PN1

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you. I'll take the appearances, in Sydney first.

PN2

MR O'MAHONEY: Commissioner, my name is O'Mahoney. I seek leave to appear for the Regional Aviation Association of Australia and a particular operator by the name of Aviair Pty Ltd.

PN3

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Mr O'Mahoney.

PN4

MS R BHATT: Vice President, it's Bhatt, initial R, appearing for the Australian Industry Group.

PN5

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Ms Bhatt.

PN6

MS K SRDANOVIC: Thank you, your Honour. Srdanovic, initial K, appearing for the entities within the Qantas Group, and with me today is Edward Haggerty of Qantas as well.

PN7

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Ms Srdanovic. In Melbourne?

PN8

MR A MOLNAR: Your Honour, my name is Molnar, initial A. I appear with Mr Miller, initial S. We appear for the Australian Federation of Air Pilots here in the matter concerned with the Air Pilots Award.

PN9

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Mr Molnar. This matter today is listed for mention only. There's nobody else appearing, is there? Oh, there is now, yes. Who is the late arrival?

PN10

MR G MILLER: Your Honour, it's Mr Miller, initial G, appearing for the AMWU in relation to the Airline Operations ‑ Ground Staff Award only.

PN11

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN12

MS W CARR: Sorry, your Honour, it's Carr, initial W, for the Transport Workers Union. I appear in relation to the Airline Operations Award only.

PN13

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you.

PN14

MR L AMOS: Your Honour, Amos, initial L, for the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers' Association. We also have an interest in the Airline Operations ‑ Ground Staff.

PN15

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you.

PN16

MR M ROBSON: Your Honour, Robson - - -

PN17

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I feel like it's a procession here.

PN18

MR ROBSON: We're only bringing you more and more things to do. Your Honour, Robson, initial M, for the Australian Services Union. We only appear in relation to the Airline Operations Award.

PN19

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you.

PN20

MR Z DUNCALFE: And Duncalfe, initial Z, for the Australian Workers' Union, Airline Ops Award. Thank you.

PN21

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you. So we now have every appearance, do we? Thank you. The matter is listed for mention today, and there will ultimately be a Full Bench for which I'll preside over, then we'll hear the matter. What we have to date is the original document prepared by AMOD which had the items to be discussed, and then we've had some correspondence to the Commission, in a limited sense, from three groups seeking further substantive amendments. I just want to confirm, now that everybody is in, that there are no further substantive amendments being sought, or if there are, could I please be advised. Yes, Mr O'Mahoney?

PN22

MR O'MAHONEY: Yes, could I indicate, your Honour, the reason for my seeking to appear on behalf of the regional peak body and Aviair is that very recently it has come to my client's attention that the Australian Federation of Air Pilots is seeking to make a substantive submission about clause 16 of the current award, the Air Pilots Award, and I think it's clause 13 of what appears in the exposure draft.

PN23

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN24

MR O'MAHONEY: We seek - it's not really a substantive submission I'm here to make today - what - - -

PN25

THE VICE PRESIDENT: We're not asking you to make substantive submissions. What I'm trying to do today is make sure, first of all, that when we start programming this matter we know who is going to do what, and if there's going to be any other counter‑variations it's all upfront.

PN26

MR O'MAHONEY: Precisely, and with that in mind, your Honour, what we do seek is an opportunity, an extension, to put on a submission about that discrete matter in the exposure draft.

PN27

THE VICE PRESIDENT: What do you mean by that? Is it a reply, or is it an alternate version - what do you have in mind?

PN28

MR O'MAHONEY: At the moment, as I understand it, the submissions were due on 15 October.

PN29

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes, but when - well to the extent that they're submissions, nobody has put on submissions, unless - if they have I haven't seen them. I know that's what was intended. All that appears to be on the file that I can ascertain is people have come back and said these are other substantive matters we want to be considered.

PN30

MR O'MAHONEY: Yes.

PN31

THE VICE PRESIDENT: So originally there were, like, half a dozen. There's been three series of correspondence saying add this in. This is making this matter quite big and complex, which is fair enough, we're here to serve, but I just want to work out where the end point is so I can program it.

PN32

MR O'MAHONEY: I'm grateful for that indication, your Honour. My client's point of view is we simply seek an opportunity to respond to any submission made by the Australian Federation of Pilots.

PN33

THE VICE PRESIDENT: You'll be able to do that; there's no doubt about that. But you're not proposing any additional variation?

PN34

MR O'MAHONEY: No, not at this stage.

PN35

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes, are you proposing something we don't have?

PN36

MS CARR: Your Honour, not a substantial variation. It's really what I'd say would be a technical and drafting issue, and given that that has already been dealt with by the Full Bench - the decision has been issued in relation to the Airline Operations Award - the TWU would like the other parties to identify an issue that could have been dealt with. It relates to a heading, 17.5 in the Airline Operations Award, where it describes - the heading is "Continuous afternoon and night shifts."

PN37

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Have you had discussions with the employers on this?

PN38

MS CARR: Well - - -

PN39

MS SRDANOVIC: We see it as a substantive issue around the heading, to change - - -

PN40

MS CARR: The heading, do you?

PN41

MS SRDANOVIC: I think so.

PN42

MS CARR: Okay.

PN43

MS SRDANOVIC: If this is about linking in with the word, "continuous", I think it links in with item 48, which is a substantive issue. So I don't think there have been discussions about it, but it might be able to be programmed in the same manner.

PN44

THE VICE PRESIDENT: It will have to be programmed.

PN45

MS SRDANOVIC: Yes.

PN46

THE VICE PRESIDENT: We're not going to do anything on the run.

PN47

MS SRDANOVIC: No.

PN48

MS CARR: Yes, if we could program it in. We say it's technical drafting, but if - - -

PN49

MS SRDANOVIC: I think there may be a link in with the other substantive issue.

PN50

MS CARR: Yes. So the principal issue in relation to the Airline Ops, on the materials you would have, your Honour, would probably I think only identify as one issue in relation to continuous shift workers and the penalty that applies, and then we would like to run this with it as well.

PN51

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN52

MS CARR: Whether or not they link in, I don't know necessarily agree though. Certainly - - -

PN53

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Nobody is going to be deprived of an opportunity to have their say.

PN54

MS CARR: Thank you.

PN55

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Now let's look at the programming. Given that there are no submissions, in fact, unless - if I'm wrong about that can somebody correct me, but I can't find anything. So the logical step would be submissions and evidence, because having had a look at the material that is being sought, it certainly can't be done on written submissions. There would need to be evidence. Have the parties had discussions in the two matters about a timetable?

PN56

MS BHATT: Vice President, if I might address you on that. The short answer to that that is in relation to the pilots' matter, no, but if I can come back to that in a moment. In relation to the Airline Operations ‑ Ground Staff Award, there have been some very preliminary discussions between the parties that are present before you today before we commenced the proceedings. I'll let the unions address you on this proposal in a moment, but my understanding is that there is a view that given that the unions are the moving party, if you will, in the sense that they are seeking a change to the award, that they will file - - -

PN57

THE VICE PRESIDENT: They're seeking the changes, yes; they should go first.

PN58

MS BHATT: They should go first, and that there should be an opportunity to file written submissions and evidence, and that ought to be timetabled after Australia Day, having regard to the various leave plans.

PN59

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes, I understand that. The reality is we will not be giving hearing dates certainly in the first three months - have already gone, and are likely to be later than that.

PN60

MS BHATT: I'm personally relieved to hear that, Vice President. If I can provide you with the dates that we have in mind? Potentially the proponents will file on 29 January, which is the first day back to work after the Australia Day long weekend; respondent parties be given at least four weeks to respond, which will take us to 26 February. I understand that the proponents might seek an opportunity to respond to what the respondent parties file, so perhaps a further three weeks for that, which would take us up to 19 March. I do wonder whether - if the Bench is unable to list the matter until sometime later, there might be some ability to extend the timetable out, effectively work backwards from the hearing date.

PN61

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Knowing what I know from the other Members of the Bench at the moment, and my own diary which is remarkably full, I would not envisage the hearing before May at the earliest. That's not an excuse to then delay, nor is it an excuse that if we do grant a more generous timetable - I would not want further delay.

PN62

MS BHATT: Of course, Vice President.

PN63

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Because sometimes when I grant a longer time, people then say now we need more time, and this is a very generous timetable. So I'm happy to work within those parameters.

PN64

MS BHATT: If I might submit then that the direction should permit for liberty to apply, in the event that the need arises.

PN65

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN66

MS BHATT: And we'll of course make the application at the relevant time.

PN67

THE VICE PRESIDENT: One of the problems I have in this to (indistinct) with the Airline Operations matter is that in the absence of the evidence, one doesn't know how many days to set.

PN68

MS BHATT: Of course.

PN69

THE VICE PRESIDENT: So I would be keen to at least have the evidence discussions, in a sense that one can have a guess, before I actually set the dates, because I don't want to be setting blocks of dates. I apprehend in the Air Pilots Award, it is complex factually from my preliminary view, and it could be quite intensely litigated. This may not be as heavily litigated.

PN70

MS BHATT: Perhaps one way of dealing with that issue might be to list the matter for a further directions hearing - - -

PN71

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN72

MS BHATT: - - - shortly after all the material is filed, which gives us an opportunity - - -

PN73

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I'm a bit worried about that for this reason. I think you would know by the time your evidence is on, before the reply evidence is on, (indistinct) reply is on how long you should need by then. Because your evidence will be on, their evidence will be on; we don't need to wait for their reply to start looking at it. So I'm not going to wait till 19 March to list the matter. That's a bit too late.

PN74

MS SRDANOVIC: The unions may have a different view, your Honour, but I would have thought that a day would be sufficient for the issue insofar as the Ground Staff Award is concerned, in that although it's an issue which is being contested, it is actually quite confined in terms of its scope. So I personally would have thought a day would be sufficient, but if there's any difference to that once we see the material, perhaps then we can approach your Honour, but - - -

PN75

THE VICE PRESIDENT: What I'll do is when we adjourn we'll re‑list the matter for some day after 26 February for a report back, and at that stage I expect the parties to tell me the number of witnesses; they will have had a look at the evidence, and work out whether they're cross‑examine or not, and then we can actually work out how many days. If it's only a day, it will be easier to program than a block of days, and it does look as though, as I say, in the Airline Operations matter, not a very big hearing, provided we have good written submissions as well. So I'll make formal directions about the timetable you propose, Ms Bhatt, with the report back before 19 March.

PN76

MS BHATT: If it please, Vice President.

PN77

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Everybody happy with that?

PN78

MS CARR: Yes, your Honour, if it pleases.

PN79

THE VICE PRESIDENT: And of course the matters won't be heard concurrently then. That's very clear. So those involved in that matter will look at that matter, and then the other matter will be heard separately. Let's talk about the Air Pilots.

PN80

MS BHATT: I don't have a view that I can put to you in concrete terms about the directions for that matter, and I unfortunately haven't had an opportunity to discuss the matter with my colleagues from the relevant union. The one matter that I did want to raise from the outset though that distinguishes this from the Airline Operations ‑ Ground Staff Award is that there is at least one claim that has been foreshadowed about which we have very little detail, and by that I mean we don't actually know what is being sought, and that is the correspondence that the Vice President would recently have received about a training costs claim. At this stage I will simply submit that any directions should require the union to file a draft determination that specifies the terms of the variations that are sought, and that should happen at least when submissions in support are filed, if not earlier.

PN81

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes. I was reluctant to make directions today in relation to this matter, because I don't think it is - particularly in light of the fact that you haven't had discussions. So what I propose to do is bring this matter back in December to enable discussions to occur between the parties, including to outline in more detail what it is that is being sought. It may well be that you reach an agreement on a draft timetable. If you do, I will then list the matter simply by phone rather than drag everybody in. I don't have my diary with me, but it would be probably around 13 or 14 December, and then we can then accommodate that and see how it goes, but on its face, this is a much more complex matter and at least we need to have some clarity around all the issues before we program.

PN82

MS SRDANOVIC: Your Honour, do you envisage in that case that the Australian Federation of Air Pilots would actually file something in advance of that date to enable the discussions to be more fruitful?

PN83

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I would hope that there would be fruitful discussions between the parties and you would know what they're talking about with some particularity.

PN84

MS SRDANOVIC: Yes.

PN85

THE VICE PRESIDENT: But let's just ask Mr Molnar what he has to say about it.

PN86

MR MOLNAR: Your Honour, yes, we would propose to file a draft variation that we were seeking so that indeed the parties do know what they're talking about and the ambit of the issue can be assessed properly.

PN87

THE VICE PRESIDENT: All right. Mr Molnar will be seeing(?) a lot about it in the next couple of weeks, so I'm sure you'll have a break in that period to do this.

PN88

MR MOLNAR: Yes.

PN89

THE VICE PRESIDENT: So we'll come back to all the parties with the revised date, but it will either be December 13 or 14, and as I say, if you reach an agreement as to the timetable, subject to it not being outrageous in terms of its timeliness, I will accept that. Any other matters today? Yes?

PN90

MR O'MAHONEY: Your Honour, could I just inquire, is it envisaged that the filing of that document that my friend just referred to would occur before the next directions?

PN91

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Absolutely.

PN92

MR O'MAHONEY: Because that would assist us in - - -

PN93

THE VICE PRESIDENT: What I'm envisaging is that Mr Molnar will give it a priority, get it out relatively quickly, and then enable the discussions to occur about the timetable, having that in front of you.

PN94

MR O'MAHONEY: Thank you, your Honour.

PN95

MS SRDANOVIC: At the risk of overcomplicating it, your Honour, there are two substantive matters for the Air Pilots Award, both of which are the subject of the original application that was filed by the Australian Federation of Air Pilots. Variation 1 is quite clear in respect of the variation that is being sought to the award. Variation 2 deals with the interaction between two particular schedules in the award.

PN96

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN97

MS SRDANOVIC: And there are alternatives which are proposed. If it's the case that alternatives are still being proposed, that's fine, we can deal with that, but if it's the case that the union has a preference for one over the other, that may also then help us to respond to it. So if Mr Molnar is able to indicate that at the same time as the filing of the determination, that would be appreciated.

PN98

THE VICE PRESIDENT: It's a matter for Mr Molnar.

PN99

MS SRDANOVIC: I just raised it in case it does assist.

PN100

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Mr Molnar, it's a matter for you how you want to deal with that. You can maintain obviously alternate proposals, or if you wish to choose you choose. Do you have a view on it at the moment, Mr Molnar, or do you want to think about it?

PN101

MR MOLNAR: Sorry. The Federation presses both of those variations. They're not alternatives.

PN102

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Okay. So they're not really alternatives; that's very clear. Any other preliminary matters today? Both matters will then be adjourned to dates to be advised shortly. Thank you.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [1.32 PM]