Department of Justice

Tasmanian Industrial Commission

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

T1434 - 14 September

IN THE TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act 1984

T.1434 of 1988 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY THE FEDERATED MISCELLANEOUS WORKERS UNION OF AUSTRALIA, TASMANIAN BRANCH TO VARY THE WELFARE AND VOLUNTARY AGENCIES AWARD
   
  RE: 4% SECOND TIER INCREASE TO EMPLOYEES SUBJECT TO DIVISION A
   
COMMISSIONER R K GOZZI HOBART, 14 September 1988
   

REASONS FOR DECISION

   
APPEARANCES:  
   
For the Federated Miscellaneous
Workers Union of Australia,
Tasmanian Branch
- Mr. K. O'Brien
   
For the Tasmanian Confederation
of Industries
- Mr. K. Brotherson
   
DATE AND PLACE OF HEARING:  
   
21 July 1988 Hobart  
01 September 1988 Hobart  
     

This hearing concerned the phased payment of the 4% second tier increase to employees subject to Division A of the Welfare and Voluntary Agencies Award (the Award).

At an earlier hearing of this matter the parties considered pursuing the second tier increase through the Supplementary Payments Principle.

However, the finally agreed course of the parties to seek the utilization of the Restructuring and Efficiency Principle, produced a package of offsets which Mr Brotherson for the Tasmanian Confederation of Industries (TCI) said would provide a cost neutral result for employers in child care centres; the Division of the award subject to this application.

Given the scope of the Welfare and Voluntary Agencies Award, the question of finding appropriate cost offsets for each of the Divisions of the Award has been a rather involved and sometimes difficult task for the respective parties in each of the separate hearings.

Nevertheless, and whilst hard quantifiable offsets have not been readily available, I have accepted the assurances of the parties that in the longer term cumulative savings would far and away exceed the cost of the increase.

Again, in respect of Division A the parties in that matter appear to have diligently applied themselves to the application of the Restructuring and Efficiency Principle. As a consequence cost effective changes have been made to the Mixed Functions and Contract of Employment clauses.

The proposed variation to the Mixed Functions clause provides a level of payment below the appropriate award classification when the Director of a child care centre is absent in circumstances where the period of relief in that position is for four days or less.

In other words the appropriate classification rate will apply for periods of relief in excess of four days.

The variation requested to be made to the Contract of Employment clause, which in essence contemplates an employee counselling procedure and the ability to suspend an employee for a period not exceeding one week, is welcomed by the Commission.

I have often made reference to the fact that in many dismissal matters before the Commission as constituted, the application of fundamental employee counselling techniques has not been evident. This has resulted in time consuming and costly hearings which, in the main, have highlighted employer deficiencies in this area.

In this day and age good industrial relations practice demands that proper attention is given to employee counselling techniques.

It simply is not good enough for an employer to reach the stage where an application for re-instatement is made to the Commission by the employee's union in circumstances where appropriate employee counselling has not occurred. A successful counselling procedure will ensure an employee is given the opportunity, over a reasonable period of time, to address shortcomings or other work related problems. Of course offences of such gravity which may constitute reason for summary dismissal do not permit the type of counselling indicated above.

A further offset relates to early notice to the employer when the employee is unable to attend work because of sickness.

This will facilitate a more efficient working environment.

In addition to the foregoing offsets the parties have agreed to commence enterprise level discussions aimed at identifying and implementing other "local" efficiency and productivity measures.

In this regard I was informed that "efficiency and productivity" discussions will be held at individual centres.

The results of those discussions will be conveyed to the Commission in a formal hearing on 17 October 1988.

DECISION

In this matter the parties have reached agreement and have requested the Commission to endorse a package of offsets for a 4% increase in rates of pay.

Whilst the package is said to provide a cost neutral outcome, in reality only four offsets, excluding enterprise discussions, have been put forward.

I accept that proper scrutiny of work and management practices has taken place in a "global" sense and therefore anticipate further fine tuning at enterprise level.

As with other Divisions of the Award, identifying effective offsets has not been an easy task. However, in this case I am prepared to accept that the negotiated package will produce acceptable cost savings.

This aspect, together with the expectation for further favourable efficiency measures being found at individual child care centres, has persuaded me to grant the increase sought.

Accordingly the Award will be varied to reflect an increase in the wage rates contained in Clause 8 in the following terms -

(i) 2% operative from the beginning of the first full pay period to commence on or after 1 September 1988. This date confirms that requested by the parties, and

(ii) a further 2% operative from the beginning of the first full pay period to commence on or after 31 October 1988 subject to the definitive outcome of the proposed enterprise discussions being tabled in the Commission for consideration for attachment to the Award. It may be that each child care centre will have a separate attachment to the Award specifying those arrangements unique to it.

A supplementary decision in respect of item (ii) will issue following the hearing on 17 October, 1988.

 

R K Gozzi
COMMISSIONER