T3480
|
TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Industrial Relations Act 1984 Federated Clerks Union of Australia BROADCASTING AND TELEVISION AWARD
Second structural efficiency principle REASONS FOR INTERIM DECISION In this matter the Federated Clerks Union of Australia (Tasmanian Branch) (FCU) sought the variation of the Broadcasting and Television Award to reflect the second instalment structural efficiency adjustment. Mrs Dowd appearing for the FCU submitted a draft order which reflected consent with the Tasmanian Confederation of Industries (TCI) in all matters with the exception of the method of working a 38 hour week. With regard to that issue I accepted the submissions made by Mr Abey which focused on the additional costs that would result in the event a 19-day month was determined to be the method of working a 38 hour week. Mr Abey for the TCI objected to the inclusion in the draft order to a proviso to the Hours Clause, which would require employers with 15 or more full time employees to compulsorily adopt as the method of working a 38 hour week one of the following:
Mr Abey said that this particular proviso had its genesis in the Retail Trades Award and that it was not now appropriate to import that provision into an unrelated industry albeit that it is now also included in the Clerical and Administrative Employees (Private Sector) Award. In respect of that latter award Mr Abey submitted that when clerical classifications were removed from the Retail Trades Award for inclusion in the Clerical and Administrative Employees (Private Sector) Award it was included on the basis of the First Awards Wage Fixing Principle. He submitted that the TCI and FCU were currently negotiating on the applicability or otherwise of clerical structures in awards of this Commission having regard to the Victorian Commercial Clerks decision. In that context Mr Abey indicated that the proviso in question and other matters were being discussed in any real sense for the first time. I concur with Mr Abey that it is not appropriate to simply import provisions from other awards without those provisions being tested for suitability and applicability to the industry to which it is intended that they have application. In this instant case I was not persuaded by Mrs Dowd that the proviso would not have a detrimental effect on those employers who employ 15 or more employees. Certainly the sworn evidence of Mr Rouse, the Executive Director and General Manager of TVT 6 established that whilst some cover can be provided for employees on a rostered day off, the end result would be an increase in costs because in the main cover for rostered days would be through the engagement of temporary employees. Similarly I was not persuaded by Mrs Dowd to accept a 19-day month on the basis that some other employees, not subject to this award are working their hours in that way. The reality was that out of 100 employees 11 have an entitlement to a 19-day month. (Exhibit A2) In determining this matter I consider it appropriate to adopt the Hours of Work draft clause proposed by the TCI. That clause does comprehend a 19-day month in respect of the method of working a 38-hour week. However it does not include the proviso which would make it compulsory for an employer employing 15 employees or more to arrange working hours in that way or by way of allowing an accumulation of rostered days off, to a maximum of 5 days before that time is required to be taken off by the employee. Accordingly there will be a capacity in individual work places for that method to be introduced depending on the relevant circumstances. With regard to the structural efficiencies introduced into the award, the Commission is appreciative of the efforts of Mrs Dowd on behalf of the FCU to re cast the Broadcasting and Television Award to make it a meaningful and up-to-date document. The Commission has expressed concerns in that direction in the past and had indicated that it would be prepared to rescind the award if it was not varied to have current application. In that regard the Draft Order presented to the Commission is a comprehensive document and I congratulate the parties on it. In explanation of the structural efficiency initiatives the parties satisfied the Commission that sufficient had been accomplished in the award to warrant the granting of the second instalment structural efficiency adjustment. The issue of the classification structure is however still outstanding and I was informed that the parties are now in serious discussion on that matter. In the circumstances the award will be varied from the first pay period to commence on or after 25 November 1991. The order is attached.
R K Gozzi Appearances: Date and Place of Hearing: |