Department of Justice

Tasmanian Industrial Commission

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

T2707, T2809 and T3231

 

TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act 1984
s.23 application to vary an award

Health Services Union of Australia
Tasmania No. 1 Branch

(T.2707 of 1990 and T.3231 of 1991)

Tasmanian Confederation of Industries
(T.2809 of 1991)

DENTISTS AWARD

COMMISSIONER R J WATLING

11 November 1991

Wage Rates - State Wage November 1989 - Structural Efficiency Principle - Report Back - State Wage August 1991 - Wage rates and work related allowances - increase by 2.5% - application granted - Operative from F.F.P.P. 20 November 1991

REASONS FOR DECISION

On 21 May 1991 the Commission handed down a decision1 which saw the granting of the second structural efficiency increase to the Dentists Award, however, the parties were required to report back to the Commission on a number of outstanding issues including the establishment of skill related career paths.

The purpose of this hearing was to:

(a) hear a report on the fore mentioned matters, and

(b) hear and determine application T.3231 of 1991 being an application to reflect, in the Dentists Award, the 2.5% increase arising out of the State Wage Case decision of 13 August 1991.

This award is divided into three distinct divisions:

    Division A - Registered Dental Mechanics and Dental Technicians;

    Division B - Dental Mechanic's Assistants and Attendants;

    Division C - Dental Assistants.

I was informed by the parties that they had explored all avenues to find a more appropriate classification structure, but in the final analysis settled for the following:

    Division A 2 classifications - each with a five year incremental scale;

    Division B 1 classification with a five-year incremental scale.

    Division C 1 classification with a five year incremental scale and an allowance for those employees holding a certificate of proficiency accredited by the Dental Assistants' Education Council of Australia.

Some time was spent on and off the record discussing Division C - Dental Assistants and their career path.

The parties presented an agreed position on the new structure for this award which was submitted in the form of an Exhibit (TCI-1). They also requested the Commission to endorse the proposals, which in their view would finalise the requirements of the structural efficiency principle.

It is worth recalling that a major review of the work carried out by Dental Assistants was conducted in August/September 1988.

That decision2 which was handed down on 19 October 1988 clearly indicates on pages 4 to 6 the vast variety of duties required to be performed by Dental Assistants under the headings of clinical, general and clerical work.

I am prepared to endorse the submissions presented by the parties and agree with them when they say that the career path for categories of employees under this award is somewhat limited.

It could be said that the new structure for the award does not follow that which we have now come to expect, but then again each industry has its own peculiarities and the blue print for one industry may not necessarily be appropriate to another.

This industry is made up of a number of very small businesses and each of those businesses have very few employees. Those employees carry out all the duties associated with the classification.

That being the case I support the view that this industry could be seen as falling into a special category.

For the foregoing reasons the award will reflect the structure agreed to by the parties, however, applications T.2707 and 2809 of 1990 will be left open as the parties have foreshadowed they may wish to further examine the classifications of Dental Mechanic in light of changing circumstance.

I now wish to turn to application T.3231 of 1991, being an application to increase wage rates by 2.5% arising out of the State Wage Case decision of 13 August 1991.

Mr Warwick of the Health Services Union of Australia, Tasmania No. 1 Branch addressed the Commission on the Structural Efficiency Principle and in particular subclauses (a) - (g) of that Principle.

He stated that the organisation he represented was prepared to include in the award three new provisions to comply with subclause (b), (c) and (e) of the Structural Efficiency Principle.

I have also noted that this award does not require any minimum rates adjustment.

Mr Abey of the Tasmanian Confederation of Industries supported the submission presented by Mr Warwick and endorsed the view that the wage rates contained in the award should increase by 2.5% along with the inclusion of the three new provisions.

I am satisfied that the Wage Fixing Principles and in particular, Principle 2 - Structural Efficiency has been complied with and the award will be varied in the manner sought by the parties along with the agreed operative date, that being the first full pay period on or after 20 November, and I decide accordingly.

The orders giving effect to this decision are attached.

 

R J Watling
COMMISSIONER

Appearances:
Mr R Warwick for the Health Services Union of Australia Tasmania No. 1 Branch.
Mr T Abey with Drs. Canning, Allan and Ford for the Tasmanian Confederation of Industries.

Date and place of hearing:
1991
November 7
Hobart

1 T.Nos. 2707 and 2809 of 1990
2 TA41 of 1988; T.1222 of 1988