Australian Railways Union of Employees Queensland Branch v Queensland Railways [1992] ICQ 1 (1992) 139 QGIG 738

738 QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE [27 March, 1992 THE rNDUSTRlAL COURT OF QUEENSLA D Industrial Relations Act /990 -1 991 s. 9.2(2) - appeal from decision of industrial commission Australian Rai lwa ys Union of Empl oy ees Queensland Branch AN D Queensland Railways (No. CJ of 1991 ) RAILW AY AWA RD - ST ATE J USTICE MOYNIHAN, PRESIDENT 18 March 1992 Appeal - Inter pretation - Railway Award - State - Travel Allowance - Travel Time - Appeal Dismissed. J UDG MENT This is an appeal from a decision of the Industrial Relations Commission pursuant 10 a reference under clause 85(2) of the Railway Award - State (" 'the Award''). The Commission upheld a decision of the Railway Interpreter in the following circumstances. The Appellant submitted a question in respect of a shunter rostercd 10 work at a station caUed CaUe mondah six kilometres from Gladstone. T he sh unter was obliged to travel past Gladstone Ra il wa y Station 10 go fr om his place of residence to Callemondah Station. It was contended be was entitled 10 be paid traYelling time 10 and fr om Gladstone Station to Callemondah Statio n. The contention was rejected by the Interpret er and the Co mmission, hence this appea l. Clause 82(1)(a) of tbc Award provides that - " Emplo}ees relieving or temporarily workinJ at a place not exceedi ng a radius of 8 kilometres from their h ome station who do not require to reside away fr om home shall not be e ~_titled to receive allowances prescribed by this Oause • • Oause 82 is headed ·•Travelling AUowances". Clause 83 is headed 'Travelling Time" and subclau sc (I) provides - -- w aies employees and Passenger Attendants and Passenger Services Supervisors travelling long distances to or from 1h eir du ties shall be allowed 8 h ou rs' pay for every twenty- four hours' uavclling . .. " . Th ere seems to me to be merit in the Ap pellant's submission that a claim to be paid travelling time is not met by reference to clause 82 which deals ""; 1h the pa}ment of travelling allowances. The appellant relics on clause 83 of the Award which deals with travelling time. It provides th at - --wa,.es employees and Passenger Attendants and Passenger Services Supervisors travelling long distances 10 or fr om their duties shall be allowed . . . ••. I do not think tha t the present circumstances satisfy the requirement of ·'travcllinf, long distances". Refe.rcn ce was made to a number of previous interpretations. Each of them however must tum on th ei r ow n facts. So far as case fo r Interpretation 95 46 - Payment for Tr.ivelling Time - Ipswich Boilermaker Weld er 1959 (30 September) Q. I. G. 1001 is concerned, assuming the Awa rd was th en m the same terms, the decision is understandable onl} on the basis that it was co nclud ed that the facts of that case satisfied the reQuirement of "travelling long distances to or from dut ies" . That was a conclusion which was arguably. although in my view somewhat dubiously, open on the facts of that case. As I have indicated however it does not seem to me to be open on the facts of this case. This is the fac tual precondition to entitlement under the clause 1s not established. It follows that in my view the outcome of the proceedings before the Industrial Commission was correc t albeit correct for reasons different from those reHed on by the Commission. Th e appeal is dismissed. Dated this eighteenth day of March. 1992 . Appearances:- Mr GJ . Sorensen fo r Chief Executive, Queensland Railways. Mr O. Doogan fo r Au stra lian Railways Union of Employees Queensland Branch. Operative Date: N/ A Appeal - A.R.U. v. Queensland Railwa ys M. P. MOYNIHAN, President. 27 March, I 992] QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTR IAL GAZETTE 739 -- 1 of 1 --