Ansell Transport Industries (Operations) Pty. Ltd and Others v The Australian Workers' Union of Employees, Queensland [1995] QIRC 189 (1995) 159 QGIG 602

602 ..._ QUEENSLA D GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE l23 June, 1995 ########### ########## ###### ########## ######## ######## ## QUfENSLA D 1'1DUSTRIAI RELATIO S COMMISSIO /11du smal Rela1i o11s Ac/ I 990 s 147 - applica tion for variauon Ansell franspon Industries (Operation,) Pty. Ltd and Others (.\o Jr89 of t995J AND The Australian \\'orl..er~ • Cnion of Emplo~ees. Queensland (!',o. IJ883 of J 995) OFF -S HORE IS I.A~ D R~-'I OIU S INDCSTRI AL ACREEJ\ I E~T 15436_1.DOC 23 June, 19951 QUEE NS LA D GOVER MENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETT E 603 COMMISSIO ER BOUGOURE 8 J une 1995 Industrial Agreement - Most Items Agreed - Multi-Hiring Clause - Casual Loading Rate - Re so rt Flexibility Agreements - Reference to Other Awards and Agreements - Casual I oading of 25°~ Granted - Application Granted From 7 Ju ne 1995 - Dr;ft Variauo n to be Submitted \\'uhin 7 Da)s . DECIS ION The abo,c application, both seek variations to the Off-Shore bland Resort, Industrial Agreement. 1\pplicati on 0883 of 1995. made hy TI1c Australian Worl..crs· union of EmplO)CCS. Queensland (A WU). seeks on ly 2 variutions wh ich are conse nted to by Mr J. Shepherd. appearing on bchal f of the respondents in that case. I 1, i ll make no further comment 111 relation to such application . Application 8789 of 1995 is made b) Ian Gordon Bennett on be ha lf of e 111 ployer parties to the s ubjec t agree ment. Applicat ion ll789 o f 1995 seeks subs tantial variations to the exisung agreement. ho"c,c r. " ith the exception of 2 item,. the AWU con:,en~ to the proposed varmtions. The 2 area, of dispute arc as follo,\s · I. Whether a 20% or 25% loading ,hould apply 10 pcnnancnt or part-time emplo}ccs engaged on a casual basis under a multi-hiring provi,ion. 2. Whether the proposed clause 4 7. providing for Resort Flexi bility Agreement~, should provide that such agreement~ shou ld indicate a time limit. The second tSsue ma~ be disposed of eas ily $incc l\lr !ihephcrd consents to the proposed c lause being suitably amended 10 sa tis ly the rcq t1 ircme nl~ of Lhc Union. In rn y view any such agrecmen1 could lr.l\c pro, it.led that 1he agrccmem ha,e J ddinite life. howcq:r. I sec no objection to a specific pro,i sion to that efli:ct lhe parties ma) agree on a suitable addition to the prop(1'ed dausc. The other is~ue in dis pute requires Ill: dctenninutiun. On hehalf of the emplo~cri. 1he applicant ~eeks a loading of 200 ... "hereas the r\\\'l 1 ,eel..s a loadmg of 2~•0 Reference \,as made to scn:ral other awards and agreemen ts which contain a loading of 25%. The l)P'-' of clause in qucMion enables permanent anti part-time emp lO)Ces to agree to \\Ori.. on a casual has1s for their pem1ancn1 cinplo)cr and rccei~e a loading of a set percentage ra1hcr Lhan be pu1d a l overtime ra1es, "h1ch wou ld nonnolly apply Rc stric1ion s no 1111a ll} apply m such an arrangement. including that the ca~ual ,,or k is in a different section of the empl o}cr's cstablhhment It "a s suhmiued LO me that the provi,1on is beneficial to both 1he cmplo~er and the emplo} cc under the particular circumstances of this intlus lr} I tind ii unnecessary 10 recite those bendits. which ha, c been outlined in other cases "di l.. no\\11 to the p.irt1c:s . Probably the lirst occu~ion in "hich such a provision was arbitrated upon was in the Hotels. Re sorts and Certain Other Licensed Pn:m1ses A\\ard - State (E'l.cluding South-L:1.>t Queensland), often referred to as Lhc ··Northern llotcls A"arcl " ( 199 1) 139 QG IG 30 4. In a decis ion involvi ng wh ar became the la~ tmcn tioned Award. a Full Dench (Chief Comm1ssio11cr Ledlie and Commissioners 13ougourc and fi sher) agreed to in)Crt ~uch a pro, 1si on in Lhe ~aid Award the Full Bench had r~se r- a11on ~ about the is~uc and III the de cis ion atorcmen11011cd. sa 1d:- "' \\'e hold g.ra\'e rese" a11on~ over the pro, i~ion sought Primaril~. \\C are con cerned abou t 1hc potential for abu,c. particular!} 10 avoid o, enrme obhg;i11ons. Recogni ti on must , il so be given to the uniq ueness of thi~ mdustry. for a ll of tho:,c reasons. it is with some trepidation that w,: respond.". mce that time in 1991 the prov1s1on . m som,: form. ha:, appeared in a number of a\\ards and agreements in the I lo~pitalit) Indus try. generally by agreement so far as I am aware In the instant case before me the onl)' I\S uc is "h cthcr a 20°0 or 25% loading s hould be payab le I was rcfc1Ted to sever.ii awards and agreements in thi s industry 111 which the lo.iding is 25"o. ,1hils1 Mr Shepherd referred to the ··na1kyo Agrcemc:111" in respect of Green and 1-"itzro} Islands m which h.: said the ca,ual loading ,1;u 20~o. i\ lr Shepherd referred to addi tional costs incurred by ··Island" employer~ in transponing and accommodati ng staff ns j u ;t ification lor the lesser loading I appreciate that 111311} emplO)CCS do find it COO\C!llent lo \\Ori.. casually fo r their pen11o ncn1 emp loyer rath er than seek ca ,uu l emp loymen t with anothe r em ployer , 1h ich may. in fi n) even t. be oft.:n impracticable fo r •·island" emplO}CC,. llowc,er. the pnwi,ion also has cons1dcrable benefit for an cmplo)er. including that the: employee i; ,1lread) trmned 10 the pa rt icular emp lo).:r·s require ments nnd it is not necessary to pay oveni rn e rates . Wlt ib t thi\ Commission ha). in the past. ci-.pn:s~cd rc;crvauons about o pro, ision such as th is. I do concede that 11 i, 11 useful and pra c1ic11ble prov1~1on in th" lndus1ry. In 111) vie" the balance of benefit in a provision such as this rc>t~ with the cmplo}er ,1 ho should be prepared 10 pay a reasonable loJdmg. I tle1cn11inc that in the circumstances of this case a reasonab le and appropriate loadmg is 25'}o. as subrni11ed b} the A WU. Another iss ue upon \1hich I propose to make limited comm.:nt 1s the classification structure and relativit ies as agreed b) the parties. ·1he cla.~sificatron structure provides for levels 1 to 4 ranging from 8 1 4% to 89A0 o. "ith level 5 ut 100%. Mo,t awards do prov ide for a le, cl '"thin the 91 'lo to 99" o range. I lind ii unu)ual that then: ~hould be such a large gap between le,e ls 4 and 5. I appreciate that a lim ned co mpc n~a tin g factor 1s thal the lm1cs1 leve l is s.:1 at 81 .4%. whereas many awards have ,1 level in the vici nity o f 78 "1a . Since 1hc levels ha\'e been trialed at length and arc no\\ agreed hc11,een the parties. I '"II not pu~ue the 1ssue lunhcr. l>ut ii ,hould bc understood Lhat th e.: rclati, 111es ha,·c been included m the . \~recment on the basis of ngrcc ment be tween th ..: part ies and n<' t arbitrated h ) me t\) I earlier mdicated. \\1th the C:'1.Ccptions mentioned. all Vdriations had been agreed l,c1,1een the pmtic; . I thcrdnrc approve the va riations (as amend ed} as outlined in holh app licarions ~ubjcc1 to thc casual load ing. ear lier mentioned. being 25% a, detennincd b> me. ·1 he partic~ .igr.:ed that the opcrat iH: date )hould be 7 Jum: 1995 Draft \'ariation~ ) hould be subm incd "ithin 7 da~·~ of the datc o f thb dcc1~ion. • I order accortl 1n gl}. R.\\" BOUGOIIR I". Comnus,iont:r. .-lppearanres Mr J. Shepherd for I. G. 13ennell and A~)ociutcs on behalf of An~eu fran,pon Industries (Opcrattons) Pt}. Ltd. and Others 1\1, A. Forbes for The Australian Workers" l "n ion of l:mp lo1.:cs, Q 11 cc nsland. \ l r C Agnc\\ for the Quc.:ns,.ind llot,!I, .\ ssociatmn. l..mon ,,f Emplo}·ers. Or..:n11i,,e Date: 7 Ju ne 1995 Dcc1S1on - Casual Loading. lleson nc,ib1lit~ l\ grccmc111s ,md Cla.,,ifica1ion \tructure Released: 8 June 1995 l 'i4V,_ 1 noc -- 1 of 1 --