PN1

JUSTICE ROSS: Could I have the appearances, please. Firstly, in Sydney.

PN2

MS N DABARERA: If the Commission pleases, Dabarera, initial N, appearing for United Voice. With me is Mr S. Ball.

PN3

MS J MINCHINTON: If it pleases the Commission, Minchinton, initial J, from the Australian Hotels Association, the Accommodation Association of Australia and the Motor Inn, Motel and Accommodation Association. Thank you.

PN4

JUSTICE ROSS: Thank you. In South Australia?

PN5

MR C KLEPPER: If it pleases the Commission, Klepper, initial C, for Business SA.

PN6

JUSTICE ROSS: Thank you. In Newcastle?

PN7

MS K THOMSON: If the Commission pleases, Thomson, initial K, for ABI and the New South Wales Business Chamber. I understand our firm has previously been given permission to appear on behalf of our clients in these proceedings.

PN8

JUSTICE ROSS: Thanks, Ms Thomson. There was a statement issued on 2 November dealing with the substantive issues. There are some that are still in contention as to whether they're substantive or technical in drafting; a small number. We might deal with those during the conference at 10 o'clock. In relation to the substantive matters generally, have the parties had an opportunity to consider how long they might need to prepare their submissions and any evidence in support, and to file that?

PN9

MS THOMSON: Your Honour, the parties have had some discussions. I understand that our dates are a little bit different at this stage, but we're in the Commission's hands. We propose eight weeks to put in evidence and submissions, a further eight weeks in reply and then four weeks from then. I understand that RCI and AHA have sought a longer timetable.

PN10

JUSTICE ROSS: When you say then a further four weeks from then, what is the purpose of that?

PN11

MS THOMSON: That would be for any - so the first eight weeks would be for parties advancing a claim.

PN12

JUSTICE ROSS: Yes, I understand. So if you have got a substantive claim, then eight weeks from today, that's when you'll file your material, then eight weeks after that, anyone opposing the claim can put in anything in reply, but then you spoke about a further four weeks. What was that about?

PN13

MS THOMSON: Your Honour, that was for if the party filing a claim wanted to respond to any party opposing the claim.

PN14

JUSTICE ROSS: All right. Is there a general employer position in response or do each of you have different positions?

PN15

MS MINCHINTON: Your Honour, I've spoken to Restaurant and Catering, who I believe are not here today, about some time frames. We were both comfortable with having a time frame that started later in the year. In fact the AHA on behalf of the associations has proposed initial submissions in July, then an eight‑week time frame for matters in response.

PN16

The reason why we have proposed a time frame that is a bit later, your Honour, is because we're aware of another proceeding before the Commission in relation to revoking the Registered and Licensed Clubs Award. The associations have a fair amount of preparation to do in relation to that matter, which is - - -

PN17

JUSTICE ROSS: When are the submissions due on that?

PN18

MS MINCHINTON: I will just check with my colleague. In May, your Honour. The matter has been set for down, I believe, 10 days in July.

PN19

MR BULL: The applicant's evidence has been filed. The respondent's evidence has to be filed, I think, mid or early May. The hearing commences on 1 July and runs until the 23rd.

PN20

JUSTICE ROSS: Yes.

PN21

MR BULL: It will sort of probably take that long, unfortunately.

PN22

JUSTICE ROSS: Anyone else wish to say anything in relation to this? No? Okay. What does United Voice say about the issues that have been raised by the AHA? That is, the interaction - well, not direct interaction, but the workload associated with the Registered Clubs Award?

PN23

MS DABARERA: Your Honour, our view is that we do understand there is some workload with that, but we don't necessarily think that they directly interact.

PN24

JUSTICE ROSS: Well, I think that's right, but - - -

PN25

MR BULL: We would need, I suppose, hearing dates that don't clash.

PN26

JUSTICE ROSS: Yes.

PN27

MR BULL: Even though there would be separate Full Benches or separate members dealing with it. Technically they don't clash. In a sense most of the work is going to be the employer association. They've got more substantive claims in the award‑specific review of this than we do. We're not pushing the barrow, so to speak.

PN28

JUSTICE ROSS: All right.

PN29

MR BULL: As the Commission would, we want this review to be dealt with, but there is a problem in that award that is being reviewed may look quite different by August this year.

PN30

JUSTICE ROSS: I'm not sure I follow.

PN31

MR BULL: Well, if there is a revocation, it's merged - - -

PN32

JUSTICE ROSS: I see, yes.

PN33

MR BULL: I suppose the Hospitality Award doesn't vary that much. I would have thought the short answer is we need to push forward.

PN34

JUSTICE ROSS: I suppose another issue that arises though is if it's merged and Clubs are covered by Hospitality, then would the Clubs have had an opportunity to comment on the substantive changes? They are sort of, if you like, responding to what does the Hospitality Award look like now.

PN35

MR BULL: The award‑specific review of the Clubs Award has been placed in abeyance pending the outcome of the - - -

PN36

JUSTICE ROSS: I appreciate that.

PN37

MR BULL: So it's all a bit of a - it is, you know - - -

PN38

JUSTICE ROSS: Yes, but if the Clubs Award is eliminated and the Hospitality Award is extended to cover Clubs - - -

PN39

MR BULL: They may want to have award‑specific claims in the - - -

PN40

JUSTICE ROSS: Well, they also may want to respond to some of the substantive claims that your organisation is pressing and the other employer organisations are pressing.

PN41

MR BULL: They're not here. Like everyone, they can read the web site.

PN42

JUSTICE ROSS: Sure, but - - -

PN43

MR BULL: That's their problem.

PN44

JUSTICE ROSS: Well, except that if the scope of the award is at issue and there is at least a prospect that their interests will be covered by this award, it would seem to - there are two ways of dealing with that. Either Clubs gets involved in this now if it is to be heard before the Clubs Award matter or this matter be heard later. All right. Look, I will have a think about all that and I will have a look at the directions for the Clubs Award and when it's heard.

PN45

As it happens, there are other matters - the annual wage review, et cetera - that are likely it impact on the timing of this in any event, so I'll take into account everything that has been said and directions will be issued in due course. Okay. All right. Well, I'll see you at 10 o'clock.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [9.43 AM]