Delta Electricity Employees Award 2003 [2004] NSWIRComm 99 (19 April 2004)

Last Updated: 27 May 2004

NEW SOUTH WALES INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

CITATION : Delta Electricity Employees Award 2003 [2004] NSWIRComm 99

FILE NUMBER(S): IRC 1440

HEARING DATE(S): 26/03/2004

DECISION DATE: 19/04/2004

PARTIES:

APPLICANT

Delta Electricity

RESPONDENTS

Electrical Traces Union of Australia, NSW Branch; New South Wales Local Government, Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines and Utilities Union; Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (NSW Branch); Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (NSW Branch); Public Service Association and Professional Officers' Association Amalgamated Union of NSW; Australian Institute for Marine and Power Engineers, NSW District; The Australian Workers' Union, NSW; Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union, NSW Branch; Labor Council of New South Wales

JUDGMENT OF: Harrison DP

LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES

APPLICANT

Mr E McLachlan for

Delta Electricity

RESPONDENTS

Mr M Gadiel, Labor Council of NSW;

Mr B Ferguson; Mr R Wilson; Ms M Kennedy; Mr M Gill; Mr R Ashton for Unions

CASES CITED:

LEGISLATION CITED: Industrial Relations Act 1996

JUDGMENT:

- 3 -

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES

CORAM: HARRISON DP

Monday, 19 April 2004

Matter No IRC 1440 of 2004

DELTA ELECTRICITY EMPLOYEES AWARD 2003

Application by Delta Electricity for variation re local workplace flexibility

DECISION

[2004] NSWIRComm 99

1 This is an application by Delta Electricity ("the company") seeking variation of the Delta Electricity Employees Award 2003 343 IG 331 (‘the Award’) to enable the making of individual agreements under clause 24, Local Workplace Flexibility, of the Award.

2 The matter was subject to hearing on 26 March 2004. Mr E McLachlan appeared on behalf of the company with Mr P Blume. Mr M Gadiel appeared on behalf of the Labor Council of New South Wales and also on behalf of the Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (New South Wales Branch) (APESMA). Mr B Ferguson appeared on behalf of the Public Service Association and Professional Officers' Association Amalgamated Union of New South Wales (PSA) and also on behalf of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (New South Wales Branch) (CFMEU). Mr R Wilson appeared on behalf of Electrical Trades Union of Australia, New South Wales Branch (ETU). Ms M Kennedy appeared on behalf of the Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union, NSW Branch (AMWU). Mr M Gill appeared on behalf of the New South Wales Local Government, Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines and Utilities Union (USU). Mr R Ashton appeared on behalf of the Australian Institute for Marine and Power Engineers, NSW District (AIMPE).

3 Mr McLachlan submitted that the variation was sought by consent of the parties and was the result of extensive negotiations between them.

4 The principle change to cl 24 is the insertion of cl 24.8 in the following terms:

Agreement of named employee(s)

24.8 Notwithstanding the provisions of clauses 24.3(a) and (e), an agreement may be made under this clause between Delta and the relevant union(s) that applies to specifically named employee(s). Before any such agreement can operate, it must be signed by the relevant union or Labor Council as appropriate.

If an employee advises Delta in writing that they do not wish endorsement by a union then the agreement will go to the Labor Council of NSW for endorsement. Clause 24.4. does not apply in respect of an agreement reached under this provision.

5 Mr McLachlan addressed the detail of the variation sought, putting that the essence of the variation to cl 24, Local Workplace Flexibility, is to allow agreement to work a 19 day month by accrual. The variation allows for agreement on a named employee basis. The form of agreement permitted by the variation is between Delta and the appropriate registered industrial organisation representing the named employee or group of employees.

6 Mr McLachlan submitted that the variation complies with all legislative requirements.

7 Mr Gadiel enunciated the consent of the Labor Council and affiliated unions to the variation as sought. Mr Gadiel submitted that the variation had been the subject of mass meetings at all work locations within the Company, and a secret ballot of all employees which supported the variation to the Award.

8 Mr Gadiel supported Mr McLachlan's submission that the variation sought satisfies the provisions of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 and meets the legislative requirements.

9 Messrs Ferguson, Wilson, Gill, and Ashton and Ms Kennedy concurred with the submissions of Mr Gadiel.

10 I am satisfied that the variation sought meets all legislative requirements and accordingly the Award is varied in the terms of the Application with effect on and from 26 March 2004.

oo0oo

LAST UPDATED: 26/05/2004