TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
Fair Work Act 2009                                                    

VICE PRESIDENT HATCHER

s.156 - 4 yearly review of modern awards

Four yearly review of modern awards

(AM2014/243)

Seagoing Industry Award 2010

Sydney

10.05 AM, MONDAY, 16 JANUARY 2017

PN1          

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Can I take appearances, firstly in Sydney.  Mr Keats.

PN2          

MR N KEATS:  Good morning, your Honour, My name is Keats, initial N, solicitor, I appear for the Maritime Union of Australia.  I understand permission has previously been granted to me.

PN3          

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Yes.

PN4          

MR K WYDELL:  Good morning, your Honour.  Wydell, initial J.  I appear for the Australian Maritime Officers Union.

PN5          

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.  And the appearances in Melbourne.  It's probably easier if you just stay seated.

PN6          

MR N NIBEN:  If the Commission pleases, Niben, initial N, for the Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers.

PN7          

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Yes.

PN8          

MS I GUARAN:  Guaran, initial I, for Maritime Industry Australia Ltd.

PN9          

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  All right.  Can I begin by just confirming what the issues are that need to be dealt with by the Full Bench.  Firstly there are the issues of the alleged NES inconsistencies raised by the Fair Work Ombudsman with respect to current clauses 8.2 and 27, although I note that the parties have a common view about clause 18.2; and the second issue, as I understand it - sorry, is there any other issue, Mr Keats?

PN10        

MR KEATS:  No, your Honour.  And I understood from the directions of the President that we were only dealing with the clause 27 issue from the way the issues are identified in item 18 of the revised summary.

PN11        

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Yes, all right.  The actual direction:

PN12        

The Full Bench is to hear the alleged - any inconsistencies and the issues identified at item 18 of the revised summary of submissions.

PN13        

Which I understand is the same issue, is it not?

PN14        

MR KEATS:  It's the same issue in slightly different factual circumstances, so it leads to slightly different issues at the end of the day.

PN15        

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  All right.  Does any other party disagree that those are the issues that the Full Bench needs to determine?  I will take that silence as assent.

PN16        

MR WYDELL:  Not aware of any other issues.

PN17        

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  All right.  Thank you.  Now, the next question I have for the parties to consider is whether this requires a face to face hearing or whether the matter can be dealt with by way of written submission only.  Does any party want to venture a view about that?

PN18        

MR KEATS:  For my part, your Honour, I would be happy to proceed on written submission.  I don't require an oral hearing.

PN19        

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Right.  Does any party take the view that the matter needs a face to face hearing, or whether it's enough to deal with it by way of written submission?

PN20        

MR GUARAN:  MIAL doesn't, your Honour.

PN21        

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Doesn't require a face to face hearing?

PN22        

MR GUARAN:  No, we don't.

PN23        

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  All right.  Thank you.  Does any ‑ ‑ ‑

PN24        

MR WYDELL:  I think we do it on papers, sir.

PN25        

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Yes.  Mr Niben, do you take any different view about that?

PN26        

MR NIBEN:  No, your Honour.  I think it can be dealt with on the papers.

PN27        

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  All right.  So the next question is:  do the parties need to make submissions which reply to each other, or can they simply file submissions on a common date?  Perhaps the way to do it is for the parties to all file submissions on a common date, then they can all have a common date for replying to each other.  Is that satisfactory?

PN28        

MR KEATS:  Satisfactory, your Honour.

PN29        

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  All right.  So how long do the parties think they would need to file their written submissions?  I take it there's no need for any evidentiary material.

PN30        

MR KEATS:  Not for our point, no.

PN31        

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  How long will the parties need?

PN32        

MR KEATS:  Two weeks, for our part.

PN33        

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  All right.  If I be a bit more generous and make it four weeks; does any party need longer than four week?  No.  And then allow parties two weeks, then, to reply to each other, and the Full Bench can then make its decision.

PN34        

MR KEATS:  That's suitable.

PN35        

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Is that satisfactory to everybody?

PN36        

MR WYDELL:  Yes, your Honour.

PN37        

MS GUARAN:  Yes, your Honour.

PN38        

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  All right.  I will have issued formal directions to that effect.  is there any other issue that needs to be dealt with this morning?

PN39        

MR KEATS:  No, your Honour.

PN40        

MR WYDELL:  No, your Honour.

PN41        

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  All right.  I thank the parties for their attendance and I will now adjourn.

ADJOURNED INDEFINITELY                                                        [10.10 AM]