Atco Industries (Aust) Pty Ltd v Workers' Compensation Board of Queensland [1990] ICQ 17 (1990) 135 QGIG 1123

1122 QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL GAZE TT E [22 December, 1990 22 December, 1990] QUEENSLAND GOVER NMENT INDUSTR I AL GAZETTE 1123 QUEENSLAND lNDUSTRlAL COURT INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT 1990 1-Vorkers' Compensaiion Act 1916- 1988 s. 13{2) - appeal from decision of Indus trial Mag is trate Atco Industries (Aust.) Pty. Ltd. AND Workers' Compensa tion Board of Queensland ( No. C32 of 1990) JUSTICE MOYNJHA1', PRESIDENT 30 November l 990 Appea l - Workers· Compensation - Industry - Judgrnent - Magistrale was Correct in Conc lud ing Employe r 's I ndust ry or Business was Most Accura tely Described as Being ".Building Con- struction" -- Appeal Dismissed - Employer :o Pay Premium '\ ecordingl y. REPO RT ON J UDGMENT In givin$ hi s Judgment from the Bench on 30 No,·ember 1990, the Presid ent said:- "Thi~ is an appeal from a decision of an Industrial Magistrate dismissing an objection u nder Regulation 14 of the Workers' Compensa tion Kegulat ions , the objection being to a determination bv th e Board of an employer's industry o r business in ierms of a particular ca tegory of industry or business for the purpose of strik ing the premium payable to the Board. The Board de term ined to re-classify the appellant's business so as to place it under the ' building construction· category within the Schedule of Rates, the relevant items being numbers J 52004 an d those immediately following. Previously the classification had been in respect of an item under the table of rates und er the heading 'M ot or Trade'. the item number being 344006, that being a ref- erence to · mo t or body builders. repairers, panel beaters, spray painters (incl uding bus bodies and ca ravans)' , and other matters not n1ateria l to consideration here. Pursuant to clause 1(4) of the second schedule, schedu le of rates, the Board was required to determ ine a n employer's industry or business ' in such manner as mos t accurately describes the employ- er's ind ustrv or business in accordance wi th the classi fi cations of industries a'nct businesses appea ri ng in colu mn 2' of the t ab le. T he appellant manufaclUred pre-fabricated st ruc tures for use in accommodati on and storage. The units were tra nsponahle e ither b) li ft ing them by means of lifting points that were provided and placing th em o n a vehicle or, in some cases, because the y had whee ls wh ich pcrmi 11ed them to be towed, by a motor vehicle. Some 98 per cent of the units we re used for industria l purposes, the balance being used in caravan parks and th e like. There is a good deal of evidence as to the manufacturing processes involved, and an appreciation of it can be had by looking at a number of photographs which were put into ev idence before the Industrial Magistrate. l do not find it necessary 10 go throu~h the det ai ls of the manufacturing processes. It is l th ink sufficient for present purposes to say that the end r esult was production of something which had all the attributes of a bu il d i ng: it had a 0oor, walls and a ceiling: it had, where it was appropriate, windows and doors fitted; again. where it was appropriate there was provision for plumbing and electricity; if it was appropriate to have internal fitt ings necessitating cabin et-making work , then a cabinet-maker or cabinet-makers carried out the work. The work, insofar as it was canied out by employees of the appellant, it is true, was carried out by largely unskilled wo rkers. That result was achievable because the more skilled work was sub- contracted out. Perhaps one or two aspects of the construction are worth men- ttonmg. There were, for example, floor boards attached to the J01s 1s. The floor consisted of a special kind of chip board, manu- fac tured chip board. There was vinyl or linoleum adhered to the flfioor. The walls were fixed into the floor, with internal sheeting lied to a frame. plywood sheeting attached to the frame - and $0 1t goes. The activit ies carried out by the uns ki lled labour sound to me very mu ch in the ca tegorv of work described in item numbe r 152004 where it refers to. 1 fixers of all types of building sheeting a nd building boards (internal and external)'. I am not persuaded that that particular reference should be read to app ly the description on ly to such operations as involve lhe use of what might be described as 'skilled fixers'. Be t hat as it may, there seems to me 10 be litt le doubt that the Board and the Industrial Magistrate were co rrect in concluding tha t the employer's industry or business was mos t accurately described in t erms of the classification o f industries and businesses referring to building cons tru ction and. notably perhaps the aspect of the item to which I have referred. The contending c lassi fi cation was the classification to which I previously re ferred under the heading o f'Mo tor Trade'. The act iv- ities engaged in by the appellan t have, to m y mind, little in common with the bulk of the activities canvassed under that heading. It is true t hat the uni ts constructed by the appellant were transportable. but that was for the purpose of moving them from one site 10 the other rather than for the son of mobi litv that seems to be in herent in the other matters canvassed under ·the m oto r trade aspect of the matter. lt therefore, as l sa y, seems to me that the classiftcation or the de term ination by the Board , upheld by the Magistrate, was the appropriate classification in terms o f the obligations that the Board was carrying out when it did the exercise the subject of the appeal. and I would therefore dismi ss the appeal.". Dated th is t hinieth cay of Novembe r, 1990. By the Court, ( L.S ] M.J. CALLEN, Industrial Registrar. Appearances:- Mr R. O'Regan. Q.C .. with him Mr M. Boulton (instructed by Messrs S li pper Smith & Co.) for the Appe ll ant , Atco Industries (Aust.) Pty. Ltd. Mr R. Douglas, Q.C., with h im Mr J. Batch (i nstructed by the Crown Solic itor) for the Re spondent. Workers' Compensation Board of Queensland. Operative Dat t:>: N/ A Judgment - Appeal - Atco v. Workers' Compensatio n 8(1ard * - -- 1 of 1 --