IN THE TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act 1984

These applications were joined for hearing purposes in proceedings before the Commission on 17 March 1988.

The desirability of that action was demonstrated in the opening submission of the Tasmanian Confederation of Industries (TCI). It was stated that employers would only support the union application if their requirement for a similar updating of cost related charges to employees was granted.

The union applications seek the updating of cost related allowances contained in the Hospitals Award (the Award) by 11.96%; the same percentage amount by which allowances in public sector awards were increased by this Commission.

By contrast the TCI application seeks to increase cost related charges made to employees, covered by the Award, by the same percentage amount. Those charges specifically relate to board and lodging and the provision of meals.

While 1 understand the submission of the TCI , referred to above, it is my intention to increase all cost related allowances contained in the Award by 11.96%. Relevant public sector awards have been varied by a Full Bench and the Commission as currently constituted. I therefore, see no point in debating the merits of the parties submissions relating to this aspect.

However, the increasing of charges made to employees is strongly opposed by the Employee Organisations. In addition public sector awards have not been varied in relation to charges.

The Employee Organisations submissions opposing increases in charges can be broadly summarised as follows:

- there is a strong nexus between public sector and private sector awards in relation to salaries, allowances and charges;

- charges contained in public sector awards have not been varied;

- traditionally public sector awards are varied before private sector awards;

- therefore, there are no grounds for increases at this stage;

- no significant material or argument going to the merit has been put by the TCI justifying its application;

- economies achieved in some hospitals may mean the 11.96% increase claimed is not sustainable.

- there is no doubt that the application relates to charges not allowances - Wage Fixing Principles do not contemplate increases in charges;

- private sector employees have traditionally had to wait for increases in salaries and allowances to flow from public sector awards; they have been as a result substantially disadvantaged; history should not be reversed thus again penalising private sector employees.

The TCI submitted that if it is appropriate to increase allowances by 11.96% it is equally appropriate to increase charges by the same amount. It would be inequitable to do otherwise. It was further submitted that charges are in fact an allowance to employees and can therefore be increased under the same principle as allowances.

As a secondary submission it was maintained that charges could be treated as a condition of employment and therefore dealt with under the appropriate principle.

The TCI through Exhibit W.1 demonstrated that since 1980, charges have been increased at the same time and by the same amount as allowances.

The TCI also submitted that the nexus has not always applied in the case of allowances and other matters, such as date of operation. There is therefore no logical reason why their application cannot be dealt with before the public sector.

In a decision dated 1 February 19881 going to relevant public sector awards I said:

"In all the circumstances, I believe there are matters relating to merit which should be debated before a decision is made on whether charges should be increased in the subject awards. I also believe that to increase charges now, without debate on the merit and in the face of strong opposition from employee organisations, would be contrary to the requirements of Section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1984. I therefore refrain from making an order in relation to charges. The applications will be relisted, at short notice, to enable the parties to present submissions on the merit.

It naturally follows that I reject the submissions that the Wage Fixing Principles prevent the increasing of charges made to employees."

Of the grounds relied on by the unions in opposing an increase in charges, the one that concerns me the most is that the TCI have not justified their application with sufficient reasons going to merit. In the light of my statement in the public sector decision detailed above, I would have expected more information and merit submissions from the TCI.

However, to again defer or reject an application to increase charges, on the basis of insufficient merit argument, would serve no useful purpose. I therefore grant the application on the basis of the somewhat limited information placed before me. It naturally follows that arguments going to the nexus, between public and private sector health awards and the reliance on the Wage Fixing Principles, as grounds for dismissing application T1118 of 1988, are not persuasive and are rejected.

It also follows that I believe it equitable and logical that if cost related allowances paid to employees can be increased, so should cost related charges made to those same employees.

Cost related charges made to employees in accordance with appropriate provisions of the Award will be increased by 11.96%.

The increase in allowances and charges is to be effective from the first pay period commencing on or after 25 March 1988.

Orders reflecting this decision are attached.

J.G. King
COMMISSIONER

1 T1056, 1074, 1079, 1080 and 1081 of 1987