T5538 T6124 T6125 T6131 - 19 June 1996
TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Industrial Relations Act 1984 Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Limited Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, Tasmanian Trades and Labor Council NATIONAL TRAINING WAGE (TASMANIAN PRIVATE SECTOR) AWARD
Award variation - second $8.00 safety net adjustment - addition of other industries REASONS FOR DECISION On 23 June 1995 a differently constituted Full Bench issued Reasons for Decision1 for the making of a new award titled the "National Training Wage (Tasmanian Private Sector) Award" which had application to a list of industries covered in existing awards and specified in a schedule. The same Full Bench issued further Reasons for Decision2 on 13 and 18 July 1995 which extended the list of industries covered but left reserved certain others. We now deal with a number of matters which have arisen subsequently. Those matters are:
At the commencement of the hearing the CFMEU requested that its applications to vary the Building and Construction Industry Award and the Building Trades Award be held over to enable further discussions to be held with the TCCI. The TCCI supported the request and we have accordingly decided to defer consideration of applications T6124 and T6125 of 1996 until a later date. The onus is on the parties to advise us if and when they are in a position to have these two matters relisted for hearing. We now turn to the application by the TTLC to vary the National Training Wage (Tasmanian Private Sector) Award by adjusting existing wage rates to give effect to the Second Safety Net Adjustment and the revision of certain sections in line with a decision of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission dated 19 January 1996 (Print M8595). In this regard Mr Warwick pointed out that in granting the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) application on 10 January 1996 Deputy President Williams was satisfied that:
Whilst some employer representatives before us expressed their reservations about certain aspects of the proposal such as a common anniversary date for all trainees, there was nevertheless consensus that the TTLC application [as amended] should be approved with an operative date of 30 April 1996. We are satisfied that, subject to checking draft orders, this proposal conforms with the requirements of the current Wage Fixing Principles and Section 36 of the Act. On this basis it is our decision to grant application T6131 of 1996 with effect from 30 April 1996. Next we deal with the request of the TCCI on behalf of the Meat and Allied Trades' Federation of Australia (Tasmanian Division) (MATFA), for the industries covered by the Meat Trades Award, the Meat Industry Award and the Abattoirs Award to be added to the appendix of the National Training Wage (Tasmanian Private Sector) Award. In speaking in support of the request Mr Flynn appraised the Commission of the high standard of training which had been developed co-operatively in the meat industry in Tasmania. He said that the request for the inclusion of the three nominated awards in the appendix was based upon grounds of equity, and it was pointed out that some arrangements had been entered into by use of Section 55 [of the Act] agreements and there had been approximately 62 commencements within the industry to date as a consequence. However there were a number of other employers who were denied the opportunity of extending the benefits of the scheme to other potential trainees because of lack of agreement by The Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union, Tasmanian Branch (AMIEU). Mr Edwards for the TCCI supported the position of MATFA on the basis that he believed access to the traineeships ought to be available to anyone, subject to the tests, controls and protections which are built into the award and including the requirement to consult with the appropriate union. It was also pointed out that the National Training Wage Interim Award included in its terms recognition of traineeships relevant to the meat industry for those persons covered by the Federal jurisdiction. Mr Swallow for the AMIEU opposed the addition of these three awards to the appendix. He said that whereas 98% of those in the meat industry were genuinely supportive of the training system in place there are others who are "rorters" of the system who have no intention of delivering any structured training at all. In this regard certain exhibits were put forward which purported to support such a case where proper training was said to have been provided but allegedly was not. He also opposed the employer's proposition on the basis of perceived adverse affect upon the apprenticeship system in meat retailing. The view expressed by the TTLC through Mr Warwick was that the industries of additional awards should only be included in the appendix to the National Training Wage (Tasmanian Private Sector) Award by consent and not otherwise. And Mr Glisson on behalf of the The Australian Workers' Union, Tasmania Branch (AWU) supported this view and suggested a deferment of the question of including these three awards in the appendix to the award. Finally Mr Edwards drew attention to the fact that there are a comprehensive number of inbuilt protective mechanisms to guard against the possibility of misuse of the traineeship arrangement as well as a requirement to involve trade unions in the processes. We have decided to grant the TCCI request for the inclusion of the Meat Trades Award, the Meat Industry Award and the Abattoirs Award in the appendix on the basis of equity, together with the fact that we believe there exists adequate mandatory safeguards to ensure the traineeship scheme can operate fairly and to the benefit of both individual employees who need to acquire new skills and the efficient and effective operation of the meat industry in Tasmania. This variation shall take effect from the date of our decision. We now refer to the fact that the Australian Mines and Metals Association (Incorporated) had made a written request for the opportunity to be provided for submissions to be made in relation to the inclusion of the Ferro Alloys Award [now the Temco Enterprise Award] in the appendix to this award. However whilst we provided that opportunity it was for some reason not exercised, and will therefore be held over. Since there are a number of other yet to be resolved matters concerning the possible inclusion of other awards to the list already approved we will continue to leave the file open for the time being and interested parties are at liberty to initiate a resumed hearing in appropriate circumstances. The parties are requested to prepare draft orders.
Appearances: Date and Place of Hearing: 1 T5535, T5536, T5537, T5538, T5509, T5490, T5495 of 1995 |