PN1

JUSTICE ROSS: Good morning. It's Justice Ross. Could I get the appearances, please. For Ai Group?

PN2

MS R BHATT: Yes, your Honour, it's Bhatt, initial R, appearing for Ai Group in relation to the Fast Food Industry Award. I am not sure if now is the right time to indicate, but in respect to the Hair and Beauty Industry Award I also appear for Hair & Beauty Australia and for the Australian Hair Council.

PN3

JUSTICE ROSS: That's fine, Ms Bhatt. We will just do the Fast Food Award for the moment.

PN4

MS BHATT: If it pleases.

PN5

JUSTICE ROSS: For the SDA?

PN6

MR A PARDO: May it please the Commission, my name is Pardo, initial A, for the SDA, in relation to the Fast Food Industry Award. With me is Ms S Perera, appearing in this conference but she will stay on for the Hair and Beauty Industry Award.

PN7

JUSTICE ROSS: Sure. Are there any other appearances?

PN8

MS K THOMSON: Yes, your Honour. It's Thomson, initial K, for ABI and the New South Wales Business Chamber.

PN9

JUSTICE ROSS: Thanks, Ms Thomson. Anyone else? No? All right. The agenda was circulated and I've received correspondence from Ai Group in relation to both the Fast Food and the Hair and Beauty Award. If I can go through the correspondence - sorry, I'll go through the agenda that was published yesterday. The first item asks whether there are any amendments to the summary of submissions document that was published on 21 January. Does anyone wish to say anything about that?

PN10

MS BHATT: No, your Honour.

PN11

JUSTICE ROSS: No? The second matter concerns the minor errors that are set out in paragraph 4 of the statement of 21 January. That is 21 FWCFB 293. There we set out some minor technical corrections in relation to the Fast Food Award and Hair and Beauty. In relation to the Fast Food Award, does anyone take any issue with any of those minor corrections?

PN12

MS BHATT: No, your Honour, but I have identified a couple of minor errors that seem to have arisen in the revised exposure draft.

PN13

JUSTICE ROSS: Yes.

PN14

MS BHATT: I can either identify them for you now or write to your chambers subsequently. Whatever is more convenient.

PN15

JUSTICE ROSS: Well, just bear with me for a moment. If you wouldn't mind identifying them now, Ms Bhatt, and then if you can confirm them in writing. That way we can see whether there is any issue taken with any of the other parties to the conference.

PN16

MS BHATT: Yes, your Honour. At clause 21.1 of the exposure draft there is a note that appears under table 6.

PN17

JUSTICE ROSS: Yes, note 1 or note 2?

PN18

MS BHATT: Note 1. Your Honour will see that at the conclusion of that note it reads "Clause 0" and it should say "Clause 21.1".

PN19

JUSTICE ROSS: Yes.

PN20

MS BHATT: Then just over the page, your Honour, clause 22.3.

PN21

JUSTICE ROSS: Yes.

PN22

MS BHATT: The second dot point in both subclauses - - -

PN23

JUSTICE ROSS: Yes.

PN24

MS BHATT: It's the same issue.

PN25

JUSTICE ROSS: Same cross‑reference?

PN26

MS BHATT: Yes, your Honour.

PN27

JUSTICE ROSS: Yes.

PN28

MS BHATT: Those are the only ones that I have identified as I was preparing for this morning's proceedings. I can't say that I've trawled through the entire document, but I can do that if it assists the Commission after the proceedings today.

PN29

JUSTICE ROSS: No, thank you, Ms Bhatt. Is there any issue taken by either the SDA or ABI to those minor corrections?

PN30

MS THOMSON: No, your Honour.

PN31

MR PARDO: No, your Honour.

PN32

JUSTICE ROSS: All right. Can I go to item C. Item C(1) sets out a number of items where a resolution was proposed in the summary of submissions document. If we deal with those matters first, those might - well, maybe optimistically - be regarded as not particularly contentious or for which there was a resolution proposed, then we will go to the outstanding items which on the face of it appear to raise more substantive issues.

PN33

If I can go to the items listed at C(1) and I'll go to each of you in turn. Look, the course I would adopt is if you don't raise an objection in relation to the proposed resolution to each particular item number, then we would take it that the proposed resolution is not opposed and that would be the course we would adopt. Ms Bhatt, can I go to you first? Any objection to any of the resolutions proposed under agenda item C(1)?

PN34

MS BHATT: No objection, your Honour.

PN35

JUSTICE ROSS: Thank you. Can I go to you, Mr Pardo?

PN36

MR PARDO: Yes. Thank you, your Honour. We do object to item 4 and we respectfully request the opportunity to make further submissions in that regard. We would link to item 4, item 35.

PN37

JUSTICE ROSS: Yes. All right. Items 4 and 35 you wish to make further submissions.

PN38

MR PARDO: Yes, your Honour. There is a little bit of overlap between items on C(1) and C(2) - and your Honour will tell me if I am getting ahead of myself. The SDA will request to make further submissions in regards to part‑time, casuals, classifications, coverage and annual leave. In that regard there is some overlap between the two. As you say, C(1) identifies things which are less contentious but we ask to make further submissions in regard to those. We would like to be able to do so holistically and so some of those items may be affected by our submissions.

PN39

JUSTICE ROSS: Which ones?

PN40

MR PARDO: (6), (7), (8), (9), (13) - - -

PN41

JUSTICE ROSS: How is (6) going to arise? That's just about where it goes, isn't it?

PN42

MR PARDO: As your Honour pleases. At least items (7) through to (13) we would deal with.

PN43

JUSTICE ROSS: Mr Pardo, I'm just not quite following you. Let's deal with C(2) for the moment. So far you have identified you don't agree with the proposed resolutions to items (4) and (35) and you wish to be heard further.

PN44

MR PARDO: Yes.

PN45

JUSTICE ROSS: Which other proposed resolutions do you not agree with in C(2)?

PN46

MR PARDO: Does your Honour mean C(1)?

PN47

JUSTICE ROSS: C(1), I'm sorry, yes. I do, yes.

PN48

MR PARDO: As you please. For example, at item (7) the current wording says "meals, snacks and/or beverages". We would just, for example, make submissions that "and/or" be introduced again. Apologising once more, with the intention to make further submissions in regard to the classifications and coverage as a whole, it may be that other items - if we make a holistic submission regarding the drafting as a whole, less contentious matters that are identified in C(1) would be impacted.

PN49

JUSTICE ROSS: Yes, there might be a consequential change if we accept your general submission. Is that the idea?

PN50

MR PARDO: Yes, your Honour.

PN51

JUSTICE ROSS: No, no, I follow. Okay. Ms Thomson, anything you want to say about C(1)?

PN52

MS THOMSON: No, thank you, your Honour.

PN53

JUSTICE ROSS: All right. We have the SDA wishing to make further submissions on items (4) and (35) in C(1). If I can go to C(2) and Ai Group has identified that it wishes to make further submissions in respect of items (20), (30), (39), (40), (51), (53) and (54). What about you, Mr Pardo, which ones do you want to make further submissions on?

PN54

MR PARDO: Thank you, your Honour. For coverage, items (10) through (13) inclusive. For part‑time employees, items (15), (17) and (18). For casual employees, item (19). For classifications, similar to what I (indistinct) for coverage we would be making holistic submissions. The items in C2 would be 20, 21, 22 and 25, although items 22 - pardon me - 23, 24 and 27 may have a consequential impact, as Your Honour pointed out. We would also - - -

PN55

JUSTICE ROSS: Well, let's just go to the items in C2 for a moment. Which ones are those?

PN56

MR PARDO: Yes, Your Honour. So - - -

PN57

JUSTICE ROSS: Twenty, 21?

PN58

MR PARDO: Twenty-two.

PN59

JUSTICE ROSS: Yes.

PN60

MR PARDO: Twenty-five.

PN61

JUSTICE ROSS: Twenty-five is not in C2.

PN62

MR PARDO: It's neither in C1, Your Honour.

PN63

JUSTICE ROSS: So it's been missed in C2, is that - - -

PN64

MR PARDO: It appears so.

PN65

JUSTICE ROSS: Twenty-five, yes.

PN66

MR PARDO: Also, Your Honour, items 50 through to 55, inclusive. We also note that AiG will be making further submissions on items 30, 39 and 40, and so the SDA would request to make further submissions as well.

PN67

JUSTICE ROSS: Let's just - bear with me for a moment.

PN68

MR PARDO: Yes, Your Honour.

PN69

JUSTICE ROSS: Ms Thomson?

PN70

MS THOMSON: Thank you, Your Honour. No, we're content to rely on our submission from 25 November. But subject to what the other parties' submissions are, and the breadth and extent of those, we may wish to make further reply submissions.

PN71

JUSTICE ROSS: Just before I get to the timing and to summarise where we're up to, it would appear that there are a number of items identified in the agenda at C2 that parties don't wish to make submissions to. I take it that - I will run through the numbers, and my question is whether those matters are - do I regard them as not being pressed? There's item 2, there is item 28, there is item 31, item 33, item 37, item 38, and item 45. They are variously either AI group or SDA items. Are they pressed or not? Ms Bhatt?

PN72

MS BHATT: They're pressed, but we're content for them to be determined based on what's already been filed.

PN73

JUSTICE ROSS: Okay.

PN74

MR PARDO: The SDA would be in a similar position, Your Honour.

PN75

JUSTICE ROSS: The parties are seeking an opportunity to make further submissions in respect of items 4, 10, 11, 13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 30, 35, 39, 40, and items 50 to 55. Have I missed any? No?

PN76

MS BHATT: Not from our perspective.

PN77

JUSTICE ROSS: Well - - -

PN78

MR PARDO: Your Honour, was item 12 omitted from the agenda? It appears that item 13 was repeated in C1 and C2.

PN79

JUSTICE ROSS: What's the position of item 12, then? That's an ABI matter, I think.

PN80

MR PARDO: In that it's a part of the coverage clause. It would be a part of our holistic submissions in regards to coverage.

PN81

JUSTICE ROSS: Mr Pardo, how much time do you require for the filing of your submissions?

PN82

MR PARDO: Would 24 February be convenient, Your Honour?

PN83

JUSTICE ROSS: Sure. I might make it the end of that week. So by 4 pm Friday the 26th of February parties are to file the submissions they wish to file in relation to those matters. I will do a short statement summarising the outcome later. I then propose to give each of you until 12 March to file any submissions in reply. Does anyone have a different view to those - the dates proposed? Do you want more or less time, or are you content with what's been proposed? Ms Bhatt?

PN84

MS BHATT: We are content with what's been proposed. Thank you, Your Honour.

PN85

JUSTICE ROSS: Mr Pardo?

PN86

MR PARDO: We're content, Your Honour. Thank you.

PN87

JUSTICE ROSS: Ms Thomson?

PN88

MS THOMSON: Yes, content, Your Honour. Thank you.

PN89

JUSTICE ROSS: And we will determine the outstanding issues on the basis of the submissions filed. Is there anything further in relation to the Fast Food Award? No? All right. Well, I will adjourn, and I will no doubt be talking to some of you at 10 o'clock when we deal with the Hair and Beauty Award. Thank you.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY [9.49 AM]