IN THE TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act, 1984

We were asked by Mr. Targett of the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association of Australia (Tasmanian Branch) (S.D.A.) to rule upon the threshold question that:-

"Penalty rates and other prime award conditions are not available to the employer as cost offsets."

Once we provide some guidance for the parties in relation to this question, they are prepared to engage in further negotiation.

Principle 5 provides as follows:-

"5. STANDARD HOURS

(A) In dealing with claims for a reduction in standard hours to 38 per week, the cost impact of the shorter week should be minimized. Accordingly, the Commission should satisfy itself that as much as possible of the required cost offset is achieved by changes in work practices.

(b) Claims for reduction in standard weekly hours below 38, even with full cost offsets, should not be allowed.

(c) The Commission should not approve or award improvements in pay or other conditions on the basis of productivity bargaining. These improvements should only be allowed on the basis of the appropriate Principles."

In our view the prime emphasis should be upon finding appropriate cost offsets in the area of changes in work practices.

Whilst the matter before us is still very much in the early stages of hearing, that which has been put to us thus far suggests employers have a predisposition towards achieving cost offsets by reducing penalty rate provisions contained in the award before all else.

We recognise the attractiveness of this approach from their point of view. However, we point out that present conditions of employment contained in the Retail Trades Award were arbitrated matters under the Wages Boards Act, and are of long standing.

If the employers wish to pursue the question of a reduction in penalty rates then, in our view, the proper and preferred course for reviewing such an important matter would be via a separate application to vary the award thus allowing consideration of the matter on all the proper criteria; not just as a cost offset in another matter.

It is our strong recommendation that both parties concentrate their efforts upon costing out all work practice savings which each can find as a first priority.

Included in that costing would be those offsets, and award matters, which have been offered already by the S.D.A.

When the parties have exhausted that exercise to our satisfaction we will rule as to whether or not those cost offsets are satisfactory to us in all of the circumstances, assuming disagreement still exists.

Until that stage has been reached the question of further alternatives available, if any, does not arise.