NSW Caselaw
Industrial Relations Commission New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Re Crown Employees (Correctional Officers, Department of Corrective Services) Award 2007 for Kempsey, Dillwynia and Wellington Correctional Centres (No 2) [2015] NSWIRComm 38 Hearing dates: 19 June 2013; 3 and 4 April 2014; 16, 17, 18 and 19 March 2015; 11 June 2015 Date of orders: 02 December 2015 Decision date: 02 December 2015 Jurisdiction: Industrial Relations Commission Before: Kite AJ Decision: The PSA's application for variation is refused Catchwords: AWARD – application to vary award - Full Bench on referral determined threshold questions on costs savings flowing from Memorandum of Understanding – Full Bench answered "no" – remitted substantive matter for disposition by single member – subject of amended application –three issues for determination – whether variation should be made to provide for equitable rostering, provision of 12 rostered days off and payment of incidental allowance for Chief Correctional Officers and Principal Correctional officers – whether any such variation will result in increased "employee-related costs" – whether the increase in "employee-related costs" will exceed 2.5 per cent "cap" imposed by cl 6(1)(a) of the Industrial Relations (Public Sector Conditions of Employment) Regulation 2014 so as to require demonstration of "employee-related cost savings" – presumption that existing award provides for fair and reasonable conditions of employment – assumption that officers under relevant award are "equivalent classifications" to those in another award – no evidence explicitly directed to establishing equivalent classifications – award regulates three correctional centres under separate award – classifications have identical annualised salaries – award variation principles – evidence suggests classifications not identical SPECIAL CASE – Arbitrated Case – Special Case Principles – historical context – contended "long-standing anomalies in conditions" – evidence suggests negotiations did not miscarry – little to no evidence setting out background to making of separate award in 2005 – award reviewed in 2007 and 2012 – no explanation why concerns were not raised in 2007 – terms of award suggest subject matters in this application were considered and dealt with in a particular way – not satisfied the positions are equivalent – in light of evidence cannot conclude existing conditions are not fair and reasonable – presumption not rebutted - special case not made out – application refused JURISDICTION - Notice of Motion seeking permanent stay of the application – Motion not heard by Full Bench – unnecessary to determine question of jurisdiction and question of employee-related costs Legislation Cited: Industrial Relations Act 1996 Industrial Relations (Public Sector Conditions of Employment) Regulation 2014 Cases Cited: Child Protection (Working with Children) Award 2014 [2015] NSWIRComm 8 City of Sydney Wages/Salary Award 2014 [2014] NSWIRComm 49 Crown Employees Wages Staff (Rates of Pay) Award 2014 [2015] NSWIRComm 7 Operational Ambulance Officers (State) Award [2015] NSWIRComm 17 Re Crown Employees (Correctional Officers, Department of Corrective Services) Award 2007 for Kempsey, Dillwynia and Wellington Correctional Centres [2014] NSWIRComm 44 Re Crown Employees (NSW Fire Brigade Retained Firefighting Staff) Award 2008 [2012] NSWIRComm 122 Re Health Employees Pharmacists (State) Award [2003] NSWIRComm 453; 132 IR 244 Re Storeworkers – IGA Distribution Pty Limited New South Wales Distribution Centres Award 2002 [2002] NSWIRComm 156 Secretary of The Treasury v Public Service Association & Professional Officers' Association Amalgamated Union of NSW [2014] NSWCA 138 State Wage Case 2010 (No 2) [2010] NSWIRComm 29; 206 IR 218 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Public Service Association and Professional Officers Association Amalgamated Union of New South Wales (Applicant) Corrective Services NSW (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: M Gibian of counsel (Applicant) J V Murphy of counsel (Respondent)
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