Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales CITATION: MultiServ Pty Limited v. Australian Workers Union and the Transport Workers Union of New South Wales [2006] NSWIRComm 1062 NOTIFIER MultiServ Pty Limited FIRST RESPONDENT PARTIES: Australian Workers Union SECOND RESPONDENT Transport Workers' Union of New South Wales FILE NUMBER(S): IRC 2115 of 2006 CORAM: Connor C CATCHWORDS: industrial dispute - stop work meeting - work stoppage - claim for payment for lost time - matter resolved by conciliation - date set for report back following discussions LEGISLATION CITED: Industrial Relations Act 1996 HEARING DATES: 06/04/2006 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/06/2006 EXTEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 04/06/2006 NOTIFIER Phil Coleman FIRST RESPONDENT LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: Wayne Phillips Australian Workers Union SECOND RESPONDENT Richard Olsen Transport Workers' Union of New South Wales DECISION: INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES CORAM: CONNOR C Thursday, 6 April, 2006 Matter No IRC 2115 of 2006 MultiServ Pty Limited and the Australian Workers Union and the Transport Workers Union of New South Wales Dispute notification under S.130 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1996 re industrial action over the use of contractors STATEMENT [2006] NSWIRComm 1062 1 On Thursday, 6 April, 2006 a notification of an industrial dispute was lodged for and on behalf of MultiServ Pty Limited (formerly Metserv Pty Limited) pursuant to the provisions of S.130 of the 1996 Industrial Relations Act with a request that the matter be listed as a matter of urgency, preferably on the day it was lodged. The S.130 notification describes three areas of dispute with members of the Australian Workers Union and the Transport Workers Union of New South Wales employed by MultiServ in the flat products area of the Port Kembla steelworks under the terms of the New South Wales Metserv Pty Limited Industrial Relations Award, viz: (i) the failure of the employees to pursue proper procedure for resolving disputes in accordance with Clause 9, Continuity of Production and Procedure for Resolving Issues and Differences, of the Metserv Award; (ii) partial compliance by the employees to meet their obligations to provide essential services during industrial action in accordance with Clause 10, Essential Services Dispensation, and Clause 11, Site Employee Representative, of the Metserv Award; and (iii) a breach of the undertaking contained in Clause 12, No Extra Claims, of the Metserv Award. 2 The matter was allocated to me and I set it down for a conference today (in Sydney) and it proceeded into private informal discussions in an effort to resolve the dispute. In those proceedings Mr Coleman represented MultiServ, Mr Phillips represented the AWU and Mr Olsen represented the TWU. 3 I have been informed that the employees held a stop work meeting at 6.00am on Thursday, 6 April, 2006 and subsequently withdrew their labour, remaining in the crib shed. Their action was initially in protest at the use of a contractor engaged by MultiServ in washing vehicles but now in support of a claim for payment for the stop work meeting. In the proceedings Mr Coleman indicated that it was the understanding of MultiServ that the employees had agreed to trial in-house cleaning of the vehicles to draw a proper comparison with the work when done by a contractor. The industrial action by the employees coincided with the start of the trial by the contractor. Arrangements to meet essential services have been addressed by the employees but the dispute remains and the withdrawal of labour continued up to the hearing of the matter today. 4 While it certainly would have been preferable for the employees to have their grievances brought to the Commission before taking any industrial action (particularly having regard to the requirements of S.143), their representatives have, on their behalf, taken a responsible course in this compulsory conference and given an undertaking for an immediate return to work. The parties are holding further discussions and the result of those discussions will be reported to me in a conference on Monday, 10 April, 2006 (in the Commission's premises at 90 Crown Street, Wollongong). I commend the parties on the constructive manner in which they have addressed this industrial dispute which accords with the objectives of the Act under which I operate and, indeed, serves to confirm my view that these matters are always best addressed by the orderly processes of conciliation and, if necessary, arbitration, rather than confrontation. P J CONNOR Commissioner 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.