Department of Justice

Tasmanian Industrial Commission

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

T1153 - 31 August

 

IN THE TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act 1984

 

T.1153 of 1988 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY THE FEDERATED MISCELLANEOUS WORKERS UNION OF AUSTRALIA, TASMANIAN BRANCH TO VARY THE CLEANERS AWARD
   
  RE: 4% SECOND TIER INCREASE
   
COMMISSIONER R K GOZZI HOBART, 31 August 1988
   

REASONS FOR DECISION

   
APPEARANCES:  
   
For the Federated Miscellaneous
Workers Union, Tasmanian Branch
- Mr K O'Brien
   
For the Tasmanian Confederation
of Industries
- Mr M Sertori
   
DATES AND PLACE OF HEARING:  
   
02 March 1988 Hobart (mention only)
29 August 1988 Hobart
   

This application by the Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia, Tasmanian Branch (the Union) seeks an increase in rates of pay contained in the Cleaners Award (the Award) by 4% as a consequence of the finalisation of second tier efficiency and restructuring negotiations with the Tasmanian Confederation of Industries.

Mr O'Brien detailed the cost offsets and the appropriate consequential award variations.

In the absence of costing information and given the broad thrust of the submissions made in terms of the anticipated worth of the offsets, it is difficult for the Commission to gauge the overall value of the negotiated package.

However, I do accept that a genuine attempt has been made by the parties to meet the efficiency and restructuring criteria as set out in the Wage Fixing Principles of the Commission.

I was also impressed that some proposed award variations appear to create more flexible working arrangements and will generate cost savings.

This is particularly the case in respect of the extension of shiftwork over a seven day period. Previously this was limited to five days, Monday through to Friday.

Mr Sertori supported the submissions of Mr O'Brien including the proposed operative date.

I found Mr Sertori's submission on the size of the industry, 74 contract cleaners employing some 500-700 employees, helpful in as much that this gave some perspective to the claim before me.

Mr Sertori said that approximately 6% of all employees are full-time; 92% work part-time and 2% are employed as casuals.

He attributed a value of 3% to the award offsets and costed the non-award items at l% to 1.5%.

DECISION

In all of the circumstances I have decided to endorse this consent matter operative from the beginning of the first full pay period commencing on or after 1 September 1988, the date requested by the parties.

My Order is attached.

 

R.K. Gozzi
COMMISSIONER