Department of Justice

Tasmanian Industrial Commission

www.tas.gov.au
Contact  |  Accessibility  |  Disclaimer

T604

 

IN THE TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act 1984

 

T.604 of 1986 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY THE HOSPITAL EMPLOYEES FEDERATION OF AUSTRALIA, TASMANIA NO. 2 BRANCH TO VARY THE WELFARE AND VOLUNTARY AGENCIES AWARD
   
  RE: INTRODUCTION OF A 38 HOUR WEEK FOR PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER DIVISION B
   
COMMISSIONER R.K. GOZZI HOBART, 14 January 1987
   

REASONS FOR DECISION

   
APPEARANCES:  
   
For the Hospital Employees Federation of Australia, Tasmania No. 2 Branch - Mr D. Holden
   
For the Royal Australian Nursing Federation, Tasmanian Branch - Mr D. Heapy
   
For the Tasmanian Chamber of Industries - Mr M.C. Sertori
   
DATE AND PLACE OF HEARING:  
   
12 January 1987 Hobart  

This matter concerns the introduction of a 38 hour week for employees subject to subdivisions B1 and B2 of the Welfare and Voluntary Agencies Award (the award).

The above sections of the award relate only to employees employed by the St. Giles Home in Launceston.

Accordingly, the exercise of vetting the application in the context of cost offsets has been made relatively straight forward.

In all, thirteen award offsets have been negotiated and four work practices are to be modified.

As a result, total costs associated with the introduction of the shorter working week, assessed at 6.5%, have been offset to the extent of 5.95%. That is, the residue cost of implementing the 38 hour week is 0.55%.

In financial terms, as documented in Exhibit S1, the total cost of reducing hours to 38 per week will be well under $500 per annum.

Having regard to the totality of the information presented to the Commission, I have no hesitation in finding that the cost offsets agreed upon more than adequately comply with the requirements of the Wage Fixing Principles and in particular Principle 5, Standard Hours.

Further I am satisfied that the granting of the application is in the public interest, particularly when cost offset and industrial relations criterion are taken into account.

I also congratulate the parties on the presentation of their respective cases.

Mr. Holden undertook the task of providing the Commission with a draft order which was well prepared and well supported by his submissions.

Mr. Sertori's explanation of the cost offsets was lucid and his exhibit confirmed the dollar values attributed to each cost offset.

In granting this application I have also decided to endorse the

request of the parties for the award variations to operate from the beginning of the first full pay period commencing on or after 1 February 1987.

The order giving effect to this decision will issue, in due course, as a consolidated award.

 

R.K. Gozzi
COMMISSIONER