[19] The respondents' response to the Federation's special case factors was, in general terms that, firstly, in respect of an economic adjustment the respondents have offered a six per cent increase over two years designed to maintain the real value of wages but this has been rejected by the Federation. Secondly, as to the productivity, efficiency and quality of work improvements relied upon by the Federation:
(a) These appear to traverse the same or similar ground as is relied upon by the Federation in the work value changes aspects of its case.
(b) To the extent that there have been productivity, efficiency and quality of work improvements by employees the subject of the Federation's application these matters have been compensated for by the salary increases received since 1991.
(c) Further, in addition to the above, to the extent that productivity, efficiency and quality of work improvements are taken into account by the Commission in its assessment of the Federation's work value changes application it would be erroneous (and amount to double counting) for those matters to be taken into account in the Federation's special case application. Equally, to the extent that productivity, efficiency and quality of work improvements are taken into account by the Commission in its assessment of the Federation's special case application it would be erroneous for those matters to be taken into account in the Federation's work value application.
[20] Thirdly, as to the risk of a future teacher shortage:
(a) The Commission would not overturn the well-established industrial principle that wage rates should not be set on the basis of shortages (even in the case of important professions). To increase rates on the basis of a labour shortage would be contrary to the public interest: Re Public Hospital Nurses (State) Award (No 3) (2002) 121 IR 28 at [90].
(b) In considering the issue of a shortage of teachers the Commission would follow the long-standing principle that it is not appropriate to set rates to address shortages because that would cause rates to be set other than on the basis of the true value of the relevant work: Equal Remuneration Case (2000) 97 IR 177 at 214.7 - 215.3 at [151] - [152], particularly the reference to Local Courts Anomaly Case [1989] AR(NSW) 638 at 645.9 - 646.1; see also Mills and Sorrell, Federal Industrial Law , 5th Edition, 1975 at [173]; In re Academic Officers (University of Technology) Award [1958] AR(NSW) 55 at 57.7 - .8 ; Re Railways Professional Officers Award (1958) 89 CAR 40 at 48.02 - 49.5; Re Metal Trades Award; Re State Electricity Commission of Victoria (1964) 106 CAR 535 at 564.09 - 566.07; In re Crown Employees (Teachers) Awards [1980] AR(NSW) 910 at 930.9 and Re Australia Nursing Federation - s 170MX Arbitration [PR931289] (Australian Industrial Relations Commission) at [59].
(c) There are strong public interest reasons for not setting rates based on the existence of a labour shortage. To do so:
(i) would lead to rates being set that were not based on what the Commission determined to be a fair and just rate for that work: see the Objects of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 (NSW), in particular s 3(a);
(ii) would be inequitable to do so for one group, in circumstances where wages are not otherwise moved on this basis. Further, it would lead to inequity in comparison to employees working in areas where there is no current shortage;
(iii) would lead to consequential pressure for flow-on outside the area of need, creating other difficulties;
(iv) would be contrary to the Commission's long standing practice of not setting wages based on a "market rate" approach where shortages are addressed in classic economic theory by the market increasing the "cost" of labour (i.e. higher wages); and
(v) would be to artificially increase rates of pay to cover short term labour shortages which come and go, and even in the case of persistent shortages, heighten or lessen in intensity over time. In the present case, a labour shortage may or may not be affected by changed economic conditions, changes in the population profile, or a combination of such factors. In these circumstances any artificially increased rate of pay would remain after the circumstances giving rise to it had changed or been removed.
(d) Whilst the Commission may be concerned to see steps taken to alleviate a potential shortage of teachers such a concern cannot lead the Commission to ignore well established industrial principles and thereby create a new basis for wage increases which could have widespread and unpredicted ramifications. In particular, if the Commission were to award an increase based on the fact that there is a shortage in an important profession or trade it would inevitably lead to similar claims being made by others.
(e) The position is a fortiori here when the Commission is addressing a claim based on a potential labour shortage, the dimensions of which, by definition, cannot be assessed. In any event, insofar as any predictions can be made as to areas where shortages are likely to be required to be addressed the respondents have put in place a number of strategies to address this situation.
[21] Fourthly, as to the decline in the relativity of teachers' salaries to both average earnings for employees generally and average earnings for professionals:
(a) The Commission would not conclude that a special case (i.e. on the ground contended for by the Federation) has been made out simply by reference to the rates payable to other professional and/or non-professional groups.
(b) Reference to the statistical comparators relied on by the Federation do not make out a special case. Changes in average earnings or average award wages, each average involving thousands of occupations, can provide no guide at all as to how the value of the work of teachers, being one of the thousands of occupations concerned, has altered relative to the value of the work of other occupations: In re Crown Employees (Teachers) Award Reference 1981 AR (NSW) 217 at 223.6 - 223.7 (albeit in the context of a work value changes application). That is, the Federation's reliance on statistical comparators does not "establish an adequate evidentiary foundation for those factors which are relied upon as showing the special case attributes of the case": Ambulance Officers Case (2001) 113 IR 384 at 420.10; par [168].
[22] Fifthly, as to the Vinson Report:
(a) It is entirely unclear how it is said by the Federation that the Vinson Report in globo provides a justification, on special case grounds, for a 25 percent, across the board, salary claim.
(b) Relevantly, the Vinson Report (at p 370.4) concluded by commenting that it had difficulty "seeing how anything less than a 5% increase, resulting in annual gains of the order of $2,000 - $3,000 for the majority of teachers, would be just and supportive of the scale of system change recommended." This is a conclusion far more in tune with the respondents' case than the applicant's case.