AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

Workplace Relations Act 1996

Review of award pursuant to Item 51 of Part 2 of Schedule 5 of the

Workplace Relations and Other Legislation Amendment Act 1996

(C No. 00296 of 1999)

SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES INDUSTRY - COMMUNITY SERVICES WORKERS - NORTHERN TERRITORY AWARD 1996

(ODN C No. 11134 of 1995)

[Print N3299 [S1100CRA]]

Various employees

Social and Community Services Industry

   

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT CARTWRIGHT

SYDNEY, 24 JULY 2002

Award simplification.

DECISION

[1] This decision relates to a review of the Social and Community Services Industry - Community Services Workers - Northern Territory Award 1996 ("the Award") as required by item 51 of the Transitional Provisions of the Workplace Relations and Other Legislation Amendment Act 1996 (Cth) ("the WROLA Act").

[2] I am satisfied that item 50 affects the Award since it provides for matters other than allowable award matters. Therefore, the Commission must review the Award in accordance with item 51.

[3] The parties to the Award are the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union ("ASU") and employers located in the Northern Territory which employ community service workers in the health and welfare services industry.

[4] The Award was originally made as a consent award by Eames C on 23 July 1996 under s.111(1)(b) of the former Industrial Relations Act 1988. It was the subject of an initial common rule declaration by Eames C which took effect from 30 June 1998 and a further declaration by Gay C on 11 December 2001.

[5] At the videoconference held in Darwin on 27 June 2002 as part of the item 51 review of the Award, Mr B O'Brien and Mr L Matarazzo appeared on behalf of the ASU. Jobs Australia and the Northern Territory Chamber of Commerce and Industry appeared on behalf of the employer respondents.

[6] As a result of that conference and subsequent correspondence between the parties, an agreed position was reached on all the terms of the simplified award. The Award has been varied to remove provisions which ceased to have effect under item 50 and has been amended to satisfy the criteria set out in sub-items 51(6) and 51(7).

[7] In considering the wage rates contained in the current Award, I have the benefit of earlier decisions in the Social and Community Services Industry - Community Services Workers - Western Australia Award 1996 [PR912428] and Social And Community Service (Queensland) Award 1996 [PR914950] and the Social and Community Services (ACT) Award 2001 [PR918263] which have already dealt with a number of the specific issues common to this Award. I note that the classification descriptors contained in the Social and Community Services (ACT) Award 2001 are, in fact, identical to those in the Northern Territory Award.

[8] The first matter to be determined is whether the rates of pay in the Award require review under item 51(4) of the WROLA Act and the principles set out by the Full Bench in the Paid Rates Review Decision [Print Q7661] and the Paid Rates Supplementary Decision [Print S0105]. I have had regard to these decisions and the Conversion Principles in deciding that the Award requires review under item 51(4).

[9] The Conversion Principles in the Paid Rates Review Decision provide that awards require review under item 51(4) if they have not been adjusted in accordance with the minimum rates adjustment principle ("MRA principle") or have been adjusted since that time other than by safety net adjustment or work value change. There was no suggestion in conference that the rates in the award had been through the minimum rates adjustment process and no other available evidence indicates that this is the case.

[10] If the rates are not found to have been adjusted in accordance with the MRA principle, the Conversion Principles then require the Commission to examine the rates to assess whether they equate to properly fixed minimum rates in other awards. As already stated, the Social and Community Services (ACT) Award 2001, an award which has already undergone the minimum rates adjustment process, contains classification descriptors which are identical to those in the current NT Award. The simplified ACT award therefore provides valuable guidance as to the appropriate level at which minimum rates for this award should be fixed. Having compared the relativities underpinning the wage rates contained in the two awards, and noting the considerable discrepancies between the two wage structures, I am satisfied that the rates require conversion. This conclusion was consistent with the position put forward by the parties in conference.

[11] The MRA principle was designed to establish a stable matrix of minimum rates in awards covering similar work. The purpose of the MRA therefore is to remove inconsistencies between award rates and, as was recognised by the Full Bench in the Paid Rates Decision, that objective is still relevant under the new statutory regime. In the recognition of the importance of the need for consistency across the industry, the parties, having reached a consent position on the key classification and external relativity to the metals C10 fitter, also agreed to apply external relativities to finalise the conversion of the rates of pay. These relativities bring the rates in the Award into line with the other simplified social and community services awards across the country.

[12] Also, acting in accordance with section 113 of the Workplace Relations Act 1996, I have varied the Award by inserting into the classification clauses of the Award wording agreed between the parties on staff development and salary progression. I am satisfied that the proposed variation is consistent with the Award Simplification Principles and the Conversion Principles and that the revised wage rate structure both reflects changes in work value in its provision for progression through the pay points and now contains properly fixed minima as required by item 51.

[13] Finally, I compared the newly fixed minimum rates to the previous Award rates. Where a minimum rate was lower than the previous rate for that paypoint, the difference has been expressed as a residual which is to absorb any future safety net adjustments until such time as the minimum exceeds the former pay rate.

[14] An order will issue shortly to give effect to this decision.

BY THE COMMISSION:

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code B>