|
TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION
Industrial Relations Act 1984
s.23 application for award or variation of award
Australian Education Union,
Tasmanian Branch
(T.5109 of 1994)
TEACHING SERVICE (TEACHING STAFF) AWARD
| DEPUTY PRESIDENT A ROBINSON |
HOBART, 27 July 1994 |
Award variation - Clause 20 - Transition
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Australian Education Union, Tasmanian Branch (AEU) made application to vary the Teaching Service (Teaching Staff) Award in the following manner:
"Amend Clause 20 Transition by deleting existing subclauses b (ii) and (iii) and replacing them with the following. 'All employees employed prior to 16 August 1990 shall continue to progress to Band 1 level 11 (eleven) by annual incremental steps'.
Provided that this clause shall also apply to those employees employed on a temporary and casual basis in the three year period before 16 August 1990.
Provided further that Clause 18(a) (Transition) of Award Number 3 of 1990 shall be deemed to apply also to temporary teachers.
Renumber the subsequent sub-clause accordingly."
At the commencement of proceedings on 27 July 1994 a submission was made on behalf of the Minister for Public Sector Management that the application before me not be heard for a number of reasons, including that:
1. The AEU application is in contravention of Australian Education Union, Tasmanian Branch, State Service Wages Arrangements - Letter of Intent which provides that "there shall be no additional claims pursued during the period of the letter of intent other than those provided for in Stage 2 of the State Service Wages Arrangement".
2. The present application is also inconsistent with registered agreement T.5066 titled "State Service Wages Arrangements Department of Education and the Arts in Australian Education Union (Teaching Staff) Agreement 1994".
3. The application effectively constitutes an "appeal" against a Full Bench decision in the teachers special case matter and an earlier award when orders were settled in consultation with the parties concerned.
The AEU said in response to the threshold argument that there was no good reason why its application should not proceed to be heard on merit. This was because this was not an additional claim but rather an application to correct a problem which was overlooked previously.
The AEU also said it intended to adhere to its commitments contained in the letter of intent and agreement signed on 17 May 1994 but that the present application was not inconsistent with those commitments.
I have considered the arguments put by the respective parties and have decided, in accordance with Section 24(4) of the Act, to refer the application to the President in order that he may determine whether or not it should be referred to a Full Bench.
A. Robinson
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Appearances:
Ms T. Moran with Ms J. Poate for the Australian Education Union, Tasmanian Branch.
Mr G. Payne with Mr P. Gourlay for the Minister administering the Tasmanian State Service Act 1984.
Date and Place of Hearing:
1994.
Hobart:
July 27 | 
