T10930
|
TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Industrial Relations Act 1984 Australian Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union - Tasmanian Branch SECURITY INDUSTRY AWARD
Award variation - Clause 17 - new subclause (d) inserted - Aviation Security Allowance - approved - operative ffpp 18 July 2003 REASONS FOR DECISION [1] On 1 July 2003 an application was lodged by the Australian Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union - Tasmanian Branch, pursuant to Section 23 of the Industrial Relations Act 1984, to vary the Security Industry Award. [2] When this matter came on for hearing Mr P Tullgren appeared for the Australian Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union - Tasmanian Branch, and Mr P Mazengarb appeared for Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Limited. [3] This application seeks to vary the Award by including a new allowance in the following terms:
[4] Mr Tullgren submitted that this application was pursued pursuant to Principle 9 relating to Work Value Changes. In particular he submitted that changes imposed on airport security officers in the post 11 September 2001 environment, together with the collapse of Ansett Airlines and the Bali bombings, had resulted in a significant net addition to the work value of aviation security officers at Hobart and Launceston airports. [5] Mr Tullgren relied on a decision of Holmes C. in respect of the Security Employees [Victoria] Award 19981 in which similar issues relating to Melbourne [Tullamarine] Airport and the Avalon Air Base were canvassed at length. In this matter the Commission granted an allowance of $0.97 per hour, which has subsequently been extended to the relevant security awards in NSW, South Australia and Western Australia. [6] Mr Tullgren tendered into evidence a witness statement from Ms Michelle Tedeschi, a full-time security officer employed at Launceston Airport since 1992.2 [7] Changes identified in the statement of Ms Tedeschi and the decision of Holmes C. include:
[8] Mr Mazengarb said that in the light of the extensive proceedings before Holmes C., the application was not opposed. [9] I am satisfied that the application is consistent with both the Wage Fixing Principles and the public interest requirements of the Act. [10] The application is granted operative from the beginning of the first pay period to commence on or after 18 July 2003. The Order reflecting this decision is attached.
Tim Abey Appearances: Date and Place of Hearing: |
