Commissioner for Railways v Australian Railways Union of Employees, Queensland Branch [1991] QIRC 28 (1991) 136 QGIG 389

388 QU EENSLAND GOVERNMENT IND US TR IA L GAZETTE [2 March, 1991 2 March, 199 l] I QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE 389 QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION Industrial Relations Act 1990 s. 2.2(3)(d)(i) - application for interpretation Commissioner for Railways AND Australian Railways Un ion of Employees, Queensland Branch (No. B495 of 1990) RA ILWAY AWARD - STATE COMMISSIONER ASHWOOD 14 February 1991 Interpretation - Shunt er - Townsville -- Rostcred Day Off - Overtime - Employee not entitled to be paid overtime for part of shi ft - 24 hour period given for rostcred day off - Decision of Railway Interpreter is Correct. INTERPRETATION This matter came before the Commission pursuant lo a reference under clause 85(2) of the Railway Award - State. The question put and the decision of the (Rail way) Interpreter were as fo ll ows:- "Ques1ion (Submitted by Australian Railways Union) A Shunter stationed at Townsville was rostered to finish duty on Sunday 27th August 1989 at 8.00 p.m. The roster working pertaining to the Shunter as posted on Friday 25th August 1989 showed his rostered day otf as being Monday 28th August 1989. Such roster sheet al so showed him working from 8.00 p.m. until 4.00 a.m. Tuesday of that particular week and this was deemed to be part of his normal weeks rostered working. The question is now posed to the effect that as his rostered day off as posted, was Monday 28th August 1989 and in fact he was required to commence duty at 8.00 p.m. on tha t day, should the time worked from 8.00 p. m. until I 2 mid- night on Monday 28th August 1989 be paid for al overtime rates in accordance with the provisions of clause 86(30)(c) of that Award. Is this contenti on correct? Answer No. The Unions contention is incon·ect. In the circumstances where rostered shifts are worked on either side of midnight, a day is recognised as being the twen ty four hour period immediately following a shift. Consequently it follows that the rostercd day off for employ- ees who are working this type of roster, cannot be confined to the hours of midnight 10 midnight on the one day. ". Jn submissions to the Commission the Australian Railways Union of Employees, Queensland Branch disagreed wi th the answer given by the (Railway) Interpreter and re ferred to a Railway Award Interpretation given by this Comm ission at 79 QGlG 605-6 where quest ions had been raised as to the definition of "day" in the Railway Industry. It should be noted t hat the word "day" is not defined in the said Award. The Union claimed that the issue in the matter related to whether the emp lo yee having been require.d to take his rostered day off from 8.00 p.m. on Sunday unt il 8.00 p.m. on Monday could be said to have his rostered day off in the same week. The basis for raising this proposition was, in the words of the Un ion, "it has lo ng been held for a range of reasons that the Rail way Week commences on each Monday and concludes on Sunday" (transcript page 4). Reference was also made by the Union to clause 63(22) of the instant Award wherein, in relation to certain maintenance sect.ion employees. a specific definition of "Week" indicates that a "week" shall mean from Monday to Sunday, both days included. Finally the Union submitted that in their vie w that in accordance with the provisions of clause 86(30)(c) of the Award the employee concerned should be paid overtime for the period outside of the week during which he should have received "a full rostered day otr'. -- 1 of 2 -- ... 390 QUEENSLAND GOVERNM EN T INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE In submissions for the Railway Commissioner the follov.fog obser- vati on was made:- ''Essentially it is about whether a day can be regarded as a 24 hour period for some employees of Queensland Railways because of the unique nature of the industry or what is regularly accepted as a day as being the 24 hour period between midnight to midnight on the following day for all employees." (Transcript page 5) . The Commission was advised that following the Interpretation reported in 79 QGIG, to which previous reference has been made, Policy Decisions were taken by Queensland Railways as to the meaning of"day" in the conte xt of its use in the Railway Industry. Having studied the material placed before the Commission I am of the opinion that the answer given by the (Railway) Interpreter is correct bearing in mind the requirements of the Railway Industry for "round the clock" oi:ierations and the need for shifts being worked "on either side ol midnight". The emp loyee in question was rostered off for twenty-four hours and in my view is not entitl ed to payment at overtime rat es for work performed between 8.00 p.m. and 12 midnight on Monday 28 August 1989. I interpret the matter as set out above. G .M . ASHWOOD. Commissioner. Appearances:- Mr L. Crofton for the Australian Railways Union of Employees. Queensland Branch. Mr R. Best as the Railway Interpreter, with him Mr G. George. Operative Date: N/A Interpretation - clause 86(30)(c) - Overtime on ros1ered day off (2 March, 1991 2 March, 1991 ] QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZETTE 391 -- 2 of 2 --