Australian Council of Trade Unions - Queensland Branch and Another v Queensland Confederation of Industry Limited, Union of Employers [1994] QIRC 129 (1995) 148 QGIG 320

320 Q E SL GO ER. ME T 1 D "ST RI L GAZETTE r 10 br ua ry.. 199 5 QUIT S I. AN ! I NDU "TRIAi. REL TION .· COMM ISSION /111/rmrial Rdmio11s Ac l /99/J ,. 37 - npplication fo r variation of mi11i111um wage s. 38 - app lic a1 i on for dec larat ion ora s w1.c1ne 11l of pl)li . re safe!) n.:1 1 ·a~c adj u~uncnt ,\ 11,1ralian Cmm ii orTrmk \ lniClw - Quccn~land !1ranch AND Quecn,l;n1d Conlcdcration of lmlu lr) Limited. L' nion of Employer. (i'.:o . 86:! of I 99.J) 'I h • AustraJ1a11 Wu rkers· lJn1011 uf Emp loyc.:;:.. QLJec n ~hmJ I) () u.:c 11 s .l an <l Con f.:dc rillio n o f" !11du . tr , Lin1i 1cd . Union of Employers ( Yo rr _of 199-IJ STATE \VA GE CA. E Cllll-'F IN DUSTRI Ai, COMMl:S IONER IIA LI CO 1"1 1 ·· 10 ER. · WARDS NDFl . liF,R _o De:cember 19 -I S1nt • Wugc Dec is ion - a ti ona l W<1 gc Ca se 199 3 - s. 150 lkv icw:J - Pilnt Awa rd Rcvu.: w - ',ccond . X J\rhitrated 'iat cly .:I Adju . tmcnl - Thin! . Sa ·1, 1c1 dJu. uncnl - Adjoumcd - N.:11 pph auons - Ah . urp ti n - ,\ll<"•"t1ncc5, etc. - Pri ndpk:, - l>ur,11ion - pcr.ili c IJ:,tc~ - Guaran teed 1i nim um WJg" - Declarati on of l'ol ic)' - FClnn ol On kr , . OL-.C.-1. H Tiu.: Applicauon by wh 1 h Case No . 11 597 of I 99' 1-.1. cu1n mcnc1: d \Hts lo ugc d w ith the ll1d11s tri al R~gi$ tr,1r on 26 Ocwb ·r 19 9. 11 was lvdg,ed b: th,· Th., A st ra !ian Worker,· Union c.,f Empt : cc . Ouecnsland lh..-rcaflcr \\' U). 11 • purpo. e ,1 10 prm id· a , chicle "hcr.:h - Wl ' might pres~ fo the outc me Ill the (t h en 111con1plet eJ 1993 National Wage Case (prim K9 700) to be ll cm cd i11 10 t nt: (Jucc ns land Industrial Rclat iMs ,y, tcrn , C,1~..: N11 136 I ol' IG93 ,m,s • from an app!ic.:uion lo dgcd ";1h the ln<l usLr ia l Rc g_l',trttr b} the u -,cralian Couucil of Trade ·uions - Queen land Bran ch . (liercalicr ·1IJ( Ql) 1Jlt1m.ncl y. A 'U (Q) <lid nn press all nr Lhc clai m ~d ,·anccd hy th e /\p pl ic ~t ion, /\ t a h..:ar ing @ ~ 'llvcmhc r I<l93 M~ Ru lston for J\C:TU(Q ) i11 !~1r11 1cd the [;ull Lkn ch nf 1h i~ Commission he.i ring 1hc maucr that ,thhough A 'T l(Ql "anh;J all "h ich the Applicali(in ·ought. for the lime being ii propc,~cd to prc s~ 1h' Full Ben ch ICl endClr. c the olllcome and prim:1r,ks cstab)i~ncd h~ the 1993 ational Wa I' Case m1J t he rca. 0 111n g up on wl1ich til e dcc1sion was basc<l . In t he cml re ul l. 13901 _ 1 [) IOFeb ru ary, 1995] EE L I D G OVER ME TI D UST RJ L G AZ E 32 1 having heard 1hc matter, Logc thcr, the Full lknch did ub~um 1i,1ll) 1hai. sec! 1994) 1-1 QG IG 3 14 . n1e full 13cu ch added thi. cania1:- ··1-( r reas ns rela ted lo cum:nl cco110111 1• ci r cu mstance, and likely i, np :Jc t n th e rJtt: of' p. row th by Enterpri se Bar gain ing th e Au tralian Com mi ssion r jcctcd thc oplll n of a gc:11crn l incre:c c 10 all a\,ard . and pos1ron ·d f r future nn~idcr:nion 1hc po i11on of 1ho~e wh . receive no a lll al mcrcas from lh e Safety et increase ur frn m an En te rp ri:c 13arg.;;, in We do likcw1. c. \: c will relist the .' applications in six mo nt h, time in order th at ,w may revicl\' bo1h th e impact nl' this dcci ·1011 pa rti cularly in the paid rate, arcJ and lhc ontinued v 1lidil) r 11ur re ason . fo r iL Ouiforthemnmcntwe:ire omm it1ed t.1ob · rpt io n :· ( ,1 3 18) Whe n the nia t1 ers wcr.: n:Ii~Lcu for rev ie w nn 18 October 1994 th ~ Fu ll Bench was in fo rme d by A WU and ACTU (Q ) th lll th ey wi hed lo now 1010 lh Queen~! nd system cite decision of the /\u:-trnlian l ndu~tri1:1I Rcfa1ions Commi sion ·ommon ly km>wn as Rcv1ew of Wa ge Fixing Pri ncip les ( l'rmt !.'I 00) and the dcci 1011 or t he u. tral ian J11dL1 st r ia l Relu ti,ms Co m 111 i ·s i, n (hercaflcr /\IRC) co mn1onl} known as .-afc1 y N..:t Adju 1mc nl s and RC\ icw ( l' rr nt I. 00). Tho ~ dcci ions \\ ·re . aid o ~ignilicantl) 10 dcpart from th • 199 ation.11 Wage Decisilin and 1h e ICJ94 ' ta te Wa ge Dcc1 . ion ~ It• make 1l1i: rev ie w conh:ni p lar cd by 1h~ 1994 Slate Wa~c Dec is ion an inappropr iate vc hi clc for the argument wh ic h A Wl J :tll<I I\CTU(Q ) wi sh Ill p111. In the cir LJm lances. und with the Cl n:;ent of all of the part1.cs. the Full Bench a andom:d the re,·iew pn,ce~s on the undcrstandmg t ha1 lhe ~ub 1an1 i al argumcn ts wo uld be put in a 1: o. 1Jo25 of I 994. whi ch a ro se from 1:111 A r U(Q ) ar,pl1c,nion. and Ca se No. l-l 78 of 1994. whi ·h :m, sc from an A Wll app l icat i on. -1l1al in fa t o~cun ·c d. alheil bclh r..: a Jilkrcnt ly onst nu tcd l' ull ll en h. If differen ce . in pka d in g a rc.: fllll aside. 1h c 3pr l ica1in 11 hy A Wll ,111d th~ app li cmi n by ACT U( Q) may b.: su 111 111a rim ..l a~ see ki ng re liel ~1, follow~:- :1i1 1emco1 or Po licy I. T he iss uin j! of a Slatcmcnl of Po li e~· in re i:::1n.l to w11 ~e .~a rccy net ~Jj u ~tnH' nts s ub$tanti a ll • in a cwnl "ith th • • ldy :-,;e t AcJj usl mcn t and He ·ien I) ·l'ision rclea~cd Ii) lht' A I l~ C Pr in t l.5300 . Statemcnl o f Polit~· 2. T he i u inl! of a . N uf W al!,C Fi l'.i nl! Princip le s . uh ta nti all ~· in a c ord \\ ith 1h Re ,·ie w o Wniie Fixini: l'rint ip lt: s l)cd sion i.~~ uc d h~ · 1hc :\ IIH:, l 'r int IA 7U0 . Oe hmn in n of Ge ne m l Ru li ng 3. T he rrn 1king of a l)c·c la rati on of G en eral Rul in i: in rq.:ard to th e Gua ra nt cct.l Min imum Wai.:c fo r· adu lt empl OJ'C s adj uslin i.: sa me 10 250.110 per \\ CCk in the :out h t:a 1cm di\ i ·ion of the .Stat front a d:11 10 be J lcrmi n eJ, a nJ 111 2 58.00 p er " eek fro m a h11 r d,11 c lo he dc-tern ii ncJ . \V ith a v ie" l a~n iding tlup li ca1 i on and promotin~ cxpcd11 in11 the ~ul'>s tanti:il c.1~.i in support of the claim, ""' put h~ I l l(Q). The points made 11cre - Th e 199,1 Rei icw or Wn ,c Fix ing Pri nciples (l'ri nl 1.4700) repre elllcd a s11b sta111 ml d,:parturc from pnr1 ciples pre iou~l) adhered 11 b • AIRC I he re\'ismn 11a~ con.~equemial up n 1h ilmendment 111 the /11d11 . 1r1t1/ Refarion Act 19 8 mnd~ b} 1h e l11du s 11 wl R ~Jo rm Acr /1)93 Since thos e aim::11dmc111~ lu1ve h,; ·• 11 mi rro red by t he lnd11s 1r-i(i/ R,,/a 110 11s R.:fnrm Acr 199-1 /Qld;, Liu: re \ I,.cd guideline~ hould al o h.i mirrored. Tl1e inlroduction to t he c:-.bt in g Pri11 iplcs should bc 11 aried to cmpha.,isc that the conccm w3 s to fac il itate enterprise hargainitll,! \\·hib l mm lll:tin in g an a"arJ ~alcty ncl c f wages and eo11cJi11on . The 1111rodu tion . hould al o be re"" rl.cJ 10 emphasi c t he impo rt anc.: now att.1 cl1c 10 the avoidan c and remov al of disc n mi11a 111r:,: provis 11111 ~. Hie cntcrpri e bar0 aining pnnc1plc ·h uld be mC1dilicd lo emphasise th, t the Commi ' ion·s prim:u} role is to fa ilitate attainment of agreement by eoncilia1io n a11J . w h,;n ne cessary. issuing orders 1, , ensure b argt1i ning in go od fai th and th e e !Ii cie nt conduct of negotiati on. , II ho uld be nude pl ain thut arbimuion wo ul d be undertaken only al the in, itation r the part:i . when a bargaimng period has been tcnninalcd. P} a Ful l Ocn ch in a ca.,e judged by lh hicf Com mis . ionc r to be spc ial, or as a n:.'tJI I o f a s. 150 revie w. The r ef rmu lat ed princip le shou ld rn a 11 i fes t ll rn1r1111i l mt:n 1 by th e ·ummis.-ion lo cnc,1urage th e incl usion of en tcrp ri e tlexibilil • provision in awards. n 1~ co nsc1 1t awa rd princ ip le shou ld be mod i fie d . o a. 10 cnsur .: that in the ordinary Cflu rse c111e r pri~e bargains find exp rc.:~ · ion , in ceni fi er.l a reemems or cn terp ri e llcxihiht~ agrcernenls and, onl} 111 ~:-.ceplional ,. cs. 111 a\, arcJ~ uf 1he Comm i:sion . ince 1he lim ned circum 1;mces in which lh e mak in g. fa consent awa ru was sa id to be approp r iat e arc 1he cir ·u111s tan cs identi fi ed hy A ll{ C. it i, unnccc:;sary to re pe al them here. It is nece sur} lo note til:11 hiIherto an in dustrial agreement hu~ be.en a po. s1hle \ Chic!• for the Clipres. ion of an entcrpri:,c harga111 under the Qut:ensland ~ . lcm. ACTl (Q) prop()Sed mod i fica ti on of the pri nciple lo rcco gnis 1b.il the use of i1 cert i fi ed a rcc.: me nl or enterprise ll cxibi Ii i) a~ rceme nt was mo re appropr i,uc new pri11c1plc should he de eloped rcll.cct ing a d.:c1 1(111 that the award s:ifct:s- 1111! f wage. and r,11J1t..ion. ~-r c111 11lo ~mcnt is. fo r lhc Lime bcin '. 10 be 1he c. is1ing wa ges and w ndit ions lixcd by lh e rl'lc, nt awa rd of tl1 c Co m mi ~s ion (o r rclt:v;ml mJ u,tr ial agrccmelll This Co1111nission shou ld nm crn harl.. 11110n a re, iew procc s t1111i l IR had as. imilaied the 1,.n "leJ g.e gkan cd from its pilot re, icw proi:es~ . A 7 U(O) al~o ~uugh t spcci fical ion of the (l im ited circu 111Man(cs) in which arbitrated \ utcomcs ;1 bove the s are, • 11 ct level wl'rc pe m1 i,si ble. Once again ~1 11 1,:c the cir umst::inu:s con1cmkd fo r \\ re 1he circumstan es pllrticulari:; d hy I R . \\C cJo nm furtl1cr p:micu lar is • Lh cm here. Wa g.c incrcu~cs avui l:ihlc Lo app li.:, 111l .~ u 11 der ..: ;;1 rlicr ~tme \,ag..: de i ·i(1 11s which h.11' e no t :-,c l ~en accc . cd shm, ld con1inuc 10 remain 3\'llllahlc. C I U U) pre · ·cd for the combimttmn ufihc: base rat.: and the ~u pplcmcn1ar: payment as s0 011 as lhi! minimum rat es adjuslmcnt proce~~ lm<lcr an award i;; CO lllp lete l1 11us urgucd tht!rc Wll no j u 1ific11ti (>11 l"tu in 1 1ing upon ·ufcguards and rc;,tric1ion.- 01hcr th an those adopted h_ I.he 1\ I R . ACTU(Q} ·oncedcd th.rt 1f the approach c llll: rl tkd for " ·re adopted 11 11ould Ix: necessa ry to annottth; t he perccn 1~ •t.: rclativiti 1,: $ tllumn in 1hc .iw;ird . It wa s co n t,•n dcd th at the appropri .i te ,11 mowtio11 \, us "l h~ perc(:nl3gc rclat iv i1 ics olumn relat es to p<:rccI,t gcs applyinl) before the application of th<:: arh1lr !co al~1~ nc:1 wage adju tmcnt l'rim:1 plc made in an·11rdan-cc wi1h 1h.: 2nd 1994 Re 1cw ol" Wage Fix in!;\ Principles . ·· ACTU( ) ) abo tendered the dr.ili unJenu ~i ng \\hieh. 11 was said. wa . 11 11ablc for c11sunng the continumion of earlier untlcrtakmg • a, to absorp tion. The pr nflOsed ui1dennking was in lhc ollo wing Len,1 • "t he: award/ induslr ia l agreement rate inclltd..:s w.ig c i11c rca.scs and adj u~tmo;;ms ari si t1g rrn111 13'l01 _ I f)()C -- 1 of 7 -- 322 QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDliSTRIAL GAZETTE [ IO february, I 995 prcvwus S!a'.e Wa)lC l:isc D2cisions Tlwsc tkci,ir,rs reco)lniSed a numb<or o!' ad1u,t111cnt.s that \\ill he' subic'cl tn ahsorption ;ncludin~ hrnadbanJing aJ;u,tTTK'llh an<l mi11imum rat-:s a,ijustmcub. Th.: ,mcknakin)l, as,o~i;ttd with abs,,rbmg those ad1uslme·nts conlmuc to apply.", Applications to flow on standarcb set in test cases ,huuld 11c,t he treated ;15 applicatioo, lnr arbitr:lled oulrnnws in excess of tho; ,,ikl} llt'L rhc prinupk: rc!Jting tc, the .iJ_justm-:nl uf allo., .m~1_;:; a1:d service increments should be modilicd to ensure that the basis of adjustment for ';ervicc increments anJ allt1w:mcc'S ;, generally the ,dfllr: anJ lO pruv1d<:: i(ll the: <1dju,t1m:nt of sen·ire incrt:rncnt, ~ml all"w:111ce·, :is pm1 nf the ,afct) 11ct r..:vinv rroc'.eJs r.itbcr th,m c:nn,c4u.;11tiall) upon a State Wage ine,rcasc. A(TI 1(Ql disclosed that matntcnancc ol the existing ,itc allo11 anc~ pr(,1 is ion was sought. no' hcca11s,, r,r contcntrnent with it. but because It wu, proros~d to rcvi,1t the issue hy way of:i spc,ific rc\'lew 1n !he near futun:. No ,uhstantial eha11gc> wrb ~ought to thl' v.nrk \ aluc pri11cipk. Al RC was ;caid to have decided to deal 11 ith cla1ms w reduce standard homs tx,low J8 hour, pe1 wc.:1-- in tht: sa111c \v:l) as any other claim for condiuons in excess of the Safe!) '~cL save that approval should he granted onlv when the i\lRC was satislicd that the c:ost impact is mrn1mal. .\CTL(Q) urged this Corrnmssion to adopt the same approach Inconsistently with the argument that ths: state principles should paralk! the federal principles, :\CTU(Q) argued for the maintenance of the Queensland "doctrine". reco)lniscd in the 1991 Stak Wage Decision (l:37 QCilG 477), that in rare and exceptional circumstances a Full Bench nnv approve a reduction hcltJ\I 38 hours in a case of genuine consc:nt We deal later with this submission. i\dliption of the Al RC principles relatmg to tl11: pn 1 ce"cs and considerations relevant tl' applic.itinns f,:,r the \ ariatil,n of .1n a\vard or inJu~trial agrectncnt at and Jhl)\ c :-;afcty net k\'C! was said to be appropriate ACTli(()) advisee! us, and \,\C are g_ratcfi..il f(Jr the fr,mkricss, that the ann~xurc Lo tht.: c\!RC principles relatmg to paid rates a\\arJ rnnstituld an agreed position at a national k\'Cl \\·hlch \\a:s n0t rcpilcated in an agreement at the Queensland k1·eL ACTL(Q) drc\\ our attention to the omission nf the anncxurc from the Draft Guidclincs \\hich ACTl'.iQl had tendered rhc nc1v !\IRC principle relating to first awarJs was s:ud lo he prekrablc tu the ,;;,isting Queensland principle ancl its adoptio'.1 was supported The principles rclatrng to econ,1m1c mcapacit\ shPuld rs:main unchanged, not" ithstanding the drought. The flcm on of the whole of the AIRC S:Iict,· '\et Ad1ustmcnts ancl Renew Decision ( Print L530U). ,ms n~GC\,sar~ h.; prott.:ct the \\.;a~ and u, f~K•i;itt.1!.i.; tb~ ~pn..·a.J .Jf .:·1 mature S) stem oi enterprise hitrg:nrnng, C ,m:;trnctiPn i1~du~Lr) state a \\'<lrJs \\ hi ~h rnirrurcJ fcJcra! J \\ arJ~ ~!1(, u !{j also mirror the date ol opcrJtion of lh,,; safety net increase. Iii fi\ H\c: ,upμort to A( fli( Q ). AV, fj surrnil11.;d ti1c1t the (_)u•~;__'.r1~!d;k1 t~c1Jnn1ny is gro,\ing ,it:-, ~kad; ra!c :.1rd tl1:it the 011tkH1"- i.:-. fni· ~igr~H!~ar1t it1creu.5c:-,; in produc~iun and 1,.;iripl\))ffiO:nt. ;\ \\'l' ,he\\ on H range nf Budget document< mid rn,atc scct,1r suney, to surport a coEtention th:it (Juccnslantl rccu\ ~r.:c fro:n tl:c n:ccss1on approxmrntclv one-quarter earlier th:m the rcrnaindc:r ot' the nau,m :mcl •lt:H the (lu"cns'and cconrm1y '-''"' lwttcr cr.p'l['peJ t'1:1•1 ll'.e l'C-'nomy nl any ,,thcr sL1~c tn c,irry the !till :,:ilcty net propris:il Jevelnped b:, i\J[~C !he: Shur, Distnbuli, c anJ Allied !·1111:lovccs Assc>c1at1,m (()u,:cnoland Branch) Union of Employees supponed the submission or ACT l '(() l and A Wl' :rnrl requested for itself that the prop11sitinn advanced b 1 the: Full Iknch wli1cl1 cklivcrcd judEincnt in i.11c Fl'bru,1ry 19g4 ~t<ltl' Wage Decision. 145 ()(ii(, •14 c1I 3IX, that , [Wjc intcnJ lhc wl;ulc l)f thc $8 Sufcty !\cl lP he a, ailabk lll wnior, an,l c1pprenticcs in a pro rota way ----- should he repeated Ill :m) final decision !fowing frc,m the ,\pplic:1tions kfDrc the Cmmmssi,>n. M1 .1ni111,,to11 fo1 the C'1,,w11 cn,harkcd on ,l thorough guin,: a11~lv,is ni the cconorn1c mmcrials tu which Ms D'Ath !or the 1\ WU haJ rclcm:d, lk ·sas ri,dit lo do s11. Scc:ti,m 93(3) rcquin;s this ( 'rnrnrnssi,m to t;1kc into ac:c,>unt the puhlic interest and, to that cmL t,) lrnvc regard to, i'11:>r a/111, the state of the economy and the likcl:- ert.:ch oi' th<: Cornm.s,iun ·s dcci,;ion on th,c t?u111omy and rnduslr) gcncra!ly, It w,1\ the Crtmn's suhmissinn th:il trans!atinn intn thl' Queensland :,y,tcrn of the: ,,hole or tliut pw1 of AIRC, Salctv !\cl /\dju,rrnents and Rcv1c,\ llcci,sion winch dealt with ArhttralcJ Salcl:, ~et Adjust111u1ts \,as justif:cJ, The impact nr the tirst $8 ~afoty Net increase was saiJ to he l1kelv to be minirnaL /\s a matter or pract1ca'i1y the increase would he accessible tn employees umkr paid rate, ,,11,ircb 1,ho had 11nt s111,.c.;cJed 1n acccs,ine the, $8 11.lwiug from the Fchruar1 1994 Decision. In facL the buik of those employees were in the public si:ctor and haJ, hy negotiating certi1ieJ agreements. rendered them,clves ineligible to claim the increase, So tar as the Cro\\11 was ahle to assess. the impact of the February 1994 Decision had been minimaL Ail the available ec01wmic materials indicated that it haJ not had a Jclcterious effect upon the economy. It was put that the economic measuring sticb and indicators e.g. manufacturing activity, business confidence. spending on plant and c4uip111rnL grcmth in new orders, growth in o,crtimc and the lo\\ domestic in!latinn rate indicate,J that the Qucc1:slanJ economy was c,·pah:c of sustaining the lirst limb or !he scccrnd 5i8 increase amL rrPv'dcd lha'. these prPcccdings were not atkndeJ by unnecessary Jei;l\ anJ the acc<essibiiity of the ,alcty net increases was not subject to an, greater staggering than the AIRC f,n1,urcd 6 month gap, supp,mcd ~bo the: inlcrcncc that the second limb oi' the second (ie. Award1 increase could similarly he supported hy the ccono1111, ~lr Joh11'lon toc1k tssLre with critics of the /\l RC decision who had chosen lo condemn it as rc\1arding inertia rather than b:irgaining, l lc: made the point that access to e\ en the seconJ ( a11ard) arbitrated ,atct\ nd aJ_1ustmcnl is dependent upon the applicant satisfving the Commission that a programme or discussions het1,cen the award parties has been established to deal with the revic11 of the award rurs1rant to s. 15(), \\ith particular attention to (a) the cflccti1-c use or iacilitative pri,,i,ions, (h) the effective use of majonty clauses and (cl the 1mpkmcntati()n of a process for testing the relevancy uf the a11ard at the enterprise ie,eL Additionally, the ,mard must have been rnried to include enterprise tlcxibilitv pro1·1s1ons, There seems t,, us to he liuk inertia in that amL as \1r Johnston rightly poinls m:t. cmrluyces \vho do ail of that would be last in the queue. There is absolutely rn1 reason to assume that the:, will not make the effort to r,;;ach an agreement with their cmplover 111 order that, even if they J;1iL the·:, may gain acces:, tk sewn.I $8 adj.istmcnt 6 mo11tl1.s c'al'iic1 at tl:c enterprise level Funhcr. as Mi· Johnston ar.~ues. tkrc is every rcasun tu bc!1cvc that employers faced 111ti1 Lhc cert~i11t) of an S8 ad1ustrnc:nt at some sta)lc, will, given the opporturnt, to hargain, t:ikc the c,;,r,c,nunil\ It is convenient tf, ,hell nu\\ a J;ti!c 11pnn ~!r Johnston's arbu11KnL Thi., CHmHi,si,,n I.a:, the difliuilt ia,1-- of encouraging 1>urp1ining at the cnt.:-rpn,e lcwL sec ss. ,()(I) ;md 15h, whilst ut the :,aim: time ci;suring tk1t the SI ,;tcm of uwards prO\ ides for secure. relevant and consistent wru~cs and employment condit1(,ns. sec ss, ~(J/21(:1) :mJ 1'0 Or :'c·lr Johnsto'1's ar;:u111cn• t11:n part r,fthe A!RC 1J 1)DI iDO( I O February, 1995] QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDLSIRIAL GAZETll: Safety Net Adjustments and Rcvie\1 Decisiun which rclarcs to Arbitrnt.::d Sakty ~et AJjustmc11ts \\ilL il'thusc ,,ho c,,ntributc tlwir capital :111d l;ihnur to mdustr:, display a 11111il1cum u! rn11on:.ilil, ;wd m1tiati1 c. contribute lo !he attainment ol both ol11ccli1 cs, The argument is beguiling, though, we think, substanl1ally correct \\'c would wish to add for ourscl,e:; that the scheme will promo1c barga1n111g on!) if the 1e,l, proposc'd are 111d h, the part1c, <1nd in,i,tcd upon by the Connnission. AmL ur cu11rse, if the harg:1i11i11g goal i:; nut met the in1pad uf the \ arious S8 adjustments upon lhe cconomv would be μrealer than the Crown has estimated. Before passing to th<: Crnwn ·s submission 111 respect of ll11:, Co11111fr;sio11·, w:1gc guidelines \\l' should say something of the (n1\\11's trc,llme·nt uf the i\lR("s third S8 increase, Mr lohnslon puts the 111:ntcr this l\d\ "Ac·cor,ling!v, we'd arg11e that it will i1 c prudent tu c1dupt. the 1\lRC appruach tu the thi1·d adiu,trncnt hut nut actually award ii at this t1111c. A review mid-1 'N:i \\ould achieve tlllS opportunity to cx:11111nc it :dhcit that in lcnns of tlw,.c principles the onus at lliat l!rnc 11ould be 011 those opposing the cL1111L So 11,,· d strongly support tlt:ll appruach." A rcadin)l of lhc suhmissinn :h a whole mdkes it plain Llrnl the n;ason tcir urging prudence is the potential for increase 111 mlcrcst nitcs, and tlw tH1L:e11;11nt1 surrounding the length of the Jn,ughl and the longer term cconornic conse4ucnccs flowing thcrcfrom We must sav that if we: had been hearing the matter de novo and nn the h:1sic; that any ckcision \\Ptild ha\l' application to Queensland cHil), v.e should h,llC b(;c'.ll inclined to heed the call for prudence and to neither award nor adopt the third $8 adjustment It seems to us that adoption of the adjustment albeit subject to a 1995 rcvic\\, will create expectations. expect that the amount will be no less than $8, expect that the amount \Vill be no rnorc than $8 Lmployee, will Employers \\ ill It may be thaL as Mr Johnston has argued, that I cry expectation and the tcsis as,ociated with accessin)l the adjustment I\ ill tcrnpt employers anJ employees tn bargain, But we ha1 e rcscn ations about whether the contribution to bargaining "hich the third adjustment has a potential to make offsets the potential for harm which arises from the creation of what may prove to he folse expectations and from hampering the cunduct of any 19 1)5 re, 1cw hy the imposition of a burden of proor Notmthstanding that the submission has the support ,if the emplon,c Or)lanisations and replicates AIRCs decision 11c dckr consideration or the third safety net increase The Cnmn ar)lues 1l is important that :m, 11agc prn1c1pics contribute lo the growth and to the quality of enterprise agreements rI1e /\IRC we \\ere told. had restructured its principles to complement Its legislation amL since lcgislati1c l'ramc1rnr1' in QuecnslanJ is comparable to the Australian frame11ork, the local recasting would best he achieved by the translation of the ;\ustr,tl1an (iuidelincs to the Oucensland system. The Crown saw the drait principles tendered by ACTl'(Q) as constituting such a translation ,rnce one allo11cd for variations in legislation and lnstory, 1'v!r Johnston stressed that the Crnwn Sal\ the system of A11ard Re, iews contemplated hy s. ] 50 as crucial to the shi It of the s; stem to enterprise hascJ bargaining undcrpmned by safety net a11ards. lt 11as also put that the Crcrnn supported i\CTU(())'s submissions on this matter. With the greatest of respect it seems to us lo be plain that the Cro11n docs not support ACTL(Q)'s submissions, Ilic C'rn1111 sees lhc pr,iposcd 19')5 re1ic11 of the tl1ird S8 dcij11sll!H;llt as cnllc:1L II the third 'i,8 adj11s1111ent he• adnpicd n,m. 11·c tl11nk 1h:ll titc C'ro\Vll i:-; right. ·1 h( Cro\, 11 ;1ho Cll\ isagcs that uL or dbout thi: :iainL: time this lomrn1ss1on will assess \\hat has occurred rn the ,:oursc ol' a re\'iew of r1 representative or pilot sample of m,·ard,· 'I o meet :;uch a limetabk 11 \\Ould 1101 be po,,iblc to defer lhc ,elcc1t1H1 and the re, icw of the s:m1plc 1111til ,\!RC !ta, ihclf re, ic11cd the nutrnrne ol ih propused Pil()t Award Re, ic1\ Progr:m1 in ,\ugu,l I 9')'i, [t 11ill he necessary to start no\, As a foial submission the Crown urged the C1,m1nission to adnpt the proposed :11ncml111cn1S to Rules :HJ.\ and :,nr; :md fonm Rf, :m:I RX ,,r Ill,' Rules of the AIRC The effect Cl( th<: a,nendrncnts is to cn'.Surc that appli~;Hion•:, fur the ct.:r~ificuti1.1t1 ur a11 <ifn..·cn-11.:nt (1r- fur iipprn\·rd uf irnpk:1nentat1on nf an L·nterrr1",: fkxihility '.lgrLcrncnt :atatc the 1Ein1h::r of ~111plo) c.:s \\·hu ar,,.:-. -.:cvcrt.d h) th..: ..1grc.::r:1c1Jt and the number of those emplovccs \vho arc women, voung person, :md pcrsow: whi,:c !irst lcingu,1gc is not Lnglish. \Ve rrnpnsc tn rk:d with that submiss1Zl11 11011, \\'L: l1rc prc:icntiy co174..:crn..:J \". itb ..:ach r,J' ~\\ P dppiic..1t:n11'-i u:;al..:r lX, Scctinn JS autltori,es a hill Bcnd1 ot the lnJustnal Commis,io11 lo make a :,Likmcnt of rolicy rclatin,; to a:n 1ndus'.ri,1I matter. The pm1cr to rnaki; ruks ol Court is ,csl<:d bv s. 155t ! i(kl. l'i1c pu11c'r is ,·e,ted in lhc' Prc,irknt \l'ith :he conc11rreneri ni' :icy two l11d11,triai Co111nii,sio11cr,, The Chief f1;d11stria: Cnmmissiom:r will rein the s1dm1i,siun lo the Prc:sident Th,· s11h111i,sinn wil! rwt he dealt "itli as an aspect ui'this dcei,hHL l,csl au uulcumc be read inlo that \\C aud that we huvc not formed a vie,,,,; upon the question ,,-hcthcr t}k· prnroscd ruL's arc ir-i tru~h rclcvm1t t1_, 1h:: perti1rn1tmc_·c uf the Commi,sion·s fu11ct111ns 11mll'1 s,, 16+ and 18,1 11r are mere mec:han is ins for the collection of (mherw1sc 11,chl l data. \\'hen eall,·d upon lo 111,1kc submissi(,ns nn behalf n1 cmplnycr interests, \fr Muir tc,r Qcecn:,land l\nllcdernti,m di' lnJustr: Limited, t:nion of Lmploycrs thcrcaner ()Cli and )\fr BcliidJ !or :\ktal Trades Industry Associ:1l:nn nf A,1sir:1li:1, ()11cc1~sl:rnd [\ranch. Un1011 of ilnplu1 er, (hcrc•:,n~r Mllr\) ,ought dll ad1ouninicut penJin)l lhc ,llllcomc of certain procccJings in AlRC !'he matter ,m,se in this ,,ay 1\either ()Cl nnr \1TlA disputed that the Commission had jurisdiction O\ er the matter of absorpti,m uf safot, net increases into nvernward payments, 1\hc:thcr the arratH!Cmenh 11cre co:kctivcly nc)lotiatcd nr negotiated 11ith indi\·iduals and 11hether the arrangcm.:nts found c:xprcss1n11 in contractual 1-1rrangc111cnts. infrrrrnal unJcrqandings or ad,ninistrativ~ arrangements, The juris,licti()ll of AlRC w:b ,aiJ to be kss well settled and the Safety Net Adju,tmcnt, and Review lkcisi,1n (Print l .53(1()) \1a, ,aid lo he redolent with ambigutt;, :md uncertainl) a.s '.o which, if any, mcr:mard pavrncnts 11crc to be excluded from the category of payment intu which particular s.:ktv net rncrcascs might be absurbed MTIA ·s kderal counti:rpart had, the rrcvious day, sernrcd frprn President ()'Connor a reference to a Full lknch or AlRC of certain metal industry matkrs (S\:C no11 Print 162+:0) wl11d1 1\ould prn, idc the opp0111111ity J,,r the Safety '\et •\djustment and Re, 1c11 llccisi,w (Print L5:lOU I to be ,,ubJcclcd lo scrutiny and elahoration. Since the case rrcsscd upon this (ommiss1on \\as that :\IRCs c!cci,ion ,hould he adopted, 1t wa, said •ha! tk CPmmis,1011 should adjourn the 1m>cecd11°gs untii it 11:is clear 11hat the ,\lRC had decided. Mr Nance, for /\w;tralian Sugar ',Jilling :\,socialiPll ()11ccnsla11d t:nion of lmploycrs (bcrea!tcr :\S:vl/\), ,upportcd the adjournment appl1eatHHL l!1c appli~ation was opposed by .\CTf r. AW\' and the Crcnrn. lly a dec:sinn on transcript (at l]·ll \\C r,:jeclcd the: application sarn,g · "\\"c arc satlsF1cd that neither the T,atcria:s piaccJ hcforc us relating to the reference to a i'ull Bench of t11e Australian lnJu:-.trial Rc'.ations Con1n1ission. of certain rnattcrs \\hirh \\-ere pre, ioush heforc Commission I !odder. nDr tht: arguments which we have heard upo·1 these 111:J!tcrs, Jlhtif1 adjournment ur Jcfcrrai of these proL'.ccding~ \\ 1 t.: ~ha!! hearth~ proceedings ln tl1c1r e'Oll1ple'tlo1L 11,e qucst1tlll "i,,ill1cr a d.:c1s1t111 ,huuld be' dcl;1ycd !-; annthcr rri,1tl•~·1 \\·ith \,bi\.:h \\t> <sh·!ll deal ,\he~, '.Hld 1( ,.,c 1nu:-.l (Trant nf th..: thn:t..: ?rl'itratcd "al"d) Pet incn:a:-:c;;-: ''-'C'Ldd undc11nin...: ncgutiatlou ~11 th1..· cnh::rprl~-,c kvL:L n,Jt unc.krp:n 1L -- 2 of 7 -- 324 QUEE:'.\'SLAND GOVERNME~T I~DUSTRIAL GAZETTE [JO February, 1995 - ---- ----- ----- ----- - ------ ----------------·-------------- ·1 h.,; thrc.; arbiLratcd s,tfot)' uct incrcosc, <.:,tabli,h a tlour und,;r negotiJti011, to which an empl<,yer', circum,tancc, arc im:k:vanL .ind. given the !llaJquaev d the hunlks at the pomt ol accc,s when c\·aluatcd in proJucll\'ity and Lfiici~IlC) tcrn1s._ \\·ill dmn:1g2 l'cnnnmic rect,\.·ery anJ employment ~r,,wth and boosL i111lat1onary pre~sur..:s. ln all) L'vent tht' h:ml,l1ip and uncertaint,· ~ri~in~ frum the drought vvcigl1cd h..·aviiy ugaIu:--t ~h~ r1~'.'.lcnt g;·a:1t of the thi~d in,tc1lmcnt. ()(I did not prcsc!ltlv adllpt Lhe ,nbmi,rnrn mad" 1<1 AlR.C iw its federal rnunterp:irt that the , 15f) n:views shu11ld he ,~<.:n a,; tile uppnrtunit) to '·,trip h.ick cxi,ti,1g .iwa:·d pnwi~inns to b~s1c corL~ or loundatilm mhird cnt1tle111cnts. A 1nirn111um h0url) rate uf pa} fur Jduit ~mrloyccs. a minimum ht1urly rule of pa,· for junwr .:mplovccs. ti1ur wed,,· paid ann;1al lenvc. one \\Cck"s pair! siC"I-.. lea\'C, 12 months· unpaid parclltal ll:,1,c a lkr 12 mutuh, cnBt inuous ,er, ice· and equal p:iy l0r malt: and krnale workers for work of c411al value." ()Cl diJ ,cck tu r-.:s-.:rvc tile ri,-'ht Lo mal.c ~uch ,1 submi,,1on ,ho11lci .1\IRC. v.hid1 had prcvlllusl) rl'j..'.ctcJ Lhc .\ubn1is.-.;it_1n. f~ff an) rca:-;on r_;, isl; its vie,.v. ()Cl suppm"tcd the conduct l'f pilot review, and urged that tht pnicc<.lurc tu h, folluwccl h.: d.,;h:luped through a ,onCerenc-: procc·durc Sub_icct to rcs1stam:c to the inclusion of claus,s reflective of the safet, net increases QCI supported rer1l ication uf the nc,, .\IRC principles in the ()uccnslimd s,·stcm SdW that ()Cl argued that cla1n1:, alwvc the saft.:l)- nd other than claims in respect nftcst case standards should not he entertained The Ciuc:rantecd \1inimum Wage Adjustment should preferably he c1aJc on an award by ;_nvard hasi=' and. in an~ C\'Cnl. on a hasi, which did not Em a hclief that a general \\age i:ic:ca~c had hcc:n grant~-:J I laving rcg,1rd 1tl the impact of the drought on rural producer...; and provincial hu~incssn1c11 the c-.:< 1 nomic incapacit) principle should be rcfornrnlatt:d as folluws: "!kfore any increase is appru\cd under these principles paniculcirly "i.2J1 (safety net adjustmcntsj thc arplicant union is r..:quircJ to establish he) c,ncl ,H1} d(ubt that the increase will have a m:nimal 11npac1 (>n busincssc:s within areas which arc drougLt JccLmx'.. S1wu!J tile ,mit1n fr1ii tn do so the claim may he d1:'missed. Th<.: Comrn1,s1on may '.tc-:::c;;t suhn1i:--:siuns nc n:qL'.c'-;t~ fnr excmpi.ic1 n fron: 11nrn..n,cmcnt:-: in wagi.::5 an<l conditions \\hilst ~uch area~ n..:ffi(!in dr{)ught declared and 1nay grant cxc1nptinn fOr a fo,eJ or unlimited penod.'' Ii::~\·ing regard to Lhc con1rlction 0f the rnininn11n rate~ ad1u,tmcnt rrocc,s rn the huiiding aml c,mstructi,m indust~ics and tile adorti,)1' of the fodcral rates the principle rcl;_~tinE, to sit.: ~1lln\\'anccs WJ5 rc-dundJnt anJ shoulJ he rc~cn1dcd. ·1 Le n;u'clc:· ,)f rtcXU'' .._,i>h t11c' dat:c of qicr:lli'H, nt' .-\IRC c.l\\·~1rds m the builJing and l;nuqruct1011 indti:-:tr) l,J1ouh:I ht: ·k:dt \':! 1 h :it 1J~c tirne 1h:H '.\j?ilic:ttinn \\d'i r'whJ:: !o \ :·ny tl1e Ulin·i.)f" ;i,.,;an.i.,. t)Cl drt1 Lieli t:1ut ;1~xu~. n~ii~ll ...'.~3 ~nJ hiiturJ 1 hd 1 ·1t.",t ju-.;ti(v dcnit~l of the npnt,rt11nnv tu lead C\,..idcnct~ Jh,1ut ... h ..1r:;:cd .._:irc1111sLa:1c~s 1n tLc hui ljint=, anC c:~1n'.--t:-th.:tion industril.:3 and ab(JUt the burden ansu:μ_ from ~n\XOYeral""k rc~l:o::p2c~i,T '.Y:1g'~ incrca~r.;-::. ~n l ,\ placc<l greaf ~tres-: 1Jn L.1hc,ur P1~1rkct tlere&-ul;,1inri arruinp i.hdt '-u for frnn1 sittine La,,ily Ln,}Llh~T <::. 1..21.lrJ!'.y rq2.1Ltt.:•J labc,ur market and ,m utl1crwisc open c;conom1 tcnde<.l to 11ndern1inc one another. l'vl'l IA did not 1a,our a l<.Jrce<.l rc<.luctiun of awards tL1 core or foundation standard:,. MTfA did suppnrt collation nrth<.: es,ential ,afety net pw\isions in one pMt uf the awc1rd and mar,halling of' n(n1-c,~c11tial terms in u ~eennd r,irt If the s I 50 review rrocess tlrc\, the ..:xi.,ting a\\ ard prnvision:o ar,1rt in that "ay a process or timi:tahle tor shitung the non-safety net tcrn1s lO ccrtifie<.l agreements ,md entcrrrisc fkxihility agreements could be dcvelnpcd MTI;\ ·s prefrrreu proces, was via an ent~rpri:;c t1c:,ibi lity provision, ,. 14 5. lr twn-thirJs of the employees at an cnterrrisc ag.rccd to the rcan ane;crncnt, the Jhl Ji,ad, Jnta/!<.: test at s. 146 should be ckcmcd to be ,atisfied and an) refw,al bv an organisation of cmplovees dc..:mcJ lo bc unrcasvnabk tor the pmposcs ofs. 146('i) \11 l ·\ trenchantly critici,ed the i\lRCs dcc:i<,ion tn make three $8 sakt 1 net adjustmcnh ac·ccssiblc as in(omputiblc with bargaining at the enterprise lt.:vcl and ckstrnctivc of relativities. r-..1 ('l,\ suppnried ()(I 111 relation to site allowances an<.l uate ot operation nc-;us in the buildmg and cnnstruction industry. Retailers' Assnciation of Queensland Limited. Union ul hnploy<.:r, (hcn.:afrcr RAQ) expressed wnccrn about the negative impact 011 enterpmc harg~ining by small retailers. R.A() had little ~,ppn:hension Jhuut th" capacity c>f those retailers to fund the safety nc~t mcrcascs ,1 hilc continuing to make m era ward payments into which the increases could not be absorbed. because few such retailers paid such ovcraward payments. R;\Q was apprehensive that acceptance of a doctrine of non-absorption \\oul<.l roison the minds of small rctc1i lcrs against any form of enterprise bargaining. Australian Mines and Metals Association (Inc), ()ut:ensland Branch (hereafter AMMAl resisted any atternrt to limit ahsorption of award rates of pay into cwcraward payments. /\S!\lA argued that to make acccssrblc the $8 safety net increases made available by the Al RC would he to deal a cruel blow to enterprise bargainmg. In the alternative. the third proroscd increase should not be dealt with now but nearer to the time at which it would be aC1:essibk and the language to be used in working the safety nel mcrt:ases mto aw=irds should be de,·clopcd on a case b 1 case basis rather than s!andardisul in thc,e proceedings. l:nited Cirazicrs' A,sociation of Queensland. Union ot' hnploycrs (hereafter UGA) and Meat and Allied Trades Federation ol Australia (Queensland Di,·isiun) l!nion of Employers (hereafter \·IATFA) stressed the devastation wrought by the drought and. rightly. emphasised the slow and difticult path to rural recover) when (if) the drough, broke. Iloth organisations supported QCTs opposition to the !low on nf the $8 safety net adjustments. Neither organisation sought ()CTs favoured moderation of the economic incapacity principle. Un I l\ovcmbcr 1994 \\·c puhlished an interim decision in this matter. The decision is now reported. 147 QCiJG 1092. It is ,urtic,cnt to say that we adopted AlRCs tirst $8 increase and also made the: second increase accessible al the rnterprise lc,el. 1'11e deciston ol I NO\ e111hcr 199,1 (kclar,~d • When the AIRC uccisiri11 ,,11 ·absorptiPn· is ;i\:i.ilabk. 1,e shall re-list this 1rn1ttcr for ti.1rtl1cr ~onsidcrdti,)ll ... Consistently ,,itli Lhc decl,mrtion the matter wa, li,tcd on l() November 1944 r-..1Tl,\ supported by ()Cl. ASMA. A:-1:vlA and tl;c lro-.,1:. imrncdiutcl, suught an aJjoummcnt pending a challenge to the AIRC dec1s10n on absorrtion in the metal industry (l'rillt L6~-l') to whid·, \\'e have previously referred In the C\'ent we ga1·c a dcci,1011 tin trm1scnpt in lhe follnwing terms: '·We liavc cn111c: hi th..: view Lhat in present circum:;tanc:cs the balance of convenience will best be served if we contmuc to i3901_1.DOC IOFehruary, 1995J QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE 325 dclcr c0nsickration of the iss\les ol power and policy 1·clating to absorptl(ln. 11' circumstances change we ,hall re list the matter. We cnnsickr that convenienc..: is h..:st served if we prou:ed to deal with all other issues. including acct:ss to what 1s colloyuially known as the second $8 incn:ase al the award kvd. In the event that \\'e ultimately conclude th:1t the first and/or second $8 increases or any part of them should not be absorbahle those 1\hosc access tl> the it1creases has been delayed will entertain some scns.: of grievance. We do not now dccidc how the grievance should he assuaged. Because this dctcrrnl flows from an emplovcr application we warn employers that they are at nsk of some measure of retrospcct1vity and should a<.ljust their affoirs accordingly. Inconsistently with this decision applic:mts will need tu se..:k orckrs on the basis of' non-ahsorption, which (>rders will n,,t now he grnntcd. in ordl'r to fix a date of opcratiou gi, ing a sound jurisdiction:.tl basis for such n:trospcctl\ iLy arguments.". To the resolution of the issues other than absurptinn we now turn. SECTJO'\/ ISO REVIEWS We <.lo not accept that s. 150 authorises the Commission to render existing awards and industrial agreements to their core or foundation provisions. We do not underestimate the dramatic nature of the changes that may flow from the review rrocess. We can sec no reason why the powers at s. l 50 may not he augmented by the powers at s. 144. But at the end of the day there must be a safety net of minimum wages and employment con<.litions un<.lcrpinning the process of direct hargaining. and that safety net must be containc<.l within the award or industrial agreement as the case may be. MTIA ·s submission is not subject to that objection. If the safe1J net provisions of an a,vard or industrial agreement arc included m Part A and the non-essential terms arc included in Part Il. the salct) net continues to he contained within the award or industrial agreement. Whether it will he always or indeed generally possible to separate out the safety net from the non-essential tcnns we are not presently equipped to assess. There is. however. no reason wh) MTIA should not attempt the exercise in the Pilot Program to which we shall shortly turn. The scheme which MTIA urges us to embrace in order to shiti the non-essential terms from the award to a certil1cd agreement or enterprise flexibility agreement is another matter. l1 seems to us that s. 146(2) permits amendment or an award to give eftect to an agreement made under an enterprise tlcx1bility provision only where the Commission is "satisfied" that no disadvantage will !low. It seems to us that s. 146(5) requires the Commission to hrush aside the objection of an industrial organisation only if "satisfieu·· that the organisation ·s refusal to agree is unreasonable. The circumstance that a fixed and antecedently known rrorortion or the employees afkcted manifest their "satisfaction·· at a ballot docs not excuse non-perfonnance of the tasks described at s. 146 (2) and (5). [ As a matter of prudence we add that we have as yet heard no argument as to whether branding a term as non-essential inevitably leads to the conclusion that its omission from a certified agreement or enterprise fk.x1btlity agreement cloes not cause the mstrument to fail the no disadvantage test, sec s. 160(1)(a) and 180('.'.)(d).] We propose tu cn,ulatc the AIRC and cstabli,h a Pilot A\\ard Rcview Program. The Chief Industrial Commissioner will. 111 Februarv 1ll')'i_ convene a conference of all parties tu these rrocccd111g, and all other intcrcstc<.l pa11ics m the hope that agreement may be reached upon !he awards to he included in the Pilot Program and of the procedures tu be fullowcd, nnt only in the process or Rcv1ew itself_ but in ascertaining and notil') ing all rlio,e with a lcgitirnate interest in the outcome relating to a p;,irticular award or agreement. A Full Bench ,viii he constituted to monitor the Review Program and, ll1 or about October/Novcmhcr 199~. to assess the Review Program in the hope that, by treating the Progr,1m a, a lc,1rning c.\ercise. principles nEI) be <.lcvelopcd on tht: basis ol which complc:tiun of the Review rroccss envisaged b) s. 150 may be enlru,ted tl, singk Cummis,ioncrs. Until such lime as ;in aw.ird ur industri:tl agn.:cmcnt i;; \ arn:d in the course of or on the completion of as. 150 Review tnc full terms nfthc awar<.l or induslrial a13rcemcnt shall constilu!e 1h~ safety net. ARBITRATED SAFETY '\'FT ADJ! 'Sl'!\fE;\T~ The interim decision released on I November I tJ94 made available an $8 per week S,1ti:ty Net .\djustmcent to thos~ employe\:s who had not achieved a forn1al enterprise bargaiu since l Februar) l 992 or the I Fehrnary 199-l safety net adjListmcnt or $8. The Cr,mmis,ion abo decided to make availabk an $8 per ,1.eck ,afcty net ad_iustmcnt at enterpns<' level 110 earlier than 7 l\ovcinber 1994 In this p;,irt of the decision \IC are required lo con.>lder whether lo extend to State award employees the second limb of the second safety net ad1ustmcnt made availahk hy the .\ustraltan Industrial Relations Cnmm1ss1011 at the <1\\ard level si\ n1ont.l1s alter it bei.:0111<:s availahll' ,it the cnterprist· level. Consideration rn11sf also re giH'll to whetlKr thc third ,akty net adjustment uf $8 per ,1.i.:ck should be m11dc ,w11ilablc in lme with the decision of the AIRC The economic material which was placed before us <.lemonstrates that except for certain sectors of the rural economy, Quecnsland's economy is continuing to grow and prosper. Whilst \\e do not ignore the devastating imract of drought we ha\ e already decidcd that the State ·s economy can sustam Lhc modest wage increases made available by the I November 1994 decision. The prospects for contmued growth outside of certain sectors or the rural economy enable us to favourably consider the extension or the second SS per week sa!ety m:t adjustment to the award level without dcletenous economic effects. The focus of delivcrmg wage Putwmcs should be at the enterprise level: the principles accompaming this decision and the Rcfonn Legislation changes ensure that enterprise level outcomes remain prcernincnt. Nonetheless. we arc of the view that where enterrrisc bargaining cannot be achieved in the rcriod of transition increases at tile award level should he a,ailablc and that. for reasons advanced hy the Crown. their availability in carefullv limitc<.l circumstances will encourage bargaining. Adjustments to awarJ wages in the ,,ay m1w maJc possible will also act to maintain the award system of wages as secure. relevant and consistent. Accordingly. subject to the comments made later on the matter of ah,orption. we have decided to make available 1hrnugh the Principles acce,s to a second $8 pa" cck wage increase at the a\\ ard level on the same basis as that dctcnnincd by the AIRC in its September 1994 decision lt shall be available no earlier than 8 May 1995. :\ ward It:, el: a second $8 rer \,cck arbitrated safety net adjustment will be arnilable, at award level. from no earlier than 8 May l 995. subject to the foll(m ing ksts: (A) that the award has heen varied for the first \,8 per week safety nd adjustment: (Bl that at kast 6 111n11tlis h,1s c:laJ'Sl'd bet\\t'tn tht> flrSJ an<.l sc:cond a\rnrd levi.:I $8 per ,,ed: silfct\ n..;t increases: ( CJ that the award has bc,c·n hiricJ to include enterprise llc.,ibii1t) prov1silH1S ,on,isLent with scetions 145 and 1-16 of the ;\et; IJ9U l _ l UfJC -- 3 of 7 -- J26 QUEENSLAND GOVER!\'MENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE [ 10 Fehruary, 1995 \0) thdt J progra.1nn1l: c1fj1~cu:-;~iurb bct\\\.'.C.tl Lh~ a\A ..uJ parti(:'.-i h,I', hc,cn ,,~rnblished t,1 duil ,1 lib the rc1 ,cw ni lhc aw,1rJ p1irsuant to s..:cliun I SIJ. \'.Ith partic~lur ~tt:ctli>n w: ( ~, thL· 11npkrncntt11HH1 df J prncc:-is fi.lr tcSLint;. tt1~ rd.:\ anc,,; (__ifths:: a,\-~trJ :H th-2 '-~ntcrpris: ia.:,,e~ ·1 h~ ;,q1;• n( the third '<;8 per we<.'k safc:1; net :1djus;tn1e11t ,1\ h,,th ~mc1r1is<.' and :n1ard lc1c; l,a:, pr0Vc-r1 t.,J be i.l more Jif!J"u'.t nne. n,,th the .-\CTL/(l) and the A WI' urge 11s to mtopt the ,\!!{( ·, ..ir,;1r,,ud, in this n:allcr To co so '.Hlllld prnnJc rrcJica!1i 1ity of ,,age outcon11:s lor many employers and employees. (JC..I and i\1 !'IA ,o:ll.•,:nJ th:n (cv,':il:,bili!v ,if a ihird incrca,c a! ,url! a pw,rccti,c t1rw: is ns~y (h.."-;plie thL~ /\ l RC •s al~o\.\"ctlh:C fur ~1ppl it.:atio1.1\ si..:ek ing lo L·h,1lirnt,L'. the thirJ .1J_iu,lmL'nt to be nrnJc prwr ((1 thl' third Hh,1\,;{1,:-,c hccun1i1,f.1 d\ ailabk. .\:::, na[g~<l abt.lvt.:· in l)Ut' vi,:.::,1. thl' r'.sks u..-::.;()ciated with dc(:i:iinr an increase tn apph· 12 munLli, licuc.: and thus rai,ing c,pcn,n,on, ·\rl' ,i,:ks ,,.c h:1,·~ decided we do nPl ,,i,h to t.ikc Our prcfe!l'cd .i[lpr,1,tcli i, w Jcfrr 1.:<H,s,dc,dti,m ,,f Lhc tlii, d $8 pn ,.c.:k sc1fcl) uel aJiusimcn• until no earlier than < ktnbl'r I <195 lhis is one month prlor to its becoming 3vailabk at the enkrprisc icvd a;-,st:n1ing \\\.~ had pr,Kcc,kd to mirror the t11rn:scaks dcL:mlincd h) the AIRC in its Scptcmlh:r 1994 Rcvic\\ dt:c1s1t>ll We then:fon.: aJj,rnm thal par! of the applications relating. to the third ,ali.-tv net adiu,tmcnt. i{a!hcr than snnpl, rc!i.sting the matter at the n.''-!u;,;~; uf 111: Appli..:anb ,it the rclc\',mt. tim.: 1,c would prcl~r that 11ew applications be tilcLl so that the sL.llcrncnt o1 lact, anJ i'."-~ucs upon \\'hich ti"ll~ app'.icrnts \,·01:ld rdy to suppott the granting o! the third safety net adiustrncnl arc krwwn 111 aJ,ancc ,,f the hc:iring to '.he n.:,p<'ndcr1l'i and to the CcmimissH'n !n dc..:idin!! uron this cPur\l' nt· action \\C c1nph,1..;;i,c that '\\C i1avc not ~ihdtHh)ncJ :he third safety net a.J_justnu:::H. \\'c ha'd..'. cLicrrcd consideration ,,f it to alinw it to be more apprupriatc:l;, ,:on~id~r:2J 11~ the crn~tc'\t of rn.::v,:1iling condition~. We shnu!J aisn add that m •naking availahk the i;r,t and second S8 r~r \\CCk arhitrarcd .-.;,afot;· net ad_iu:-;t1ncnt:,;_ we int('.nd th..: """l~olc of the mnuunt'.-t h1 be rr:aJc aYailahlc to junior~ and ~1ppri:n11ccs in a fW 1"J roia \\,J) 111 a<.:co:·cLm~c \\ ith the \\·age r:-incipl 1.::1. WS0RPTJnS \\'c adhere to the \ it:\\ \vhich we cxpr,.:--.:;..;cJ Pn 3!J l\Jo\-cn1!-1cr l'J':l4 (.,cc: ah,,,-:). \\''.1i!st the n1atlcr ri:rnain~ u11Jctcrrr1incd. our con1r1t:-:1t< \,-i11l rcspt:ct Lo the ab:-.orhuhility uf the first S8 per \\\~eK :-;afci.y net :1dju~ii:H.."nt a~1d the ~ccor:J s~uC'ty net ad_(,_1::-::tinent a~ cnterprlsc level rc1r1..1in LHh~hangcd I"he! nn·~,- ha\L applicatinn h' the $8 per \\CLk ~arct:, ;1ct adju~t111:nt \\·h,ch ha\ hcconK"' a\.-atl;J-,Jc through thi:-- d\.."'ci<on ut a,\.ard k\·cl. .\LLO\\ \\CF~snn 1n I\U-l.E:\IF.Yl', .\:\D \\ l·TKL\l) Pl·S\ I.TIE', E\J'Hl:S'-EI! :\ "i_lJ ,\T llOU~\JC\)lOJ ~IS !,, 11, •\!1;•1; 1 !9LJ4 dccis,un the /\IIZ<.' dcurL-d that the issue ol ~1:~_;u.,1:ns ull.J\\a::c:s a:1d s,._;n 1cc it~:~r-:tncnb fo:- rnn11ctar; s..11''-'l) Ect rncrc~1,-c~ '" nuld be dctcrn1in~d in each case bY the !·uli Hl:nch ic:i.i;n/ ·,vit!~ thL' inattcr '\ :--in1il.:1r arp~o:1ch \\''.1:--; al:-.n cr,n~lLLT:~d a:)f~H1priah.: \\ 11.h ;i.;-;pc\.'.1 h, ti)~ ad.pi:t1n1cPt. fur l\iOBCLJI) ,,,kt~ net iw:n'a'--:c, l,f,\·eckL·t1-..~ 11cn:..dtic:-,, c,-...:prc:-:;\cd u.:-: n~n dnilur ;_p1.:nunt...;_ ·1Lc AIRC in ils September 1994 Jcc1:oion rl'lcrrcd to the rcseneJ (icc1sion in the Retail and Wholesale ~hop Emplo,ces (;\u.c:traliar, Capital Territory) Award I 903 Given the pnsitinn, the AIRC. iu co11s;(krim.; the issue as pan uf the'. current rnicw, clec;idL.'d in rc,pect nfth1; lir,1 .irbitrateJ sal~~ty net provided 1,y the Septcml,cr ,kci,iun, liPl tu dclcrminc Lhc i;;suc of thc ud_justmcnl of ull(manccs, ,,'rv1cc 1ncrcrncnt, and \\eekcnd penalties C)-;prcsscd as flat dollar cllllllLJLtS. '\ Ji!Tcn:nt apprn:ich \\as ad<1pted \\ith rc,peel to the st:cond &bitralcLi ,ai'e1y net ad_justm.:nt. Tlic AJRC dL.'1.:ickJ that ull1ma11ccs, ,crvicc i11cr-emcnts 1md \\Cckcnd penallle, c,pn·sscd as flat dollar JllHlllllt, arc tu be adj usld for lhe second S8 per week ,1rbitn1kd safot:, net aJ1ust111<:nt. rhc rncthoJ o!' ad_iusLinp llal d,,lla1 allm\mKcs. ,crvicc increments and \\'cck-c:nd p1;naltic, for the sc:conJ $8 per week arbiLrulcd .,ali;t, net 1.1djustment is unckar. \Ve have rcacheJ nu f1xc·d v.ew cm the matter hut consider rt woul,l he hest sdtlcd bv a l·ull Benc!1 m response t<.) a separate. specific applic:ition. An uppropriate 1eh1clc may be the llat allcrnoon and niμJ1L sliill :1l!!mtmccs ,'st:ihlished h; (icncr:li Ruling . Lxcq11 where otherwise 1t1d1catcd, we t1avc decided to adopt Lhl: rcasonmg of and the Statement of Principles issued by the A!RC in its Auc1ust 1994 Rc,iew of \\age Fixing Principles. (Print L4700). !he l;rincq,le,; have been modified to take accuunt nf Stale !cg,,li1!10n or to suit local circumstance,. WORK V1LUE CHA,'VGES Since the July 199 l State Wage Case Decision. the Work Value Principle in ()c1ccnsland has differed in nnc n;spcct lo that applying to federal a,\artb .. ln ordinary -:ircumstanccs, changes in work , alue ,,·,21T to be measured from the date of operation of the second ,tructur;;I cfiicicncy incrca,c. Where extraordinary c:rcumqances c,,u!J re dernonstratcd in special case proceedings. an earlier date 111;1, ha, c been approved The latitude provided m-cr the last three years has been rarely .1cccss-.:d hut H has served some purpose. (iivcn its limited use, we can ~-..:e t11J rea:,;on for its rcn1oval at thi:') stage. ST:-11\DARD H0uRS J'hc d1 all principle, trnd<.'rcd hy ACTl i(()) rctams the lullowing. ,-;\,.·nt~ncc in the .Stan,..iard I Iours pru\:i:-:ion:-- "\ul,_jcct to the '.iH!~ \\a 0 c Case of 29 Ju]_,~. claims for reduction in stanJarJ \\ cekl:, hours belo,\ 38. e,cn with full cost offsets wili not be alimvcd." ln rnntinnll1tc to include 1t. the /\CIT(()) ,!S>crtcd thaL the AIRC uctcrn,rncd that an~ claims tn reduce standard hours bt:!ow 38 hours per- -.,·cek \\ou]J be treated in the ,amc manner as other claims abon: the ,afrt) net of wl.ig.cs and nmditions ·1 he ACll'.(()) rclcm;d the Commi,sion tP the rnt:charnsrn provided by the AJRC m pnncipk , , •o achic·.-c' standard hnurs Jc·" than ;g hom,; per week. In the Quccnsl,md conte.\L tl1is v-u1I!d bL Jone by rcfcrc:ncc to the Chier ( nrrmi."i,·,ncr tn decide \\·hcthcr the n,:,tt•~r ,hould l,c dl'cilt ,,ith b, ,1 hJI Jl,:J,ci; TLc i 'Ji! I State Wac,c Case d:cision ,tllowcd a l'·.d! Bench t,, consiJcr conscnl matkrs ,,h,ch i'all \l'!lhin the rare and cxccpt1011ai circ,11n,,anccs !\s the 1\Cll :(()) noted, t!ie rncc'!l:mi,m nm, prn\ ic.iecl I" t!.c ;\CTL.'(()) tL, <1chiL.'\C adjustments nbovc: th<; s,dc:t:- nct \\nuiJ aho npplv to issues not accnmrnodatcd m the l 99 I Srntc \\'a1oc C1,,c Jce1o1un, tLat le, ca.,c, in >\h1ch cunsen\ w,\s nut present. 1'1\lOl I.DOC 10Fcbruary, l995J QUEENSLAND CiOVERNMENT INDUSTRlAI, CAZETTE We would e"pect clauns scekmg to reduce standard hour, to less than 3R hours per week would remain rare and C\C('ptional. The AIRC docs not limit cl,iims ahovc the award sakt) net LP ones of consrnt: rather it pruvidc, a mechanism to deal with such claims. In the circum,tunccs the adJ1tional sentence currcnl!y prm ,Jed in this State's Wages Pnnciplcs 11111y be construed as an unnecessary restriction. We prnposc to delete the sentence and in so doin;~, note the n:quiremcnts placed on parties \1hen making a claim above the safety net to proviclc supportin~' material justifying the nwllcr being dealt with as a ,pccial ca.sc MAKING .1/\'D VIRJ'//\'G A/\' AIV1RD .1BOVE fl/E SAFE[}' :YtT lncimlcd in thi:, princirlc me spccilic requircrncnb with respect to the making and varldtion olpaid rates award,, above the safety net of a,1urd w.igcs and conditions. l'hc :\!RC noted in ib ,\up1s1 1')C)4 Review ckcis,on that in the process leading. to 1t, the partu,;s agreed 11pnn a set of guidelines (attached as /\nncxure I to the decision) atlout the nwking and varying of paid ralC's awards. The parties in these prncccdings ha\ c not agrcul upon these guidclirlL'S. We hclicvc there 1s ment 111 the AC J'IJ(())'s proposal however, that the guidr.:lincs sC'l out in Annexurc l of the: AIF.l"s August 19934 Rei ,ew decision ma, be useful in progress inμ paid rates claims before this Commission and should he used as a reference point. TIIIRD ARBITRATED SAFETY /VET ADJUS1MENT Clearly. in light of our decision to adjourn consideration of that part of the claim dealing with the third arbitrated safe!) net adjustment. no provision in the Principles shall he made for it. SITE ALLOWANCES Ciranted that ACH:(()J proposes to rc,isit the matter cif site al lowanccs in a thorough going way in !he near future '".: considn that convenience is best served by maintaining the guideline in its existing. form If any party is dissatislied with the zest with which the rcvi,iting is brought forward, that party may. of course, hasten on its own application. ECONOMIC /!\CAPACITY /\s noted above ()Cl proposes a yuali ficalion on the Frnnomic Incapacity Principle. The rationale for the proposal is to prm ide adJitionai relief to i.:mployers in drought alkcted areas of the State. Mr Muir ad, iscd that variations to common rule awards for the any of the $8 per week arbitrated safety net adjustments would apply to husinesses in drought alkcted areas. I le submitted that an obligation c,ists to assist those most affected by the drought and not to burden businesses \\ith further financial commitments such as increased \vagcs. Mr Turner for the U(i;\ presented econnrnrc mc1tcrial dcmonstratinp the i111pact of the dro11ght. Wl11lst gencrnl!\ supporting the ()(Ts submissions. Mr Turner did nut pre" for· ;111;, special consideration for drought affected lanncrs in terms nf extra relief under the l'conomic lnc,1pacity Principle Both the A( .. llJ(Ol aud the A Wl: nppPsed tile ()Cl proposal. We have previously acknowledged the impact of the Jrn11ght (111 the State's economy and rccog111sc the hardship that lt 1s causin,;. Nevertheless we consider thal the Frnnum1c lncapaeilv Pri11c1rie ,hould r,~rnain unch1mgcd It provide, llc,ihilit,v to any rany or group uf panics hound by an ,I\\ ard to scek lo reduce aml/c,r postpone any increase Mr J\·luir hunsell pnmted out thut till: ;11nalg;1rna•ion hctlll'Cn the Q11eensl:md Confedcrnt1nn <'f !ndrrsrn· Limitc,L lJnion ,it· Fmpluycr., anJ the Stdk Chainbcr or Cummu,·c,; mid Industry has r,,sulteJ in a brundcr rncmbcr,hip base mid a sy s1c1n uf nct-.vor~ing v\ilh Regional Clurnhcr.i We arc c,,niiJcn\ thal the ()lTs uhil1ty to represent a broader membership combined w11h the Economic lncaracity l'rineipk \\ill cll';ure th,1t the interest; of businesses in droui!ht affected an.:.i, arc rrn,cell:d Tile AIRC deknnincJ that ,t:-: l',·ir:cipL-s 1-.0,dd ,Jpcuk un1d I July 19%. lhc t\l .. l L(()) urge:, Lb 10 ,HJont Ilic ,ame lite spai1 Jm the Principle's no11 apprnveJ We prefer !h;ll th<;y nper:11e until l :\o, cml,er l ')95 it is rnsturna1~y l~1r tl,, re1 i.:\.1 uf \V,1gc Principle.', 1n this State to occur alkr the .'\IHC has rc'kased a ckcision c:011cen11ug the re, ic11 of its Princ:1plcs. \Ve ,I.all r,:\ 1,it the· rnatkr until the October l 'J95 Renew DATt OF OPFRATIO,'\ 01· VARIATIO'.\S H) :\HRH.OR \. W \RD~--- I'.\ __ .IH lllll'\(; __ \'\ll__ CO'.\SrR!'("[IQ~ I\Dl'STRIES \Ve ..1cccpt ()CTs sd1u11.,sio,1 tlul tlm nrnttcr sh<rnlJ be dc,iit with when applicat,on 1s made lo ,·ary a particular nurror awarJ, ·10 do otherwise would deny emph1ycrs the or,portuni!y tc lead evidence that changes within the industries have made inappwpriak the 1radition of obscni1,g the same date ,1f operation under hoth the federal award ,md the minimum award. We dr1m the attention of the parties to s. 341h1 which proviJcs that. save with the consent of the parties, any rctrospccti,c dkct gn en 10 an award is not made to operate before the date when the Commission tir,t took CPgni,ancc of the maticr in relation to \\·hich retrospective cflcct 1s lo be given. Whether. hccausc a general rulinlc operates to vary all a,,,irds and industrial agrcemcms (s. 37(7)) th-: di:;cussi(,n in these prncccJings about \\hcther some tir all df the saldy net adjustment should he made b1 ""Y of a general ruling hr,_)u~ht variation 0f each and every (1\Vard ar:J indu;)trial at;;n.:c1ncnt \VI thin the COf!J1!sancc of the Cornrni'."i~ion as and fro1n the Jatc of th~ discussion, 11c leave to the da) on "hich the lir,t appli,·ation lo vary a mirror award is heard. Gl\RA'.\TEED \11'.\l\lt:\I W.H;J•: The applicants seek an increase to the (iunrantecd Mmimum Wag_e to reflect the second $8 per week safety net ad_iustmenl a, ailahle at the ,mare! level. No real nppnsitinn t(> this pmpo,al was exprcsc;cJ although the rein ancc of incrcc1S:n;2 the (ju.iranlc'-'d Mmirnum Wage. In the circumstances. we proposed to incrca,c the (iL:aranlct:c! \1 ininrnm \\'age tn reflect the second 58 per week as from 8 Mav 1995. We repeat lht: cnmment made O) the Jui! !lench in its l February l 99°1 decision that. "We should state. hcnvC\-cr. that a r-cpnr1 that 1hc Con1missipn ha.-~ grunted an actual increase \)f $8 to an; one \\'ilL of C1)ur~c. be a misleading rcpon .... ( 145 (J(i!Ci 31,1 u 319) We order ,Krnrdinfly IJ. R. I IAI.I .. ( 'hid Industrial ( ·omm1s,iPner. J-... I FUWARDS, Commiss1011cr Ci.K. 1:1s1 ll:R. Cun,mis.,iuncr. 13901 I !JOC -- 4 of 7 -- 328 QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE [JO February, 1995 "vh n. Ralston f,,r the: !\ustrd!inn ( ·ounul ,,r ·1 ra,k L'ninn. ()uccu~l..1nd Brauch Ms Y. D'J\th and \\tth her Mr .1. Ludwig for Tht'. Au,trnlian \\orkers' l'11ion oi 1~mplt1)Ci,;S, ()ui,;ensla11d. /'vlr J. .Jobml\111 am] with him \ls .I. R~iJ ,rnd \1r T Shipst,me for the Crow11. Mr G. Muir for the Queenslaml Co11te,kratiun of lnJustr: J.in1it,:cl. l.':1ion of Fmploycrs Mr M Fklfieirl 1t't the Mdcil Irade~ Industry /\ssncwtwn ot' Au,tr..iliJ. (),H.:ensl,md Branch.1 1nin11 (if Employers Mr W. Turner for the l 'nitl'ci Cirnzicrs' !\•ss0c;ation of ()ue<.'nsLmd. lmion of l:niplo1·er,. Mr l rumn t;,r 1he i\usLraliJn !\!i11co an<l t-.kta!s A,sociali(1J1. i\!r S Nance for the Austnlian Sugar "v1illin£! Assoc1;1tion. Queensland. lm1on of l mployers Ms ( Rice t\ir 1l1c R.ctaile1 s • 1\ssoci,:ti,)n of Qui,;cnsland Lirnikd. Lmon of Employers. \lr C. C,1scy for the Shop. Distributive and Allied Emplnyecs .\ssociation (QL1censland Branch I Union lll Fmpluyec, Operative Date: 19 November 1994 Decision - State Wage Case Released: 2t) Decemher 1994 llECLARATIO:\' OF POLICY I. Introduction !'he !nJusrrio/ f<,iuliom -kt /99(} (the ,\et) now prmidcs for an industrial rclatams system ,~h1ch pr,m1otcs enterprise hargainrng about 1,·ages and conditions or employment "ithin the framc\\t 1 rk nf an a\\ard ,ystcm. which pnl\ides a safety net or secure. r.,;lc;\anl and consistent wages and conditions of emplo:men! In ooth areas. the Act provides for the rcmm ai or pre, ention ,,r specified forms flf J1scmrnnat1on. Tbe priority rn Lh1s system i, on the parties :u an cntcrpri-,e - employers. cmplo)CCS and their representatives taking rcsponsihilit, for their ,ll\n mdustrial relat10ns affairs and reaching agre::rncnt:; appr,,pnate to their c111erpnse. l his new priority requires a change in the way the parties and the Commission approach the prevention and settlement uf industrial disputes !'he ,mard svstc:m pnn rdc, a .,af'cty n.:t of wai;cs and conditiom \\hiclr un,jcrpinc; ,,r.terpnsc b:1rga:ninc ;m:l protects c:mrlPyccs \\h 11 inav b~ unahk lu reach '111 cu~erpn:,;~ aμr~cm\.'.nl \vhik n1:1inu:ining an inccnt1\'e to h:1rl::iin fr,r such an ag.n:t'1J1cnl It also t'l'l'\ irk, thc brndH1.:11k !'ur th.:: "no disad\'illltJg, test" Lhat Lhc .\d rcqu11.::, be l!h:' rehire :.grl'cmcnh are cc:rti!ied or implemcn,ation (If cntapri~c f:c:,,biiit) tl~rccrri..:nb approved by the Ccnnr11i.')sio1:.. In c.,crcisin~ it.a p,w.ers and ohlig;1tinn, under 1hc 1\ct. the C,mm11s:,1011 "ii! conLinu.: t,, dprly ,trnctural r.:fiicicm:; ctmsi(Jen~tinn1.:, including. n1ininn11r, r~tc~ a<l.Ju~tmcnt rrl'n)ions c.:\'H~i-"t.l..'.n~ ·~,·ilh !Le .)'1.'J.,ft,m!Jer J088.,_ ()c_ruher .-· 939 c:111.~· _,Ju[r f ')9 I S'/q/e Wrigc ('a,e derisions. rhe .\m·emhcr I 991 !ntenm dec1.1·wru1!!li. rhe Dccc:mba 1_991 !icvicll ol Wag,? Vix111g Pm1cip/es d2c1siu11. 2. Fntcrprise Barg:lining 2.1 General A central feature of the Act is the promotion of enti:rpnse hJrgaming and the Commi,sirm's obligation to facilitate agreements and promuk bargaining. Thc: Comrnis,ion ma) J'acilitale b,irgaining in hoth rrnmmurn rates ,md pi!id rules areas 111 four ma111 ways: (a) By com:iliatton and where neccs,ary issuing order, tu cnsur.: h~rgaining in ::woe! faith and to promote the cflic1ent conduct of negotiation,: (b) By 121:nc:rally not arbitrating in favour nf cbim, above the safety net of award w:➔ ges and condittons. except; ( 1) \\hcrt arbitration is undertaken at the imitation uf the pa1iie,. in which case the Cornmis,inn's rle<.:1sion should he: incorpurat1.:d into an agreement; or (iii \\here the parties remain in disagreement and the Cmmrnssion considers there is no prospect of agreement b.:ing reached, in which case: (A) if s.2 l 1( l )(b) applies and the Commission has terminated a bargaining period. the Commission will exercise its rowers pursuant to s. 212: or ( B) the matter shall he referred to the Chief Cornrni,sinner for consideration as a special case. A paii) seekmg a Special Case must make an application pursuant to s.47 supported by material justifying the matter being dealt with as a Special Case, It will then he a matter for the Chief Commiss10ner to decide whether it is to be dealt with hy a Full Bench: (c) ,\, a result of the review of awards pursuant to s. 150 to ensure comp! iance with that section; and (d1 By encouraging the inclusion of enterprise lkxihilit) prm is ions in awards consistent with s. 145 and their effective use hy the parties to the award 2.2 Consent Award, Industrial Agreement or Award \'ariation to Give Effect to an Enterprise Agreement !'he scheme of the Act is that an enterprise agreement between parti<:s hound by an award is most appropriately formalised through a ,·ertified agn.:eml.'.nt or enterprise flexibility agreement under Part l l - Promoting Bargaining and Facilitating Agrecmcnts. Parties hound by an award who wish to have an award made or ,-aril·d, nr an industrial agree1m:nt made. to rive effect to an i.:ntcrpris,.; agre,,meut nrn,t, as ,1 tirst step. satisf: the Cummissiun that such ,m award or \ arial!on or industrial agreement ,hould he made rnthcr than h,l\ c an abn:cmcnt <.:c1iificd or an cnkrpri:,c tkxihilitv agreement approved. In considering whether that onus has bcrn satistied the Commission will have regard t0 the nature of the enterprise, the vic'ws oi' the parties, the hisLOry 01· reg11laLion 111 the ;nea \.:n,ered b: the agrcemt:nl. the rnne,e' ,,f matters covered by the· agreement, the l.ikclihooJ of "flow on" anJ an) other relevant matters. ll901 I.DOC IO February, I995 J QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE 329 lf the Commission considers Lhat the onus ha, been satisfied a consent ;1ward or consent variation to ;in aw;ud or an industrial agreement ma) be macJe to give eff(:ct to an cnterprisc agreement between parties bound by an i!Ward. subject to the followinp.: (a) The agreement has been negotiated Lhrough a single bargaining unit in an enterprise, section of an enterprise or group of enterprises. In the cas..: uf ,1 single harg;uning urut in a section of an enkrpri,l:. the: pmiies must demonstrate that the section is discreti.: and that the section heinb treated separately from other sections of the enterprise docs not n:stnct the implementation of structural cfficienc:, considerations and enterprise bargaining in that establishment or other sections of the enterprise. (h) The proposed award nr variation nr lndustnal Agreement is consistcnl with the continuing impkmentation ut cntcqll'i,e level of structural efficiencies considerations. (c) Any wage raks and/or conditions contained in the p1opost:d award or variation or industrial agn:cmcnt which exceed the award safety nt:t of \\ages and conditions must be ba,ed on the actual implementation of efficiency measures designt>,d to effect real gains in productivity and the wage rates and/or the conditions must be separat<:ly tdcnuficd. (d) Where the proposed award or industrial agreement \,ill operate in conjunction with another award or other awards or the variation operates in conjunction with the award. the relationship between the proposed award or industrial agreement and the other award or awards or the variation and the award must be explained. including how any wage increases are to apply. (c) Where the proposed award or industrial agreement is not to operate in conjunction with another award or awards or the variation is not to operate in conjunction with the award. then the award or variation or industrial agreement should specify the classification in the relevant minimum rates award on which the actual rate prescribed for the key classification in the new award or variation is calculated. (f) The proposed award or variation or industrial agreement should also contain a procedure for its renegotiation at the expiry or its term. (g) The proposed award or variation or industrial agreement is not a device to circunwent the statutory tests \\hich the parties would have to comply with in the event that they had sought to have their agreement certified under Division 2 of Part l l. ln this regard the Commission will have to he satisfied that the proposed award or variation or industrial agreement meets the same tests as apply to the certification of an agreement set down in ss. l 60. 161 and 164. (h) Where the parties to an enterprise agreement reached through negotiations with a single hargaming unit include employees within the federal jurisdiction an agreement covering thosc cmplovccs is submitted for approval through the processes pm\ idcd under that jurisJ1ct1on. (i) Where the pwposed ;mard or variation or ind11stri;li agreement appli1;s to a group of' entcrprisl:s th~ manc·r shall be referred to the Chief Commissioner t,,r consideratiun as a Special Case. A party seeking a Special Case must make an application pursuant to s.17 supported bv material justifying the matter being dealt with as :1 Special Case. lt will then be a lllnlter for the Chid Commissioner t(> decide \,hditL'r 1t 1s to be dealt with by a Full Hench. 3. Role of Arbitration and the Award Safety \et 3.1 A\\anl Safety :\et The C011m1bsion will gcm:rc1lly n,,t arbitrak in frl\ our of c:l.111m, above the satcty net of award wages and conditions. except in certain circumsunccs. !'11is applies to th,ise <'11 paid rates as well a, minimurn rates awards. Existing \\ages c1nd cunditions in the 11:k\ c1nt award, .mard, 01 rndu,tnal agrc:cmcnt/s of the Commission shall be the safety net und..:rpinning cnt:rprisc bargaining. The award safety net may. on applic,ition be re, iewed and adjusted from time: to time'. consistent with 1hc: C\,mmi'>siun's obligatilll1S tn cnqirc tha1 employees arc protected bv awards which ,et fmr anJ enforceable wages and conditions ol' empi,)) mer.t lhJt ,ir-: uminlainc:d at a relevant level. Gcn.:rnlly. the detailed nature and timme. of any adjustments mll he dC'tcm1med in the c0ntext of' specific applications and in the light of prevailing economi1,; .. social ,md imlustrial c ircum,t;l!lCC'S. 3.2 \\'hen an ,\ward/Industrial Agreement :\1a,v he Varied or .\nothcr A\\ard/lndustrial .\grcemcnt '.\lade Without the Claim fking llci,:ardtd us A hove or Below the Safety '\et ln the following circumstances an award 1industrial agreement may. on application. he varied or another award/industrial agreement made without the application hemg regarded as a claim f,x wages and/or conditions above or below the award safety net: I. To include pre\ious State Wage Case increases and the February l 994 increases in accordance with paragrarh .3. 2.1. 2. To incorporate test case standards in accordance with paragraph 3.2.2. 3. To adjust allowann:s and service increments rn accordance with paragraph 3.2.3. 4. To adjust wages pursuant lo \rnrk ,·aluc changes in accordance with parngraph 3.2.4. 5. To reduce standard hours to 38 per \,·cck 111 accordance with paragraph 3.2.5. 6. o ad,iust wages pursuant to Arbitrated Safety '\et \\.age Adjustments ll1 accordance with paragraph 3.2.6 3.2.1 Prnious State \\'age Case Increases and the h'bruar·y 1994 Increase Increases available under previous State Wage Case decisions and the February l 994 decision. such as structural d'ficicnc: ad,1ustments. mm1mum rates adjustments and the arbitrated safoty net adjustment. may be awarded in accordance with the relevant Principles in those decisions. Foll(>WH1g the completion ,,f the mininrnm rate, adju,tmcnt process in ,Ill award m mduslrial agr..:em<.:nl. the Commis,1on ma, consider an applicat10n for the bc1se rate and supplementary payment ll' he combmcd so that the aw;ird or industrial agrcrn-:cnt spccitic" only the wtal 111i11irnurn rate for ear:h cla~silication in the ,mard or industrial Jg_rcement. In considc:ring ,uch an appltcat10n the Commis,ion will. where rck\'cmt. huvc rcr;ard to !he cun.,cyucnces pf granting the applical!on on the lixation ojjumor rates or payment hy results arr:mgerncnts m the award or industrial agr,'enu~nt in question. Further, in ,;ranting ,m:h au applicatiun the Cnmmi,s10H must he sati,Jiecl that prs:v1nus 1391!1 _lfJOC -- 5 of 7 -- QUEENSL\ND GOVERN:vlCNT lNDliSTRIAL GA7J~TTE [ IO February, 1995 unJcnuk1ngs μiv<:n by the p~1rt1cs rc~arding ab~orpt1nn an: cnntiILH..:J md th1.1i ,1 cL.1:1~-.: i:-; ins:_"rt:.:c~ '.:; tl~~ a-,.\~:rd e:r i11 Jt1:-, 1 ~·1·tl ~lL'JT..::11cn' nuting tiU.l tilt: \\,aμe n..:Ltl i \ ilil':'I li1 i.lk' d\'vlHd ,11 iudU'itri<1l agr~CIJh,;nt h.:l\e h..:cn ;..~ist:-11,!i~hc·J in '.h.'C1.'!·danv' \\1 1.h ~h:..· ()c 1 uhi..·r )l)>{'-J \trite Wage C;1,;; <lc~1,inn. 3.'.!.:': Test ( ·a~c ',tandanb ··11~st c:.1~~· \t:lrnl•rd"' t..:!"t.:.ihlishcd and/or r,::i.·i:,.;•_~d t") lht: ('()n1;;1;-.:si,>r n1a: ln_·: iih... orrdrJ1~d i;1 an it\\ tU·lLindu::.tr :ti! d\;tc..:r~icnt. \\'h.;n..: di~ac~Jc:..·r11c111 cxi:ih it'-; ll) \\}h..:ther a ci~nlll 1nvoh·e:-; ~1 tc:,..:t case ..,tunJun..!, thu~.: a'.;~L11:n~ thal 1~ Jc-.;~ :nusl make ~tn.J .it.slit)· .Hl appllcatwn pur,ual!t tu s. ·P. ll 1\ill then n,..: :1 matl~r t(H t/1c l h1ci Cnirmls·.;1nnc~r tc dt.:cid;.; \\ '1.__~•h2r tl·•~ ::h1r1 ,,hot: ls"! h.: dc:.d! ,v1th b\· lull Bcnd1 (a) L:,.i:<1ng ~dl,)\\·~mle~· \1.hi;,_~h Cl'll<tttut-.~ r'. n:-'.mh·1r-"e'1h'11~ o!· exp1.:nscs u1curr\,;d rn:1y re ,id1n:-.lcd frn1n t11n~ l() li!ill? \Viler~ :1rprorri:1t:..~ tu rf•J7'_:,.:l th•-· n:!t..Yanl ch'-mft: In tht.:~ k.:vt..:i l"'f -.,uch i...'\j'cn.:,.e., (h) .\J1usln1~nt of ,.:;...'.sli1-,t2 allL1 \\~H:c .... s v, hicL l·cLit.: t.:1 Aur~~- 01 cunaiUtJth \vl1ich have not chanecd and ot' s.;ct\'icc incrcuH.:nts Jor r11n11ctar:. sal\:ty ~1c1 1--1ct\_''._1::c~- \\"Jll h.: dClL':n11rc:i in ::.id~ c:1, :..; h 1: the Full Bench (kalin? will~ ,he ,afct, net adJtbtmcnt. , ..,-) L,i:-,;ting aHin\·anccs t(ff \\hlch an incrca~e is clairnc<l hccau_-.;t <ii ..::hangi..::,; l:1 the \Vo!·k ur cond'.titJ!b \\ il: be 1..lctcrn1incJ in LL.:corJancc v,·ith th~ rdevant ;1nl,·is!ons c,f the \\ t)rk \/:.ilu~ Cha-,gc:-: p:O\'i~H)fi ufih~..; ~L.11~n1cn! t_:f Princirlc:<..;_ fJ) 7\l"\\ allo'-\at1cc~ t.,1 uyn;1cn-.:;.1t....: l(1r ~he r'--·imbtir-::L·mcnt ol c,pcn;)C:> in(urrcd n1a) be J\\~lrdcd \\ h~rc appri.)pnatc h:1'-·1ng n;~~ffJ l() ~11ci~ c.xrcn-..c"-. tCl \\·her(; chan~'..:;:,:; in the \Ynrk lta\e \IL(:UJn.:J or new \\Ork and cP:1dit~on~ h:h·:.? :1riscn. the <fJL'stiur, pj' a '.1C\\' aHc,\\'~111ce. if :.w::,. :--hJI: he 1.k~cnni1~.:u i,1 ac~n;·da!i\..'i...: \\ ith thl: f;._'k1,-._mt pr;,,\ i_•,;,Jli-" \if n11s Stalf..:n1L· 1:t of Princ1pic:-:. rh..: rcles,·ant nn:\·1~h)Jlj m thi< ..:nnL.:,t nu; he \\'drk V JL1L Cha: SL.'.'- l 1r i 'jr_, t /\.\\elf,_! ;L:Jd LxknsLJn to ;:.n I \i:-;u:1~ i\v,;arJ. \ r, ;\'C\\ Si..'.'..\-'iu.: i·h.:rcnh:ilt.-., rna_y .. ,nl) be d\\:tn.kd tt< ,COlllpCi1',d'.i.: ki? ,:.·h~1n~e:"1 in the \\-·nrk antl/t1r co;1d11i<•n-.: ;.111d \\i!l he '-kl•-~nLinc{i i;1 .ic~nrd.mcc \':i:h tL:.::- relevant rL1rl~ P:· t!1c \\urh. Vt~:u~ (l:a:n:-.:'.-> ~XO\ hlOll of th1:-- .i...:.ta~cn1cnt n1 Prin,...:1pies q:.> S:"tc ,-!i/01runc,, PcnJ'.ng. final:~alizw ~1f the Principk a.'i td •·paid rate:-:'· :1ward ;_ !h;:-i Principk due:-; n.-,t pn.x!wL: cnnsid ...'ra1ion o!' ,; ::-.it~ a!!+J\\.:1nc ...• Jpr'.ic~1ti,\n on a :,;r~ci!lc :)!~C ba:,;i:-, \\h~l\.' it ..::;1n l1c ,bnvi.-n th~tt ,pc..:ial and co1nrc1lin?: circHm:-.tanc(':-,, c-.:i~t \\:hic:1 \\Crc n1.)t c,mtcrnrJ;_;.tc,,.1 \\ ,thin cx1:-,tin~ a\\J.rJ pt\J\·i:-.i(HL..;. .3.'.!..1 Work Yaluc Change, {~i' r_·h,1ngc.-.. in\~;,)!'~; \ ah1c rna;- c.u·i'"lc froff1 cha!t~.t:,, in ~!1•,· n:it 1,lf•.: nf ti1e \\nrk, :-ikdi nrid n:-~rl"'n:-:1h1lity n.:~~uw...~d or the C,"'tHti11lHl'.', ~11;.Ji.:r s,vl:Kh \'- ~ir~.: :s jK'fE)rln.:{J. Ch~n;μ,..:s in \\ ~,;-k_ h~. t!11,.n::,ch ~>, may not k;·;d ltl chanJc in \,·ae~ ra!,cs i he stri\.;t test fur an ::l!-~r'.1t'.,.11~ ;~l \:,;·12'..; r.1·c~~ :\ !i1 :.1t the chc!;1[l' ir: t 1h_' rs~it'_Jr.? ,'_)r l~"lt' \;.f.,rk ~hun;ri ~'df'i...;!.itutc \lll,i: :: ,..:1,.'nific,1tH 111_'.l iJ.dJ;\i:Jn it) \,nrk ,-,.. ,,1.i'!,_'li~'.;J'''l:- d' rn '.\:Hrant fl;i~ Cli..'::1tiut·1 !)i'd 'W\\' .__.J(i~·:,ifil'd!it\~1 rir ~.p;r~r:ir:t'. ~n ~1 !ii~L,:t c:a.,,:--i:~\_.ai.1 1.;n. ln aJc!:ti,__.)L tt1 rr-~ct1:1~; th1': :l;:·-t a r~irty n~aklf:'.0, a \',·ork \ .d.1t apr1!JCati\)Ji \,;iii ilCL'r.i lt.1 jlbtif: ar:} chJi1~1l: tu \1."ctL'.,I..' j'l_~t?li\ itJL'C.. 1 L:i1 u~i.c:ht n~.-:,;lt n;.,t nnly \\l~li;n the rclc\ ;~n' ;H1•.:r•i;!i ·.i,•.,1rd ~11,...'>-.d:c:..~ti,H, sLrL.cL ...n~ b 1.• l .i.l'--.~• d~.:.1i:ht ,.,;\:~c:11..l ...:L.;, ,1i~culi.,_1i;:,.: 1u which that structure is related. Then: must be no likelihood or \\':lt1 c "!capfrogTing .. a;ising nut nt'changcs in rel:;ti,:l' posilion. l"•w,c arc the only circurn,Urncc, i11 w!Jich r:itc, rnav he altered n:: the ?rnunJ ,if,,o,k v:,!t.c .mu the altc1cu r:,lc:s .11;1\ he :ipplicd onh to cmpt,l\CCS whose ,,ork has chani::cd in accordance with this pn)\·1~ior1 (hJ \V!wre c1 new or drnng,·d ,,:ork ju,;tifying a hig:h:r rate i•: pcrl~)n11~d only fri\1n ti;ri...~ to tin1e by fh.T~Oll'.-, 1..:~n c1-cG h) i.l parl1wlar cla,s1tirnt1on or where it 1s pcrfr,rmcd onl\ hv :,ome' lll. the iJ<.:rs,m, ..:,'\ crcd h; the d.is,ilic;1tion. ,u~IJ new or changed \COT"K ,hnuld be wmpensatcd h, a spect:Ii allowance \\hich is p::) :,h'e only \\hen t!i(' 1,c1, nr ch:nged \\nrk i•; pc·rti,rmcd by :: parU<:ul"r ernp!u) ,·c an.I nu1 b;, in CJ cas111μ die· rale lnr the cl:i:..;silii.''11:ion r~~ a \\huk (.:) I he time from whid1 work \illuc diangcs :m ,mard shoul<l be n1·.2,i:.t:rcd i..;, 1.mlc;~ G:'\tr,1ordi11:1r:: circurn\l:mces \:an be dt:111011,tratcd ll1 \pc,.:iul Case proc,:ed111μ,;. the date of upcrallon qf ,he' scc,.ind ,trnctural dfo,:icncy :iJjumnrnt .i!lnwahk trncki th.: October l '!8') Stcitt: Wa,>c.; Ca,e dcci,ion. (d) ( ..ir,.. :~huuld ht: c;-...-.;r-,;i'.:t:J lo c11sur~ th~tt d1~1ng(:s \\hidi \\·crt: or -::1ou!d iwv,, bc.;en wkcn imo account in any pre\ ious \\ork value :.ldju·..;t:nL~nt~ nr in ;·i ~in:ctural efficiency ('':crcise ;1rl~ not included in an:, work e,·alu,1t1on under this prO\ 1siPn kl \\ here :lie 1csh spee1ficd in (a) arc met. an a,ss.:ssrncnt wiil have to he n;;idc a.s to hmv that alteration should k measured in mnnev terms. Such assessment should normally he hase<l on the ;1re,·1uus \\O~k requirements. the \\age previously fixed for the ,1,lrk :m<l the n,1turc anJ extent of the change ll7 ,,,irk. (I) ·1 he expression ''1l;e cowl:11,ms under 11ilich rhc Hork. i., fJCrjnm:e,f' relates h> the ennronmcnt in which the work is done. {~~) !"he ('on1111ission should guard against contriY~d ciassili\.'.ations :u:d nYt.::rcb:..;-._ift...:ation nfjoh~. l\n} change~ in the nature of the \\Prk. s\.,jl] and n.'.sp<,nsibilit:, :·cs.Juircd or ~!lL cu:H..1itior:.s und:r \\ liid1 the \\Ork i:-; pcrfurmcd. taken intu accou;1l in assessing an increase under any other rr:,,·isiun o( tins Statcmc'nt ,if I'r:ncipks, shall not he t:d-:cn ir:to dCl.'~1unt in ;_my clai1n urn.kr thi'-i pro\ i'.-.inn .3.2.5 Standard Hours '.n ~1rTn,, :nt:- Jny apr1ilati()~1 t,_, reduce s~trn:L1rr_! }-wur:; l1· ]8 per \\coch.. the Cumni:,si,lll ,huuld satish itscll" that 1hc cost impact is ~nini111iscd 3.2.h \d1itrntcd Safct, '\rt\\ age Adjustments 111 accurc1ancc \,ill, ! ,,.,,embci !994 State Wage Case Interim ,:l:ci'linn ,.:nd 1.. hc 2P Dc-cctr:b~r 1994 ~late \\'ag.c Ca'.->C DL'ClSidn 1n1rir1tm1 rates and paid rate:,; d\\·ard~ rnay be \ ;_~ricd to include t\,·o S8 per '-' ed. arbilratcd ,akl~ net :idju,t:ncn!, s11b1ect tn the fo!lnwl11<.:.· Firsr. lrhilrutl'ri Sull'll :\et. /dju.1/me111 ,:q/1) .·\, irul'> 110 1.:,1Jlicr tl1an 7 ,ovcrnncr l'/(J.f :mard, and ;11dw~tri,1' agn..-cn1c11ft; may. Pn app 1 icat1nn, be var'.cd tn pr\.J\ ;d;..: J i"iL~t SS per '.\cck arbitratcl.i ~afcty ncl JdJUSlllh.:nt t~1r en1plnyce::. \Vhn havL~ not received a \\t·ige nH'reasc a..:: ;1 : c0,u'.t ,,f ,~ntcrpn:,e h::rgainins s111cc I Fchru,u:, ! 992 (ii) 1\t tht.: t;rne ..:·1ch an c1~1rlic,1~inn is hca:d th~ Cnmrr1i~c.:inn \\·ill ; :ii,-.;~ \'.'ith tLc r•urtics th1.: dlilli1H11..:d i111rlcm~ntaUon of Lh~ I JliO I I I)()( JO February. 19951 QUEENSLAND GOVERNME.''H INDL1STRIAL GAZETTE 331 an-:ml restrnduring prngr.irn cummc11ccd 1n 198'! :md measures taken and/or pruppscd to further ,.,ncoun,gc cnkrprisc barg.aininf.. \Vh1k such action ts not a prccon<lit1011 to the grn11ti11μ of the· safety net adjustment it rnu:,t he pur,ucd (11i) Where the .suppkn1cnl,ir'> paymen1 111 an award h,1s ;dread, been , :tried lr,r the S8 per wed-. arbitrated ,:il"ct) net adjuwm:nt pursuant to tlw l _QOJLUclr_yJ9_9:l Bc_yi.\;\\:" dcci:,1,in. the lc,cl of supplemcntar:, p,1ymrnt will be reduced hy ~8 per ,wck ;it the "rnie time: as ihe !Jrst ,irbitr:1te<l ,at,·1_v net adjustment pw, ided for in this decisi,,r1 ><; in,ericd. ( ·011scquc111ial a111end111c111:-: lo cl:1usc.s in:;crtcd a" a result ot the I cbruar;_ 1994 Re\ 1r,;w_ Jcc1smn will he ncccssar, and the tolkl\\rnμ claw;e must he inserkd 1nt1, the a"ard or industrial agre.:rncnt: ·The: rate., ,,r pd) in this 1\\\c!ld or lndustri,il l\grc·c1nc·111 include Ilic first 'i,8 rcr week arbitrated :,;ifctv 11c1 adj,1st:ncnt pa\ able unJcr the 0\!.tJ.;lllh.P:... J 9j),1 _Slal,; _1,\'su;~ _<..itci.C (Jc_Ql;,_J(ll1, increases made under pre, HHIS Sti.ltc \I, aμc (_ ase principil:s or under the c11rrclll St:Jternent of l'rin,,1pl,·, :irrc 11t1I to be 1bccl to uff,ct arbitrated ,;;tfct_v n"1 ad_;ustn1c11t., ·1 hi, first SX per \\l'ck arbitrated s:dcl\ ne't :idj11stnwnt 111,,v be ufE,ct lo the c.,tcnt of :my other ,,age incrca,c. whether an award increase;. an ovi.:ra,,ard rayn1r,;11t or an 1ncn:l1sc h~ way of enterprise arrangement. rcceivc<l ,1nce I February 1992. Pre Fehnrar_v 1992 o,eraward arrangements arc t<1 he applie<l accor<lmg to their lcrms.··. Second .·1rb1rra1ed Sa/er_i· .\ei .·1d;11.1rme111 (h)(i) lnterprise level: a secon<l S8 per \\cek arhttrakd safely net a<ljustmcnt will be mail able. at cnterprisc Inc!. lrnm no earlier than 7 :--;o,crnber 199-l. suhject to the foli(1\ving tests: (;\) that the :mar<l or industrial a;_,rcement b,is bcc.:n \ aried for the first S8 per week sakt\ net aJ_justmcnt: (BJ that the un1tn1 applicant bas genuinely sought to reach an agreement \\ 1th th,; emplo\ er but lu, been un,uccessful: (CJ that there i, no likelilwo<l that. \\ithin a 1·casonable period. further conciliation or negotiation \\ iii result in an agreement CO\ cring the cn1ploycc:-; concerned: ( ll) that the rn1plo) ccs concerned h:i, c not rccci\cd the benefit of an arhitratcd safety ni.:t adjuslln•...'.lll in the pre, ious 6 month,: :md (l· J that the amount of the arbitrated oafct) net a<l_iustnicnt i, reduced to the extent of an, ,,age increase a~ a result of agrccn1cnts rcachcJ ut enterprise level since I h:bruary I (J92. insofar as that \\ age increase has not pre\'iousl) been uscJ ll) offset an arbitrated safety ncl adjustment. ( i1) 1", \)_H[d_oL iJJc!J1:iJri;1L ,!ffs\Jll.\-'Ilt lc~,cJ a :-ce·on<l S8 p,·r \\ cd ,trbitra1c<l .,afctv net adju:,trncnl ,, ill be a\ ailabk. at :mar<l or m<lustrial agreement lc\el. frorn 1rn earlier tlrnn 8 \'l,l\ I 'N5. subject to the fiillowinr 1c,.h· L•\) 1h,1t the award or industrial ,1erccmc11I has been varied f;ll the lir:,t SR pu· \'>Cek ,;alct\ 11cl ad1ustmcnt: 151725-25 (Bj tliat at k:1,t 6 11,umlr, Im,, elapsed bn,,ccn the i1bt and ~ccon<l Jv,ard.'industnal agreement level 'i,8 per \\c~k s.1tc1y net increases: (( \ that the a,, :1rd ha, hr.:cn varicd 1o il'eludc enterrrise !,c\ibilit'.I \\ilh ,cc:tioil, .14, and 1-!6 oi"tlK Act • tl11,, le.,t 10 not re-iuirc<l 1 r the ac.!_iustmcnt :s sought for an industrial Uf!t-!cment: (DJ tltat a prngrdm ot <Ji"'l~·11~~io11:, hct\\t:Cli 11:e J\1 ard/indu,trial '1grce1ncnt p,1rtic, ha, t,cen cstdb:1,kd to Je,tl \\ith the re• It..:\\ Oi tlic a,rnrd/Jnduslnai agrern1ent pursumll tn s,;ctmn 150, \\ ith particulnr :itt~r:ti1)t1 tn: ()) the' cffcct1ve !Is(' ofrnajonty clause,· and ( 3) the implementation or a process for testing the rc+•,·ancc pf •lw aw1rrl ;1t lhc enterprise Jc,·d • thi:..; rcquirL~111c:nt. i~ not JlCl'C~\ary ni regard to indu:,lria1 atr..:c1n~nts FOR\I OF ORDERS (c) (1) J\ saiel: net ad_iustmrnt at cntcrrnsc lnel ,h,1uld be specified in an appcn<lix to the award or the in<lustrial agreement if the in<lustrial agreement applies to multiple enterprises. ( 1i) J\ salcty net a<liuotmcnt at award or mdustrial agn;emcnt level should specify a separate "arbitratc<l safety net" amount for each clas,:lication in the award. Where the minimum rate, adju,tmcnt process in ,m award nr industrial ac'rcerncnt lra.; been completed. the (ornmiss1on may consi<ler an appltca1ion IPr the base rate. supplcn1entary ra} rnent and arbitratt:d safety net adjustment lo he combined so that the av,ard or in<lustrial agreement specific, only the total rrnnimum rate for each classification. :;1) Where the minimum rates a<ljustmcnt process has not been completed. thL: safety net adjustment may be taken into account in detenrnning the size and phasing in of a 1ninin1tun rate~ adjust1ncnt. (:,) i\n wdcr pro\i<ling for the first Sk per \\cck arbitrated safe:y net adjustment shall a,so provide for the relevant olEetting clause to 11c inserted into the award nr indus1rial agreement (,ce 3 2.6(a)(1ii1' .3.3 \faking and \"a1·ying an .\Hard AhO\c or Below the Safety :\et Generali} an appiieation to make or vary :1 minimum or paid rates ,mdrd 1,,1 ,,ages a11,Uur conditiuns abm e cir h~lo\\ the award ,a(ct_\' 11ct ,hall he· 1-ei'erred tn •he Cliief Commi.>Si,mcr fiJr consiJcntirm ;1s a Special Ca,,c. A panv ,ei.:king d Spcci.il Ca,e mus! ma\..e an applicati(in pursua111 to s +7 ,upp(,rteJ by material rnqify11w the matter being dealt with :is a Spc-:ral Cusc. lt '.viii thc:r, he J m,Jttcr for the Chief Cornmissioncr to uc~idc whether it is to be dealt with by a Ftdl Hench. Fxcc:pti,1:1s tn th's process arc app1ications wl:ich fall \\ !thin 1h~ pn,;\·i~H.Hl~ in the StaLcirh.:nl \Jf Pi inc~pk:·-; ck;iling \-\itl1 d Consent ,\ ward. l11dus1rwl "-l'recment nr r\ \Ulrd \"iniatlon to Give l:llcct lo :m L11krprisc Agreement Jnj \\ itli d 1-i:-st ;\ war<l ,mJ Lxtensicrn to an Existing :\w(cro. l:O'IGI_LDOC -- 6 of 7 -- 332 QU EENSLAND GOYER MENT I DUSTRIAL GAZETT I JO February, 1995 In considering an appl ica t ion to make or vary a pa id rates award for wages and/or co nditions above or below t he award safety ne t. the Co mrn ission must ensure that any such paid rates award sets "fo ir and enforceable wages and co nditi ons of employment th at an; maintained at a relevant level" (s . 13 l) ( I} Cons idera ti on which may b relevan t in determi ni ng such wages and or cond itions in a paid rntc~ award are: (a) Ens ming. it is sui tc<l to the efficient pe r fon11ancc of work according to the ne ed s of the part icu la r in d us tries an<l enterprises, wh il e em ployees' ttllc rests are also properly take n into accou nt : (b) The market and the extent of restructuring and a~sociated efficiency improvement s; (c) That a range or ra t e. may be introduc.:d for c.: lass ifi ca tions in th e award ; Id) Ski ll an d respons ibil it y: (e) Re cruitment and retent ion: If) TI1 e commi tm ent of Lhe pa ni es at both nat ional and c-0rpora1e level : fg) That rates fixed do no t lead to wage adju stmen ts else where : (h) That in a re view of a paid rates award apply ing to a sing le elllcrprise/employer or a number of en terprises/e mpl oyers. consideration ,hou ld be given lO in ternal relativities. ii' necessa ry. by a process o l' C()llcct i\'C review of ~II the pa id rates awards applying only to the particular enterprise/employer or enterprises/employers. Relev ant factors in such a re\'iew ~re the particular ci rcu mstanc es o f tbe emerpriselcmploycr nr e nt .:rpdscs/e mpl oyers. inclu din<> the pa11i cular market: and (i) 17,ai reliance 011 nexu it ~If pro\ ides no j ust i fi ca tion for a pa id ra tes adj ustment (2 Wh ere the m~rkct is a consideration th e t'o ll owing s hou ld app ly: (a) In the fir t insta nce . before any steps are wkcn 10 obwin infonnation about the market. ap propriate classific at ions and in te rn al rel at iv ities should ex ist or be set fo r t he wo rkplace or sector conccmcd on t he basis of sk ill and responsi t>i li t): (b) arket infonnation shou ld not be used to altc.:r th1: 1ntcrral rclati\ it i1:s already set withou t gooJ m,J suflitienl reason and the onus must l ie on a ny pat1y seeking to alt.:r th ose rel ativities to demonstrate good and suflicient ground, ltl r al taat ion: (c) In some case.- the relevant rmirkt:t \, ill be the local geographical market. although in o th er case nat ional marke t considerations wi ll be rel evan t and the market ma~ · in clude: the pu bl ic sector: (d) When using infomiation about market rates of pay. rnrc mu st be tak ·n to ensure that t he ra tes examined ha,·c b.:en se t for elassiti at ions w hi ch are comparable and thut cnnJi ti ons of cmrloymenl have been obji:ctivd) tak ,;n intn acc,,unt: and (cJ 11 1 ohrnin i ng infomw ti on abou t nrnrktt rn t ,s. t he rdc vmll considerat ion is the level iif ac:Lua l ra t es paid ,wt the amount~ or any increases in ra tes. 3.-1 Firs t Awar d and Extension to an Existing Aw:ffd ( I) The following. ~hal l appl) I() the making of i.l fir~ t a\\'ar<l and an t xte nsion to an exis tin g award: (a) Where 1hc circumswnces requi re, a Vir, Laward " ·i ll be maJc as Qll inte rim award. In making an inter im award the long es tablished pri ncip les shall apply. That ts . prima lacic the ma in considcrJ ti on is the c~isting rutes and w nd itions . It is open to the parties to arg t1e for exceptions to t h.:: prima facic po si t ion "here change. we re rec ent ly made tin ila1 erally to pre-existing rates and co nditions and there was no t genui ne consent to su ch changes. other than chang.:s made by th.: Quccn, land Indus t ria l Re la ti ons Comm is ion or Court . (h} In the maki ng oi a first award. oll1cr than (l n inte rim award. t he ma in considcr:itioll sh :1 11 he that the a "ard mee t, the need., of the pan icular industry or t!n tcrprise wh il e ensu rin g that emp loyees' interes ts arc al so prope r! ) t;1kc11 into account. Structur.i l cfJicienc) considerations shall ap ply in the nuik ing of such an award . (c) In the extension of an exisling m,ard to nc\, \rnrk or tn a\\'ard• free work the ra!Cs a ppl icahlc to such work will he assessed hy reference 10 th e value of work alrc~d y con:rcd hy the a"w d. provid ing st ru cwral cfticicncy con. id crations incluJing lhe mi ni mum rates adjustment pro"isions when: rdeva111 ha ve bee n app lied to the award. (<l) Ad ditional rnatkrs which must be considered when making a fi rst pai d rates award(whetbcr inte rim or not} include: ( i} wh.:thcr the wages and ,;onditions of employment of the employees conccm d have customa ril y been dc termin-:d hy a paid ra tes award : (i i) the ap propriate parties to th..: ,iward be ar ing in mind that a 1 ilid rntcs al\'ard is most arprnpr iatcly framed 011 th e ba:is of li1111 t ed coverage: (i ii) th at such an award shou ld g.:ncra l ly Cll\'Cr all important llspccts of l hc c rnp loymcn t rc l.1t ionship co nsidered appropria te fo r mrnrd rc gul;iti<,11 1-lowcvcr. the precise con ten t a nd con:ragc uf a paid rates award w il l be affrctcd h) the cnmprchcn: ivencs 01 · 1:tn ) ccrtili.:d ag reement or cntcrpri :; c llcxibili ly agrt:emen t app lying in wnj unct ion wit h th e award and whether or not such an awatd has r'esu lted from an ex..:rc i~c of the Co 1nr11 iss io n', p<mc rs under s. 212: ( i1·) that wages and cond11ions ,lf cmp lo y111ent in a paid rates award arc to he fair and c11 forcca blt: a nd rna imained at .i rdc, anl leve l. Co n s1dcn11ions wh id1 ma) he rcl c\'~llt to th.:: dc tcm1imnio11 of such w~gcs and ,·onditio n. art•: (A) ensuring it 1s sui ted to the cflicient pcrlom, an cc of wo rk acc\ird ing to the needs of the p,1rlicular ind ustri es and enterprises. \l'hilc cmployccs' inH:rc,t, are al so prn pc:rly t,,k cn int o accoun t. (B} th e market an d the cx tcn t nr re,1rue tu ri 11 g ll nd associ ::itc:d ci'ficicncy i rnp rO\ ·cmcn ts: (C) that a nm g.: of r.ne, may he i111.r ciduccd fi: 1r cl.i~~i li cations in the a11ard: (DJ , ki II and responsib ility: (El recruitment unJ rctt: ntion: 13901_ 1 DOC I O February, 1995 J QUEENS LAND GOVERNMENT [NDUSTR1AL GAZETTE ( F} the com mitme nt of th~ pa rti es al both nat ional and co rp orate level: mid (G) l ha t the raic, lixcd do not le.id to ,-age adj uslrm:n t~ elsewhere: (\') thal the a1Vard shou ld spccil'y the cl as ilica tion prc,crihe d in t he rclc\'a nt m in imum rat es awar r.l on wh ich the paid r,1le prc s.: ri bcu li:ir th e J...e y clii;;sili <:a tion m the award is ca lcu lated: and (vi) t he need ti.)r the parties to give ,1 rnmm iuncnt Lhnt t hey wi ll mainta in thc in tegri ty of the paid rates ,l\\ard. (The Comm ission may co nvert into ~ minim um rates award a paid r.1 tes mvanl whic.:h ceases to be maint,t ined as a tru e pa id rn tcs award. ThL: conversion of a lapsed raid rates award into a min imum rates award wi ll involve the eval uation of classi ti c ;i t ion s in it h)' comparison wi th si milar -.:la~s ilications in oLh.:r rn ini rnt,m r·a tL'S ,1ward s). (2) Where th e market is a considerat ion the followi ng should ap ply: (a) In tbc first instance, before a ny steps arc takc 11 to ,lbta i,1 infnirna ti on ahout the market. appropriate class ilications and internal relativi t ies shou ld ex ist or be set for the workplace or . cctor concerned on th e basis of s ki ll and responsibility: (hJ ~1arkct i nfo rmation .,hould n,)t he used tu allcr the internal re lati vities already se t withtHl t good and suflicicnL n:a,on a11J the onus must lie on any party scck i r1g to alle r those relativ ities to dcmonstn,te g1,od a nd su rlicicn i gro u11ds fo r alteraiion : (c) In so me case, the rcle" an t market will he t he local geographical markd. although 111 o th er cases national market considerations will be relevant and th e marl...e t may include th e puh li sector: (d) \\'hen using in fo rmat ion ahnut ma rk et r.i tcs of pay. care mu ~t be taken to en su re that the.: rates examined ha \·e hccn se t for classification wh ich arc comparable and th at condit ions ol cmpl11vm~ nt have been onjcctivcly taken into account: and (i.:) [n nh1a i11i 11g i11fnnna ti on about 111ark1: ! r at~s . th e rclc,a nl co11s itlcrat ion is the level or ac t ual rnt~s paid no t t he amounts of an) incre ase$ in rates. 3.S ~:conomil" I nc:tp:u ·ity 1\n) r.:~po11dc r11 or group of respondents to an a ,1 ard may app ly to 1·edl1Ce and /or pnstponc the app li cmion 01" ml) in erca.'c in la bou r cns b dctcm1incd under this S1:1 1c n1e11t of Pr inciple, nn the gwund or , er) serious o r extreme economic adwrs it , Th.: merit of such app li c:ation shal l lie dete rm ined in the lighl of t he pm1icular circu,mtanccs L\f c~ch case .ind any material n:l :iLin~ 1hcre to sh~II be ri gorou~ly te sted . /\ party maki nl;! such an app lt ca t ton must make an d .i u,1 i (1 an app lication pursua nt to, . -17. 11 w ill tllen be a ma tte r l~lr the Chief Comm i~ sione r to deci de whether it should be dealt with bv a Ful l llcncb. • Ourntion T hi s SWtcmcm of l'nncipk s is i11 tcndcu to nr,c ra te unt il I November 1995 . 151 725- 26 333 -- 7 of 7 --