Australian Sugar Milling Association, Queensland, Union of Employers v The Australian Workers' Union of Employees, Queensland and Others [1999] QIRC 213 (1999) 162 QGIG 151

150 QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE 15 October, 1999 15 October, 1999 QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE 151 ######l!#ll####################################################lf###############################################II############# QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION lnd11s1rial Relations Act l 999 lruiustrial Court Rules 1997 - Ruic 64 - application for Joinder Australiat, Sugar Milling Association, Queellsland, Union of Employers AND The Australian Workers' Union of Employees, Queensland and Others (B296 of 1999) SUGAR INDUSTRY AWARD-STATE C0YIMISSIONERS EDWARDS, SWAN AND BALDWl\15 October 1999 loinder - Applicauons - Classification StructUre - Award Matters - Combined Classification Structure -Joinder of Application Approved - Co nstitution of Full Benches Referred to President. DECISION By �pplication filed on 4 March 1999 the Australian Sugar Milling Association, Queensland, Union of Employers (ASMA) applied for loinder of Cases Rb5-l0 of 1989, B2025, B2108, B2169, B2216 and B2221 of I 996 and B 1708 of l 996. T he Statement of Mate.rial Facts and J.ssues is as foll ows:- ·-i. The panics LO lhe Sugar lndu,1ry Award - Stat e have recently been involved in the arbmation of a new ·combined' award for the Sugar lv1illing Industry. A discreet is sue in the new award matter was the creation of a combined classification stn1cture LO cover persons who use both process and trades skills in the workplace. The parties to the Award matter had agreed that the issue of a single classification structure be deferred until th� arbitrauon on the other combined award matters was concluded. This arbitration was concluded on 22 February 1999. 2· By way of case number B1708 of 1998 the AWU has made application for eenain variations to the Sugar Industry Award - State. The central issue in the. AWU' s application is the establishment of a m.:chanism through which employees are both appointed and promoted through the process of classification structure iu the Sugar Industry Award. 3. The ASMA submits that the combined classification structure mauer and B 1708 of I998 are int egrally linked and should b e joined for the following r�asons:- -- 1 of 2 -- 152 QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE • Substantially the same question is involved in both mailers. • A decision in one of the mailers is likely to determine or seriously impact on the other matter. It is appropriate and desirable that the mailers be joined.''. The following sets out particulars of the cases Jis1.ed:- RJ55-!0 of 1989 B2025 of 1996 B2108 of 1996 B2169 of 1996 B2216 of 1996 B2221 of 1996 B I 708 of I 998 Sugar Industry Award - State Sugar Industr y Award - State Sugar Industr y Award - State Engineering Awar d - State Sugar Indu51r y Award - State Sugar Industry Award - State Sugar Industry Award -State Rule 64 of the /11dus1ria/ Coun Rules 1997 states:- Date Filed 26 March 1997 1 September I 997 (Amended Application) 21 November 1996 28 November I 996 6 December l 996 9 December I 996 I April 1999 (Amended Application) "64.(1) A party to a matter may apply to the court or commission for the matter to be joined with another matter. (2) The court or commission may order matters to be joined if it considers - (a) substantially the same question is involved io all the maners; or (b) the decision in I mailer is likely to determine or seriously impact on the other; or (c) t is appropriate or desirable. (3) When joining rnauers, it is not necessary for - (a) a written order for joinder to be made; or (b) the panies to consent. 15 October, 1999 Applicant AWU AWU ASMA AMEPKU AMEPKU ETU A\VU (4) If a party claims to be adversely affected hy thejoinder of matters, the party may apply 10 separate the matters hy advising the regimar and any other affected pany rn writing before the heanng of the matter.". The application was supported by CSR Limited (CSR) but opposed by The Australian Workers' Union of Employee�, Queensland (AWU), the Automotive, Metals, Engineering, Print.iog and Kindred Industries Industrial Union of Employees Queensland (AMEPKU) and the Electrical Trades Union of Employees of Australia, Queensland Btanch (ETU). Jn strongly opposing the application, Mr Low on behalf of the AWU placed considerable emphasis on his union· s concern about the merit of the various applications. He outlined that the parties have spent many years in discussion on career structure and the development over a two-year period of the syllabus for a Sugar Milhng Certificate. By Exhibit 3 we were referred to the content of the Jmplementation Manual for the Sugar Milling Industry - Process - Transport and Services to reinforce the detail that was rnvolved in its development. By such reference he acknowledged that the application before the Commission concerned a number of issues but in particular career structure. As such he summarised as follows:- ··What the ASMA are seeking in their application is a completely new structure altogether. There are two separate matters. Our structure exists now. If the ASMA proposed a new structure in a separate application we submit they'd still have to go through the same consultation procedures as we' re saying they do now as an independent matter.". He also made reference to the view of the union that the application for joinder was seen as a means of dis1.racting the implementation of certain structures including the Sugar Milling Cenificate . While it is not appropriate for the Commission to expNSS any views on the reason for the application we regard the comments of Mr Low as an additio11al reason to support the argument that the primary matters of concern are career structures. We are satisfied that a decision on either one or more ol these applications 1s likely to deter mine or seriously impact on the other matters as they clearly relate to the career stcucture. Having accepted that one of the points 1s sausfied (Rule 64 (2)(b)), it 1s not necessary for a determination to be made in relation LO that Other (.Titcria. The application for joinder 1s granted. The applications which ha,,e been joined are subject to hearings before Full Benches constituted by different Commissioners as follows:- Cases Rl55-I0 of 1989: B2025, B2108, B2169, B2216 and B2221 of 1996 Comrruss1oners Edwards. Swan ,rnd Blades Case B 1708 of 1998 Comrruss1oners Edwards, Swan and Baldwin t5 October, 1999 QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETfE 153 In accordance with s. 270 of the IndustrialRela1io11.r Act 1999 we hereby refer the applications to the President for his determination. Order accordingly. K.L. EDWARDS, Commissioner. I).A. SWAN, Comrrussioner. D.B. BALDWJN, Commissioner. Released: 5 October I 999 Mr G. Low on behalf of The Australian Workers' Union of Employees, Queensland. Mr J. Barrett on behalf of the Automotive, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred industries Industrial Union of Employees, Queensland. Mr A. Doodney on behalf of the Electrical Trades Union of Employees of Australia, Queensland Branch. Mr P. Warren and Mr R. Cullen on behalf of the Australian Sugar Milling Association, Queensland, Union of Employers. Mr B. Laube on behalf of CSR Limited. #ll#/#l###ll########################ll#######ll#########ll####/1##11#####-#################/l#####/l##ll#####/!#####################l#I## -- 2 of 2 --