T5470
|
TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Industrial Relations Act 1984 Australian Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union and Direct Security Group Proprietary Limited
Industrial dispute - underpayment of wages - non-payment of superannuation - arbitrated - order made REASONS FOR FURTHER DECISION This was a continuation of an application for a dispute hearing made under Section 29 of Act by the Australian Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union (Tasmanian Branch) (the Union). The dispute was with the Direct Security Group Proprietary Limited (the Company) and concerned the alleged underpayment of wages and non-payment of superannuation contributions in particular for an employee of the Company, Mr Colin Budd. In the original decision on this matter a settlement was endorsed subject to the satisfactory conclusion of payment. In the meantime full payment was not made to Mr Budd and the Union sought an appropriate order. There was disagreement between the parties over an amount of money ($960 equivalent to two weeks wages) paid to Mr Budd in May of 1995. This latter amount of money was paid well prior to the agreement between the parties in late November 1995, that an amount of $10 335.87 was due and owing to Mr Budd by the Company for wages outstanding. The Company claimed that the $960 had been paid in acknowledgment that outstanding wages were due to Mr Budd and to assist him even though no work had been available nor had any been performed by Mr Budd just prior to the payment of the money. The Company claimed that Mr Budd had been aware of the circumstances of the payment. The Union claimed that the amount settled in November 1995, should not be discounted by the $960 paid in May 1995 because it had not been mentioned at the time of the settlement and therefore could not be considered as part of the $10 335.87 agreed as outstanding in November 1995. The Union also said that the May payment represented two weeks pay in lieu of notice as Mr Budd had been employed full-time for quite a period up until then and he was not a casual employee. The Union acknowledged that Mr Budd had been paid a casual loading. The parties accepted the Commission's arbitration on the disagreement over the money paid in May 1995. I suspect that many employees in the coverage of the Union and particularly in the security industry, are paid and look upon themselves as casual employees whereas, in truth by any reasonable industrial standard they are full-time or part-time employees. In this context I am not prepared to say that Mr Budd was not a casual employee and, therefore, I find that the Company was not required to give him two weeks notice of the termination of his employment. This means that, despite the agreement between the parties in November 1995, that an amount of $10 335.87 in unpaid wages was due to Mr Budd, the extra money paid to Mr Budd in May 1995 is able to be offset against any outstanding wages amount due to Mr Budd as it was indeed an extra payment if not otherwise designated. I have calculated, therefore, that the balance of monies owed in wages by the Company to Mr Budd is $10 335.87 minus $8 855.00 already paid, leaving $1 480.87 outstanding. I decline to make an order in relation to superannuation payments because there was insufficient evidence before me, but, I am prepared to hear the matter further, in due course, once full particulars become available: to that extent the application will be held open. Order In accordance with the power vested in me under Section 31(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1984 I hereby order that within fourteen days from the date of this decision Direct Security Group Pty Ltd pay to Colin Budd of Bellerive the sum of one thousand four hundred and eighty dollars and eighty-seven cents being the balance of monies owing in wages underpaid.
P A Imlach Appearances: Date and place of hearing: |