IN THE TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act 1984

The Minister for Public Administration made application on 15 July 1987 to vary the Hobart Regional Water Board Staff Award.

The matter was heard on 31 July 1987.

In summary, the applicant sought to amend the award by:

1. including additional classes and grades for Drafting Officers, and new classifications for Drafting Assistants and Trainee Drafting Officers;

2. inserting definitions that had been previously determined by the Commission;

3. reformatting the award to replace employees under the age of 21 years in their appropriate classification, as opposed to a separate section in the award dealing with juniors;

4. adding "Word Processor Operator" in the classification list for Keyboard and Office Assistants Employees;

5. including a provision for part-time and casual employees in Clause 8 - Salaries;

6. amending the qualifications for Drafting Officers to bring them in line with the Drafting Officers Award;

7. deleting Clause 15 - Progression; and

8. inserting the standard clause adopted by the Commission in respect of Conditions of Service for public sector employees.

The parties came to the Commission agreeing to the abovementioned matters, and Exhibits McCl, McC6 and McC7 were tendered itemizing the agreed variations.

I am prepared to accept those parts of the application that fall within 2 to 8 of the previously mentioned summary, and an Order will be handed down at a later date giving effect to this decision.

In granting this part of the application I have had regard for the following facts:

1. in many cases the claim only reflects that which has already been decided by the Commission, constituted by either a Full Bench or a Commissioner sitting alone;

2. a number of matters in the application only relate to the format of the award or are purely of an administrative nature; and

3. 1 was assured by the applicant that the variations would not constitute an increase in the Government's Salary Bill or grant increases to individual employees covered by the award.

This leaves me to determine that part of the application dealing with:

(a) the new classification of Drafting Assistant;

(b) the new classification of Trainee Drafting Officer; and

(c) additional classes and grades for Drafting Officers.

There is no provision in the current award for the classifications of Drafting Assistants and Trainee Drafting Officers. It is my understanding that the salaries for this category of employee, especially those under the age of 21 years, are those described in Scales 2 and 1 respectively of the Junior Officers appearing in Clause 8 B. of this award.

In keeping with my earlier decision to allow the salary rates for employees under 21 years of age to appear in their appropriate classification in the award, and for the sake of consistency, I support the application to include a provision for Drafting Assistants and Trainee Drafting Officers. This will mean that Drafting Assistants and Trainee Drafting Officers under this award will receive the same remuneration as their counterpart under the Drafting Officers Award.

I now wish to turn to that part of the application which seeks to place four new classes in the award for Drafting Officers.

The main thrust of Mr. McCabe's submission in support of the application was:

1. the Hobart Regional Water Board was seeking to fill the vacant position of Drafting Officer which, in their view, equated to a Class III in the Drafting Officers Award thus necessitating a provision in the award; and

2. there may be a need some time in the future for persons to be employed on salaries equivalent to Classes IV, V and VI of the Drafting Officers Award.

Mr. McCabe further supported his claim by tendering Exhibits McC2 and McC3 which were position descriptions for Trainee Draftsman and Drafting Officer Class III respectively employed in the agency of the Hobart Regional Water Board, and Exhibits McC4 and McC5 were position descriptions for Drafting Officer Class I/II and Class III respectively employed in the agency of the Department of Main Roads.

Whilst I find these exhibits informative, nevertheless, my task is one of determining whether or not Classes III, IV, V and VI should be included in this award and the reasons for doing so.

No submission was put to me nor was I shown the current duties of a Drafting Officer Class I and Class II in the employ of the Hobart Regional Water Board. If this had been done it may have assisted me in comparing the work currently being undertaken by Drafting Officers with the position description for the Class III being argued for inclusion in this award.

Before I make any decision on this part of the application, I would ask the parties to address me in greater detail on this matter.

The Wage Fixing Principles require me, when extending an award to new work or to award-free work, to assess the rates by reference to the value of work already covered by the award.

The parties will need to establish what work is undertaken by a Drafting Officer Class I/II in the Hobart Regional Water Board at the moment, and then demonstrate why the award should be varied to include four new classes.

The hearing will be reconvened at the request of either party to further consider this part of the application.

R.J. Watling
COMMISSIONER