Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales CITATION: OneSteel Wire Pty Ltd Newcastle Fence Post Plant Award [2005] NSWIRComm 290 OneSteel Wire Pty Ltd The Australian Workers' Union, NSW PARTIES: The Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union, NSW Branch The Electrical Trades Union of Australia, NSW Branch The NSW Plumbers and Gasfitters Employees' Union FILE NUMBER(S): IRC 4235 of 2005 CORAM: Harrison DP CATCHWORDS: Application for new award - rescinds and replaces 2004 award - award made by consent of the parties to apply prospectively from 1 September 2005 for a period of three years Industrial Relations Act 1996 LEGISLATION CITED: Superannuation Guarantee Act HEARING DATES: 08/17/2005 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08/17/2005 APPLICANT Mr R Cusick OneSteel Trading Pty Ltd LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: RESPONDENTS Mr K Maher, AWU Mr R Alexander, ETU Ms M Kennedy, AMWU JUDGMENT: - 4 - INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES CORAM: HARRISON DP 17 August 2005 Matter No IRC 4235 of 2005 ONESTEEL WIRE PTY LTD NEWCASTLE FENCE POST PLANT AWARD Application by OneSteel Wire Pty Ltd for a new award DECISION [2005] NSWIRComm 290 1 This is an application by OneSteel Wire Pty Ltd ("the company") seeking the making of a new award to apply to employees of the company employed at its Fence Post Plant operations in Newcastle. 2 The application was subject to hearing on 17 August 2005. 3 Mr R Cusick appeared on behalf of the Company with Mr S Cook. Mr K Maher appeared on behalf of The Australian Workers' Union, New South Wales (AWU); Mr R Alexander appeared on behalf of The Electrical Trades Union of Australia, NSW Branch (ETU); Ms M Kennedy appeared on behalf of the Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union, NSW Branch (AMWU) ("the unions"). 4 Mr Cusick submitted that the award sought is the result of extensive negotiation and discussion between the parties on both a national and local level. Mr Cusick tendered a document titled OneSteel Manufacturing Wage Review 2005 - Proposed Settlement - 19 July 2005 (exhibit 1) which he put was a product of the negotiations and consultation between the parties, arrived at with no time lost and no industrial disruption. The proposed settlement was accepted by mass meetings of employees and consequently became the agreement between the parties forming the foundation of the present application. 5 The agreement contains a commitment to ongoing business improvement, the pursuit of workplace change necessary for the company to meet customer requirements and an improvement in asset and labour productivity during the life of the award; recognising that such change will occur consistent with the principles of fair treatment, consultation and competitive manufacturing. 6 The agreement provides scope to further review classification rates of pay consistent with work value wage fixing principles in the event of a "significant net addition to work requirements". 7 The agreement provides for increases to the award and over-award rates of pay, leading hand/supervisory allowances and dollar amount shift allowances totalling 13 percent, commencing with 4 percent from the first full pay period on or after 1 September 2005, a further 1 percent in March 2006, 4 percent in September 2006 and 4 percent in September 2007. Tool allowances, electrical licence allowances, skill and disability allowances will be increased by 3 percent per annum and meal allowances will be increased by the relevant CPI index. 8 Consistent with exhibit 1, the award application includes an improvement to the extended wage support provisions which assist employees suffering extended periods of illness or injury. The award further includes provision for choice of superannuation fund and a mechanism for adjusting superannuation guarantee payments to meet the Ordinary Times Earnings (OTE) definition of the Superannuation Guarantee Act. 9 The application retains the disputes procedure and other long standing features of the award. 10 Mr Cusick submitted that the award sought conforms with legislative requirements and is consistent with the principles set down for the making of awards. Mr Cusick submitted that the award sought will rescind and replace the OneSteel Wire Pty Ltd Newcastle Fence Post Plant Award published 13 February 2004 (343 IG 266). 11 Mr Maher endorsed the submissions of Mr Cusick and enunciated the consent of the AWU to the making of the Award in the terms of the application. In submissions supporting the making of the award, Mr Maher put that meetings of employees had voted unanimously in favour of the Terms of Settlement (Ex 1) now expressed in the application. Mr Maher said: "In endorsing and agreeing with the submissions made by Mr Cusick, the negotiation between the Company and the combined OneSteel unions in respect to this agreement [exhibit 1] and the award is a first class example of how the relevant parties can work co-operatively in an industrial relations system that has got built into it fairness and a quality dispute resolution service". 12 Mr Alexander and Ms Kennedy enunciated the consent of the unions they represent to the making of this award. Mr Alexander and Ms Kennedy adopted and supported the submissions of Mr Maher, adding their appreciation of the constructive role played by union delegates in the process of negotiation. 13 I am satisfied that the application meets all legislative requirements; that it conforms with the relevant State Wage Case principles; and that it is presented to the Commission with the genuine consent of the parties, who deserve appropriate congratulations on the product of their collective and co-operative efforts. 14 The OneSteel Wire Pty Ltd Newcastle Fence Post Plant Award is made in accordance with the application with effect from the first pay period on or after 1 September 2005 to remain in force until 31 August 2008; and rescinds and replaces the OneSteel Wire Pty Ltd Newcastle Fence Post Plant Award 343 IG 266. oo0oo 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.