//
© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[1990] AIRC 102
mixed. Application acceded to; award to be varied subject to: (a) provision of amended draft order identifying levels 1A and 1B; (b) statutory declarations from both parties covering absorption and adherence...
The Industrial Relations Commission approved a union-employer agreement to update an award covering workers at irradiation plants. The new classification structure included better training and multiskilling. Although the judge had some doubts about whether two middle-level positions deserved a $15 pay increase under the national wage rules, he accepted that these workers needed special certificates to operate dangerous equipment, were responsible for checking sterilisation processes, and required up to a year of training. The approval was conditional on both parties signing statutory declarations promising to stick to the agreed pay rates, and the changes only lasted six months.
AI-generated legal information, not legal advice. Zoe can make mistakes. Check the cited source, and for advice about your situation consult a qualified Australian lawyer.
The application which is for a consent variation of the Ionising Processing (Irradiation) Award, 1985 is acceded to. The application is based upon a notification lodged on 8 August 1989 for a variation under section 113 of the Act. Proof of service of the notification of the listing of the matter and the application for variation has been placed before the Commission. There is a draft order submitted but I understand that The National Union of Storeworkers, Packers, Rubber and Allied Workers has a further variation to make to that draft order, specifically the identification of two proposed levels (being level 1A and level 1B) within level 1 wage grouping, the details of which have been advanced on transcript.
1 cited instrument linked from this judgment.
The draft order should be accompanied by an appropriate form of statutory declaration indicating that the commitment to absorption of the paid rates award is forthcoming from both the employer and from the union. The making of any order in the matter will be dependent upon both provision of the draft order as amended and the statutory declaration covering absorption and adherence to the paid rates award in this particular instance. Should the parties not be in a position to supply those matters, I will relist the matter at the request of either party.
As to the basis of the variation, the case is advanced essentially on the lines that there is agreement to a proposed classification structure which will be inserted in the award. At present there are four classifications
provided for within the award. There is some agreement as to a set of definitions and it is said the intention is to produce a greater degree of multiskilling and a capacity to enhance training for the company's purposes. Some attention has focused in the course of the hearing upon the question of the appropriateness of varying the award to allow a first structural efficiency increase of $15.00 for the proposed level 2 and level 3 which are essentially developments of the plant operator position as defined currently
in the award. _______________________________________________________________________________
(1)Print G2951 [I031] I have some reservations about the appropriateness of the extension of the $15.00 increase. However, the parties have relied upon the requirement for a certificate of competency to operate plant and equipment. They have also adverted to the nature of their responsibilities as the plant involves sterilisation of products using irradiation techniques. The plant operators in question have responsibility for verification of the process and are accountable for the preparation of documentation relating to the process while the plant operator is performing the functions. It is said that access to the plant operator status is dependent upon a period of on-the-job experience of up to twelve months and a period of working under close supervision once a certificate of competency has been obtained.
In the circumstances I consider that the public interest does not require me to set aside what is a consent arrangement between the parties in respect of a paid rates award. On the material presented I am sufficiently satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the National Wage Case principles.
There is associated with the proposal a detailed exhibit indicating a proposal for implementation of the structural efficiency principle at the Ansell Steritech plants which are the areas covered by this award. I have taken into account that documentation and the lack of objection by Mr Hayward who appeared on behalf of The Australian Chamber of Manufactures and the company to the making of the award in the terms proposed.
The award will be varied, subject to receipt of the additional draft order and to the receipt of the statutory declarations to which I have referred, from the first pay period commencing on or after 18 December 1989 and shall remain in force for a period of six months.
Application acceded to; award to be varied subject to: (a) provision of amended draft order identifying levels 1A and 1B; (b) statutory declarations from both parties covering absorption and adherence to paid rates award; (c) variation effective from first pay period commencing on or after 18 December 1989; (d) variation limited to six months