NSW Caselaw
Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales
CITATION: BlueScope Steel (AIS) Pty Limited v. Australian Workers' Union [2005] NSWIRComm 1129
APPLICANT BlueScope Steel (AIS) Pty Limited
PARTIES: RESPONDENT Australian Workers' Union
FILE NUMBER(S): 7187 of 2004
CORAM: Connor C
CATCHWORDS: steel works - bulk handling operations - interlocutory decision - whether an enterprise award should be made over objections by party - industrial dispute - public interest considerations
LEGISLATION CITED: Industrial Relations Act 1996
Butchering (Wholesale) Award Case (1911) AR 245 Hammersley Iron Case (1982) WAIG 2418 CASES CITED: 2004 State Wage Case (2004) 132 IR 190 Sugar Manufacturers Case (1926) AR 113
HEARING DATES: 08/08/2005
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08/24/2005
APPLICANT Jack de Flamingh Blake Dawson Waldron LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:
RESPONDENT Andy Gillespie Australian Workers' Union
DECISION: INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES
CORAM: CONNOR C
Wednesday, 24 August, 2005
Matter No IRC 7187 of 2004
BlueScope Steel (AIS) Pty Limited and the Australian Workers' Union
Dispute notification under S.130 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1996 re application for a new enterprise award
INTERLOCUTORY DECISION
[2005] NSWIRComm 1129
Background
1 This interlocutory decision concerns operators in the bulk handling department of BlueScope Steel (AIS) Pty Limited. The matter came before me initially through a notification lodged for and on behalf of BlueScope Steel under S.130 of the 1996 Industrial Relations Act. Currently before me is a deceptively straightforward issue - whether or not the industrial dispute should go forward to a State enterprise award for the operators. That issue is really far from straightforward, however. 2 The State enterprise award is proposed by BlueScope Steel but it is opposed by the Australian Workers' Union, representing the operators. At present the employees are covered by the Port Kembla Operations Enterprise Agreement (unregistered) which exceeded its nominal term on Friday, 6 August, 2004 and negotiations for a new enterprise agreement have been protracted and have reached something of an impasse. As I understand the position, there are essentially two issues still in dispute between the parties, viz:
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate