Department of Justice

Tasmanian Industrial Commission

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

T1099 and TA38

 

IN THE TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Decision Appealed - See T1379

Industrial Relations Act 1984

 

T.1099 of 1987 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY THE AUSTRALIAN WORKERS UNION TO VARY THE CEMENT MAKERS AWARD

RE: INSERTION OF A NEW CLASSIFICATION

   
  and
   
T.A.38 of 1988 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY THE TASMANIAN TRADES AND LABOR COUNCIL THROUGH THE ANOMALIES CONFERENCE TO VARY THE CEMENT MAKERS AWARD

RE: INSERTION OF A NEW CLASSIFICATION

   
COMMISSIONER J.G. KING HOBART, 9 May 1988
   

 

REASONS FOR DECISION

   
APPEARANCES:  
   
For the Australian Workers Union
Tasmanian Branch
- Mr D.P. Hanlon
   
For the Tasmanian Confederation of
Industries
- Mr T.J. Abey
 
DATES AND PLACES OF HEARING:
   
17 February 1988 Hobart (Before the Deputy President)
2 March 1988 Railton
30 March 1988 Railton
   

T.1099 of 1987, seeks the inclusion in Section I - Persons Employed in Limestone Quarries of Division A, of Clause 8 - Wage Rates, of the Cement Makers Award, the following new classification:

"1. Tamrock DHA 800 Drill
Operator $309.00 per week"

The rate claimed is based on a rate determined by the Commission, as currently constituted, for the same classification in the Quarrymens Award. The rate does not include the most recent national wage adjustment of $6.00 per week or the 4% second tier adjustment which has been finalised in the Quarrymens Award.

Following detailed submissions and inspections in this matter, it became obvious that an increase in existing rates for the Drill Operator, would exceed 4%. In accordance with the requirements of the current Wage Fixation Principles the Tasmanian Trades and Labor Council processed a claim through the Anomalies procedures of this Commission.

That claim is identified as T.A.38 of 1988. The President, on 22 April 1988, determined that an arguable case existed and referred the matter to me for determination.

This decision will have the effect, subject to any appeal rights of the parties, of determining both matters.

The parties are agreed that the introduction of the Tamrock DHA 800 Drill constitutes a significant change in the work requirements of the operator, but there is no agreement on the value of the increased skills and responsibility.

The circumstances in this case are substantially the same as those which resulted in the new classification, Self-contained Drill Operator (Tamrock DHA 800), being inserted in the Quarrymens Award. In that case a new machine was introduced and was found by the Commission to constitute a significant net addition to the skill and responsibility of the operator. The new rate determined in T.659 of 1987, of $299.00 per week, resulted in an increase of $17.90 per week to the Drill Rig operator.

The Australian Workers Union (AWU) in this case seek the new rate of $309.00 ($299.00 per week plus the March 1987 national wage increase of $10.00) whereas the Tasmanian Confederation of Industries (TCI) submitted that only the increase should be the same, i.e. that the current rate for the Drill Rig operator should be increased by $17.90 per week.

The rate for the Drill Rig operator contained in the Cement Makers Award is $265.30, the resultant increase if the AWU claim was granted is therefore $43.70 per week.

The logic of both arguments in this matter would be quite persuasive given the right circumstances. However, many situations in the industrial relations arena do not necessarily reflect logic and therefore require some analysis to arrive at a decision in the given circumstances.

I was advised during proceedings that an overaward payment of $40.30 per week is paid to the operator of the new drill rig at Railton. However, the award rate paid to employees covered by the Quarrymens Award, and in particular to operators at Bridgewater, where the Tamrock Drill is located, is in effect the actual rate.

A comparison of rates within the Cement Makers Award leads me to the conclusion that to grant the AWU claim would create relativity problems which currently do not exist.

In the absence of detailed submissions, which may have answered the many questions in my mind going to the composition of the rates paid to the respective operators, I cannot accept the submission of the applicant.

In any case the primary intention of the Work Value Principle is reflected in the following:

"(d) Where a significant net alteration to work value has been established in accordance with this principle, an assessment will have to be made as to how that alteration should be measured in money terms. Such assessment should normally be based on the previous work requirements, the wage previously fixed for the work and the nature and extent of the change in work."

Principle 4(d)

Even where the principle allows for comparisons elsewhere, the comparison relates to "wage increases for changed work requirements in the same classification" not a comparison of actual rates.

It is my decision that the rate currently paid to the operator of the Tamrock DHA 800 Drill, will be increased by $17.90 to $283.20 per week.

Agreement was reached between the parties, that any increase resulting from a decision of the Commission in this matter, would apply from the first pay period commencing on or after 23 October 1987.

Application T.1099 of 1987 was lodged with the Registrar on 23 December 1987. I am not aware of the reasons for the delay in lodging the application, however much of the delay since that date, could be attributed to this Commission or was otherwise unavoidable. In those circumstances the date of operation of the award variation will be 23 December 1987.

An order is attached reflecting this decision.

As the Cement Makers Award has not been varied by a second tier movement in wage rates, I make it clear that the new classification Tamrock DHA 800 Drill operator, is to be adjusted by the same amount as all other classifications when that matter is finalised.

 

J.G. King
COMMISSIONER