STATEMENT

Fair Work Act 2009
s.156 - 4 yearly review of modern awards

4 yearly review of modern awards
(AM2014/209)

4 yearly review of modern awards – Pharmacy Industry Award 2010

Pharmacy Award–Substantive claims

[1] On 8 June 2016 a conference, was conducted to discuss the next steps in relation to the review of the Pharmacy Industry Award 2010 (the Pharmacy Award). Following the conference the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association (SDA) wrote to the Commission setting out the substantive matters still being pursued 1. The Commission understands that the following 5 matters are the only substantive claims that need to be determined:

SDA claims

(i) A variation to clause 6.3 of the exposure draft in relation to full-time employees. The proposed variation is to include a requirement for agreement in writing, at the time of engagement, to a regular pattern of work and the requirements for a variation to the pattern of work. A similar clause is included in the current award and the exposure draft in relation to part-time employees. 2

(ii) A variation to clause 18 of the Pharmacy Award (clause 10.2 of the exposure draft) to provide for the payment of junior rates to Pharmacy Assistant level 1 employees only. 3

(iii) The inclusion of a new clause relating to blood and bone marrow donor leave. 4

The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (APESMA) claims

(iv) APESMA is seeking to pursue a work value increase in pharmacist rates of pay for intern, pharmacist, experienced pharmacist, pharmacist in charge and pharmacy manager rates of pay. The work value claim includes a claim for the introduction of a new classification of “accredited pharmacist”. 5

(v) APESMA also seeks the introduction of provisions for employers to provide financial assistance in the payment of registration fees and the undertaking of CPD training to maintain registration. 6

[2] The SDA and APESMA have filed draft variation determinations and brief written submissions in relation to each of the above claims. 7

[3] The SDA has previously sought to pursue a claim to include a minimum shift of 4 hours for full-time employees. A draft determination in relation to this claim was filed on 21 April 2016 8 however, this was not included in the correspondence of 7 July 2016. The Commission seeks confirmation from the SDA as to whether this claim will be pursued as a substantive issue.

[4] The following substantive claims have been referred to separate Full Benches for determination:

(i) an SDA claim to vary clause 26.2(a)(i) in relation to overtime which has been referred to the Casual and Part-time Full Bench 9;

(ii) a Pharmacy Guild of Australia (PGA) claim in relation to providing more flexible work arrangements for part-time employees which has been referred to the Casual and Part-time Full Bench 10;

(iii) a PGA claim in relation to hours of work for school students and secondary students which has been referred to the Casual and Part-time Full Bench 11;

(iv) a PGA claim in relation to annualised salary which has been referred to the Annualised Salaries Full Bench 12;

(v) a PGA claim in relation to overtime and penalty rates which is being dealt with by the Penalty Rates Full Bench 13.

[5] There are also a number of plain language and drafting issues which are being dealt with as part of a separate process. 14

Next steps for the substantive claims

[6] The SDA have requested that the Commission convene a conference to allow the parties to discuss the remaining substantive issues before directions are issued.

[7] A conference will be listed on 4 August 2016 at 2pm in Sydney for all interested parties. The purpose of the conference will be to:

(i) determine whether this statement reflects the position of the parties;

(ii) discuss the substantive issues set out at paragraph 1 with a view to narrowing any issues in dispute;

(iii) obtain an indication of the scope of each party’s case, and whether they intend to call any evidence; and

(iv) give consideration to the directions to be issued.

[8] Any other party wishing to pursue a substantive claim should file that claim together with a draft variation determination by 4 pm on Friday 22 July 2016. These should be sent to [email protected]. If nothing further is received, the Commission will proceed on the basis that the claims set out at paragraph 1 above are the only substantive matters to be determined.

[9] A notice of listing will be issued separately.

Additional matter–Annualised Salaries

[10] On 31 May 2015 and 3 June 2016, statements were issued referring a number of applications and existing annualised salary terms in modern awards to a Full Bench for review and determination. 15

[11] At the conference on 8 June 2016, the PGA requested that the claim set out in their submission of 23 May 2016 16 be referred to the Annualised Salaries Full Bench17. The Pharmacy Award was referred to the Full Bench in the statement issued on 31 May 2016, however, for the avoidance of doubt, this statement also refers the PGA claim to the Full Bench for determination.

[12] Statements or directions will be issued by the Annualised Salaries Full Bench in due course.

PRESIDENT

 1   SDA correspondence 7 July 2016

 2   Joint submission of SDA, APESMA and the HSU 21 April 2016 at page 22

 3   Ibid at page 23

 4   Ibid at page 24

 5   Joint submission of SDA, APESMA and the HSU 21 April 2016 at page 25

 6   APESMA submission 25 November 2014

 7   Most recently in the joint submission of SDA, APESMA and the HSU 21 April 2016 at page 25

 8   Joint submission of SDA, APESMA and the HSU 21 April 2016 at Appendix 2

 9   Ibid at page 22

 10   PGA submission 25 November 2014

 11   PGA submission 15 July 2015

 12   PGA submission 23 May 2016

 13   PGA submission 25 November 2014

 14   [2016] FWC 4756

 15   [2016] FWC 3520 and [2016] FWC 3649

 16   Pharmacy Guild of Australia submission 23 May 2016

 17   Transcript 8 June 2016 at para. PN1522

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR582854>