Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales CITATION : Pastoral Industry (State) Award [2000] NSWIRComm 159 APPLICANT: Australian Business Industrial RESPONDENTS: PARTIES : Employers' Federation of New South Wales Australian Workers' Union, New South Wales INTERVENORS: Minister for Industrial Relations Labor Council of New South Wales FILE NUMBER: IRC 6711 of 1999 CORAM: Walton J Vice-President; Schmidt J; Grayson DP; Connor C CATCHWORDS : Application for new award - parties intervene late in course of proceedings - application by intervenor to vacate current program - important issues raised in relation to counterpart award applications - unlikely that parties would be ready to proceed on presently set timetable - timetable variation granted & hearing adjourned LEGISLATION CITED : Industrial Relations Act 1996 HEARING DATES: 08/01/2000 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08/07/2000 APPLICANT: Ms Brooks Australian Busniess Industrial RESPONDENTS: Mr McDonald Employers' Federation of New South Wales Mr Tripodi LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: Australian Workers' Union, New South Wales Branch INTERVENORS: Mr Benson of Counsel Minister for Industrial Relations SOLICITOR: Mr Walsh Crown Solicitor's Office Mr Lennon Labor Council of New South Wales JUDGMENT: - 1 - INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES FULL BENCH CORAM: WALTON J - Vice President SCHMIDT J GRAYSON DP CONNOR C 7 AUGUST 2000 MATTER No. 6711 OF 1999 PASTORAL INDUSTRY (STATE) AWARD APPLICATION BY AUSTRALIAN BUSINESS INDUSTRIAL FOR A NEW AWARD AND ANOR MATTER. DECISION 1 This decision is in relation to an application made on 1 August 2000 by the Minister for Industrial Relations, intervening with leave of the Commission in this matter, at which time the matter was before Justice Walton sitting alone. His Honour reserved the determination of the application so as to allow the present Full Bench to confer and consider the application so made. 2 Having been granted leave to intervene in the matter, Mr Benson as counsel representing the Minister, made an application to have the hearing dates and the programming of the matter previously set, vacated. 3 Mr Benson indicated that in the Minister's opinion the matter raises three important issues. Broadly, these were that the New South Wales Industrial Relations Commission was being asked to adopt in a defacto sense, the federal award simplification principles, that this would then raise the question as to whether the federal award simplification decision was to be considered a national decision in the context of s48 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996, or that at the very least, these proceedings give rise to a test case revision of the principles that apply to counterpart award applications, having regard to the statutory provisions under the Industrial Relations Act 1996. Mr Benson submitted, it was on that basis the Minister was making the application to vacate. 4 The application by the Minister was supported by Mr Tripodi on behalf of the Australian Workers' Union, and Mr Lennon on behalf of the Labor Council of New South Wales. 5 The application to adjourn was resisted by Ms Brooks on behalf of Australian Business Industrial (the applicant in these proceedings), and Mr McDonald on behalf of the Employers' Federation of New South Wales. The resistance to the application was put on the basis that the matter was programmed in May 2000; indeed, the application was on foot in December 1999, and the parties were clearly aware of the issues raised at that time. If the parties now seeking to become involved had done so at an earlier stage, then their intervention could no doubt have been adequately dealt with within the timetable previously set. In the interests of the efficient use of the Commissions time, the timetable should stand and the hearing dates should be maintained. 6 It is unfortunate to say the least that this application has come so late in these proceedings. Whilst we would agree with Ms Brooks that the loss of two hearing days before a Full Bench is inconvenient, and that the efficient use of the Commissions time is a significant consideration in applications of this, or any other nature, we have determined that it is appropriate in this matter to grant the application made by the Minister. This is particularly so, as all parties recognise that the issues raised by the Minister are significant. It appears to us that there is little likelihood of having the parties adequately prepared to address these issues at the dates now set for hearing. 7 The Commission therefore makes the following directions: 1. The hearing dates set before the Full Bench on 14 and 15 August 2000 are vacated. 2. The matter will be set down for hearing before the Full Bench of the Commission on Tuesday 30 January, Wednesday 31 January and Thursday 1 February 2001, commencing at 10 am. 3. The programming as to the filing of submissions shall then be as follows. i. The Minister shall file and serve any evidence he relies upon and submissions on or before 4 pm, 25 August 2000; ii. Other parties to the proceedings supporting the Minister's position are to file and serve any evidence or further evidence they rely upon and submissions on or before 4 pm, 8 September 2000; iii. The parties to the proceedings that take an opposing view to that of the Minister should file and serve any evidence or further evidence relied upon and submissions on or before 4 pm, 13 October 2000 4. Liberty to apply is granted, for a party or intervener, upon the giving of 48 hours notice. DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.