Notification under section 130 by New South Wales Local Government, Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines and Utilities Union of a dispute with Lake Macquarie City Council re job sizing of position [2011] NSWIRComm 94

Industrial Relations Commission New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Notification under section 130 by New South Wales Local Government, Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines and Utilities Union of a dispute with Lake Macquarie City Council re job sizing of position [2011] NSWIRComm 94 Hearing dates: 6 April 2011 Decision date: 21 July 2011 Jurisdiction: Industrial Relations Commission Before: Harrison DP Decision: Application to intercede in salary determination declined - application dismissed Catchwords: Industrial dispute - Job evaluation - Application of Evans Webb Job Evaluation System challenged - Review of procedure and application - No error found - Application dismissed Legislation Cited: Industrial Relations Act 1996 Category: Principal judgment Parties: New South Wales Local Government, Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines and Utilities Union (Applicant)

Lake Macquarie City Council (Respondent) File Number(s): IRC 1448 of 2010 Publication restriction: No

decision 1In this matter the New South Wales Local Government, Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines & Utilities Union ("the Union") on behalf of its member, Mr David Williams, disputes the conclusion by Lake Macquarie City Council's ("the Council") Job Sizing Committee which set the rate of pay for the position occupied by Mr Williams at salary grade 16. 2The claim is that proper application of the job evaluation process would result in salary grade 17, an increase of $89 per week, at the base level of the 21 point salary scale as at 1 November 2010. 3Mr David Williams has been employed by the Council from September 1988. 4Mr Williams was first employed as an Engineering Draughtsman in the Engineering Drawing Office. In 1995 he was appointed to his current position of Development Engineer in the Development Assessment and Compliance (DAC) Department at salary grade 15. 5At the time of his appointment and for almost a decade thereafter, the DAC Department consisted on one Chief Development Engineer, one Senior Development Engineer and five Development Engineers. 6The DAC Department was subject to restructure from May 2005. This team consists of a Principal Engineer and employment is regulated by the Lake Macquarie City Council Enterprise Agreement 2011 EA11/3 ("the 2011 Agreement") . 7The restructure resulted in the creation of three separate groups within the DAC Department based on the type, scale and complexity of the development to be assessed. The Groups are identified as: (i)General Team - less than 6 lots, usually no major infrastructure or Council assets. This team consists of a Senior Development Engineer General (Grade 17) and Development Engineer/s General (Grade 16) (ii)Medium Team - 6- 30 lots with public infrastructure or Council assets. This team consists of a Senior Development Engineer Medium (Grade 17) and Development Engineer/s Medium (Grade 16) (iii)Major Team - over 30 lots with public infrastructure or Council assets. Generally major green field subdivisions (greater than 30 lots) requiring design, construction and dedication of public infrastructure & engineering aspects of other major size development 8The Council uses the Evans Webb Job Evaluation System to determine job size, and consequently salary grade, pursuant to the applicable industrial instrument. This is applied by the Job Sizing Committee (JSC) which in this case comprised Ms Kerrie Lee Houlihan, Human Resources Co-ordinator, and Mr Douglas John Fahey, Human Resources Systems and Remuneration Co-ordinator, both of whom are employees of the Council and gave evidence in these proceedings. 9On restructure in 2005 Mr Williams was appointed to the position of Development Engineer Medium Team, which the JSC assessed at Salary Grade 16, an increase of one salary grade for Mr Williams. 10In 2007 Mr Williams raised his concerns with management over both the detail of the position description and the allocation of Salary Grade 16. This led to a further review by the JSC which concluded on 26 February 2009 that salary grade 16 was the appropriate value which incorporated some change in the position description and a revised points score, but did not change the outcome. 11Mr Williams then pursued the formal grievance procedure to have his claim for increase to salary grade 17 considered by the General Manager. 12The evidence of Mr Jeffrey Green (Ex 7) is that meetings were held on June 8 and June 29 2010 at the request of the Union, attended by Mr Williams; Mr Collins; Mr Goodbun, the local union delegate; Mr Stephen Brown, Manager of DAC; and Mr Tony Farrell, Director of City Strategy. On both occasions Mr Williams' request was considered and declined. 13Mr Green was not required for cross examination. 14Mr Williams ultimately lodged a formal grievance disputing the JSC's recommendation, giving rise to these proceedings. 15The essence of the dispute is succinctly put by the Union in its written submission in the following terms: 20. The Applicant submits that the dispute involves two issues: I. Whether or not Mr William's position should have rated as a 'D' instead of a 'C' for Judgement and Problem Solving; and II. Whether a 'D' rating would have resulted in an increase in grade from Grade 16 to Grade 17. ... ... 25. The Applicant submits that the Respondent has erred in the application of the Evans Webb Organizational job evaluation process, through an inconsistent application of weightings assigned to the position of Development Engineer Medium Team position by the job evaluation panel. 26. In the Applicants Outline of Contentions it was submitted that by application of the definitions contained within the Job Evaluation Handbook (Exhibit 3: Affidavit Peter Joseph Collins para 6 'P1C 2'), that an incorrect weighting for the sub factor Breadth of Issues under the Factor Judgement and Problem Solving that the Williams' position sit within a 'D- System' weighting not a 'C - Procedure' as assigned. 16The Council submit that it has applied the Evans Webb System correctly and that it is not appropriate to adjust outcomes by simply and only having regard to internal relativities. 17The 2011 Agreement (and its precursors) provide for the use of skill descriptors at Clause 10 by adoption of those specified by the Local Government (State) Award 2010 370 IG 648 ("the Award"): 18The 2011 Agreement further in Clause 12 adopts the Salary System specified in Clause 7 of the Award, which together give industrial validation for use of the Evans Webb System.