a) the shop steward shall take the matter up with the Production Manager. (c) If the issue remains unresolved at this level, the delegate may take the matter up with the Works Committee. (d) Should the matter remain unresolved, the shop steward shall notify the State Secretary of the Union. A conference on the matter shall then be arranged between the union and the appropriate management representatives including, if desired, a representative of the employers association. (e) If the conference referred to in sub-clause (d) hereof is unable to satisfactorily resolve the dispute, the matter shall be referred to the Tasmanian Industrial Commission whose decision shall be final and binding on both parties. (f) Without prejudice to either party and except where a bona fide safety issue is involved, work shall continue in accordance with the award while matters in dispute between them are being processed in accordance with the preceding procedure. (g) Where a safety issue arises, the Works Manager or his delegate shall ensure that all reasonable precautions are taken and work shall not proceed in the defined area until the Works Manager or his delegate and the shop steward are satisfied that the arrangements are suitable. In the event that agreement is unable to be reached in accordance with the preceding paragraph, the matter shall be referred, without delay, to the Department of Labour and Industry, whose written decision shall be accepted as final. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||