68 Mr Brands was appointed as Engineering Officer/Condition Monitoring Technician in September 1997 with Pacific Power at the Advanced Technology Centre where he remained until the sale of PPI when he was transferred as a displaced employee to RBMC.
69 Mr Brands evidence is that in late 2002 the Hon. Michael Egan requested state owned corporations to participate in a Voluntary Notification Scheme (VNS). Mr Brands stated that apart from four weeks secondment at Vales Point Power Station in August/September 2003 he has been unable to gain employment having unsuccessfully applied for four positions through the VNS and one external position in which he was also unsuccessful.
70 Mr Brands provides extensive evidence of requests for re-deployment, training and secondment, all of which were unsuccessful.
71 Mr Brands deposed that his salary has not altered since November 2002 despite increases in the cost of living which have eroded purchase power with a negative effective on his standard of living. Mr Brands further deposed that the value of superannuation has been adversely affected as his contributions and employer contributions have not increased. Mr Brands' evidence is that the value of his superannuation was some $40,000 less than an employee on the same salary point employed by Eraring Energy.
72 Mr La Spina acknowledged the difficulty in placement of Mr Brands, deposing that Mr Brands has received financial assistance to undertake a Bachelor of Engineering Mechatronics at the University of Newcastle.
Mr Colin Brann
73 Mr Brann commenced employment within the electricity industry as an apprentice Electrical Fitter/Mechanic in 1970 and after working as Testing Officer/Testing Group Sydney City Council attained employment with the EC in 1978 as Technical Officer/Transmission Supply Group (Sydney).
74 Mr Brann deposed that he was employed within the EC in different capacities until 2001 when he became Specialist Design Engineer/Engineering/Electrical and Control Systems/Electrical Group (Sydney) Pacific Power International, remaining until February 2003 when he elected to stay with the public sector and was placed with RBMC.
75 Mr Brann deposed that he has participated in all redeployment processes established and involved himself within the VNS having applied for nine positions within different electricity organisations.
76 Mr Brann deposed that he had been seconded to EnergyAustralia as Project Manager (Homebush Enserve) from November 2003 on his RBMC rate of pay, which he deposed was to the order of 10 percent less than the EnergyAustralia rate paid to employees undertaking the same work. Since the secondment Mr Brann has gained permanent employment within EnergyAustralia as a Project Engineer.
77 Mr Brann's evidence is that since November 2002, at which time a 1% pay rise was awarded, he has not received a pay increase and on comparison with the equivalent salary level within his current organisation he was at a significant loss.
78 Mr Brann deposed that without a rise in RBMC pay scales similar to those implemented within the other electricity corporations, potential superannuation benefits are greatly reduced.
79 Mr La Spina deposed that comparison of RBMC and EnergyAustralia pay scales is difficult, adding that it was open to Mr Brann to contest his salary during the period of secondment.
Mr Harinderpal Singh Chawla
80 Mr Chawla began his career with the electricity industry in India in the early 1970's as an electrical engineer and after emigrating to Australia attained employment with ACT Electricity Authority Canberra in 1985.
81 Mr Chawla's evidence is that he commenced with the EC in 1986 as Professional Electrical Engineer/Transmission/Plant Branch and remained with the organisation until the sale of PPI, at which time Mr Chawla was transferred to RBMC.
82 Mr Chawla has been successful in attaining permanent employment within EnergyAustralia following a secondment period of approximately four months, deposing that his current salary is substantially higher than what was received while on RBMC secondment rate of pay.
83 Mr Chawla's evidence is that he was paid at salary point 34 by RBMC and was assessed by EnergyAustralia at salary point 55 of the scale applicable within EnergyAustralia.
84 The EnergyAustralia Award 2003 ("the EnergyAustralia Award) 342 IG 402 provides a salary scale of different dimension to the electricity generators. Mr La Spina deposed that it is no possible to align the two scales to establish equivalents, and accordingly no valid comparison can be made. Mr Chawla deposed that alignment can be achieved by use of job evaluation processes relevant to each scale.
85 Both organisations use job evaluation methods to establish pay points for a particular task or set of tasks. Subject to the imperfections of structure and application of any job evaluation system, it is possible to arrive at an equivalent salary for the same job in each of the pay scales.
86 Mr Chawla deposed that the lack of salary progression experienced within RBMC has impacted on superannuation entitlements as these are dependent on final salary. Mr Chawla's evidence is that he has not received a pay increase since November 2001 which has resulted in a significant loss to him. Mr Chawla's evidence is that the position at EnergyAustralia is valued from $145 pw to $242 pw more than he was paid by RBMC and the same salary point under the Eraring Energy Employees Consent Award 2004 (the Eraring Energy Award) 345 IG 940 would be paid an additional $204 per week.
Mr Stephen Fisher
87 Mr Fisher has been involved with the electricity industry since July 1980 when he commenced employment with the EC as a carpenter.
88 From 1984 to 1990 Mr Fisher worked as a leading hand carpenter, civil inspector and building foreman for various periods.
89 In 1990 the Homebush Regional Centre was closed and Mr Fisher, having elected redeployment over redundancy, was employed as a civil inspector overseeing a stores refurbishment project, eventually returning to carpentry and general maintenance duties on completion of the project on a salary six points below that of a civil inspector.
90 Mr Fisher rejected further offers of redundancy and in subsequent consultation with immediate management, committed to a career in material supply. Mr Fisher was appointed to the position of Purchasing Officer in the Pacific Power Hyde Park offices and, at the request of management, undertook the Purchasing and Supply Certificate Course of two years duration conducted by TAFE.
91 On completion of this course Mr Fisher was assigned the additional duties of liaison with site staff on technical issues and undertook technical evaluations.
92 On disaggregation of Pacific Power Mr Fisher became part of the Engineering Services Group, then in 1998 became a commodities buyer in PPI.
93 It is Mr Fisher's evidence that he has participated in the VNS and WMC matching process with minimal success. Mr Fisher deposed that he is prepared to work wherever his skills and qualifications will be utilised. Mr Fisher's evidence is that he genuinely believed he would be redeployed in a manner similar to his previous experiences.
94 Mr Fisher's evidence is that he is paid at salary point 20 ($896.40 per week) which has not moved for three years resulting in an adverse effect on superannuation benefits. Mr Fisher put that the equivalent rate of pay on salary point 20 at Eraring Energy is $1023.26 pw; TransGrid $1079.30; Delta Electricity $1006.20 and Macquarie Generation $1013.90, noting that a multiplier effect magnified the disadvantage to him.
Mr Roman Migocki
95 Mr Migocki commenced employment with the EC in 1979 as Technical Officer Grade 1. Mr Migocki's career advanced to Senior Technical Officer by 1987 and in 1990 he was appointed Senior Technical Officer Grade 2. Mr Migocki was appointed to the position of Engineering Officer (Branch Planner) in 1993. Mr Migocki's evidence, not challenged, is that for diligence and dedication to duties and as recognition for extra efforts during preparation of major bids he was elevated to salary point 30, the top of the salary range for his position. In 1998 Mr Migocki was appointed Information Technology Support Officer for PPI.
96 Mr Migocki's evidence is that in 2002 when PPI was being reorganised he joined PPI's Services Group as Information Technology Contracts Administrator, where he remained until the demise of Pacific Power in June 2003.
97 It is Mr Migocki's evidence (unchallenged) that he worked a lot of unpaid overtime in the hectic period of winding up Pacific Power. Mr Migocki subsequently referred to this period as having actively supported a Government initiative unknowingly to his own disadvantage.
98 Mr Migocki is 57 years of age and has contributed to the State Superannuation Scheme (SSS) throughout his employment. It is Mr Migocki's evidence that he rejected a "better paid" position in private industry in 1988 on the basis of security of employment in the public sector and his commitment to the SSS. Mr Migocki deposed that, considering his age and commitment to superannuation, his only option on the demise of Pacific Power was re-deployment in the public sector.
99 Mr Migocki deposed that for these reasons he did not apply for a position with Connell Wagner. Mr Migocki deposed that he declined to take the redundancy package offered as he felt he should continue to contribute rather than take redundancy and go into retirement.
100 Mr Migocki's position was declared redundant on 30 May 2003.
101 Mr Migocki experienced a period of secondment with Eraring Energy from 24 May 2004.
102 Mr Migocki's evidence is that he actively sought placement in another position but was wrongly matched (both in qualifications and experience) twice by the Workplace Management Centre; and on another occasion was sent to an interview for a position which required excellent knowledge of specific procedures. Mr Migocki used his information technology skills to assist other employees within RBMC. Mr Migocki notes in his evidence that his salary was frozen at the December 2002 level, despite undertakings from Treasury that employees would not be disadvantaged.
103 Mr Migocki undertook two short training courses and made several unsuccessful applications for employment until being appointed Information Technology Business Support Officer at salary point 27 with Eraring Energy, commencing on 15 November 2004. The work required of him in this position is described as very similar to that undertaken for Pacific Power at the time of being declared surplus.
104 Mr Migocki deposed that despite a reduction from salary point 30 to salary point 27 he is paid approximately $20.00 per week more under the Eraring Energy Award than he was at salary point 30 under the 2002 Award.
Mr Nicholas Sollazo
105 Mr Sollazzo commenced employment with the EC in February 1971 remaining with the EC until the sale of PPI at which time he was transferred as a displaced employee to RBMC located in Newcastle.
106 Mr Sollazzo's evidence is that he received the guarantees of no forced redundancy and no disadvantage from the NSW Treasurer in the same terms as other employees.
107 Mr Sollazzo takes issue with the assertion by management that the reform process was concluded in 2000/2001 with the establishment of Eraring Energy.
108 It is Mr Sollazzo's evidence that up to and during the time of sale of PPI he was committed to and actively employed in the role of Consultant/Machine Condition Monitoring servicing the power stations and paid at salary point 30, which is now $178.26 pw (or 14%) below the equivalent salary point 30 at Eraring Power Station.
109 Mr Sollazzo deposed that he was prevented by management from taking up available positions at power stations. At para 10 of exhibit 30 he states:
10. During my employment period at Pacific Power's/Advance Technology Centre there have been various voluntary redundancy packages and 'mix and match' positions at various Power Stations. But because my position was regarded as essential to the business at the Advance Technology Centre I was not allowed to participate in these opportunities.
110 Mr Sollazzo deposed that he did not seek employment with Connell Wagner on the sale of PPI as the negative effect on his superannuation made that course non-viable for him.
111 Mr Sollazzo's evidence is that, given his specialist skills, it has been difficult for him to find a position outside power generation.
112 Mr Sollazzo has had two periods of secondment with Delta Electricity, in which he was able to apply his skills and experience to substantial tasks of material benefit to Delta. Mr Sollazzo deposed that he was ready and willing to take up a position with any of the Electricity Generators and would retrain if needed, and that he was increasing his information technology skills on his own initiation.
113 Mr Sollazzo deposed that he has not received a wage increase since November 2002 which has reduced his purchasing power and greatly affected superannuation pension entitlements, which he details in Exhibit 32A as a reduction in retirement benefits of $95.41 per fortnight on early retirement and up to $426.51 per fortnight on retirement at age 60.
114 Mr La Spina disputed an assertion by Mr Sollazzo that he had been paid less than equivalent employees of Delta Electricity when working on secondment.
Mr Ian Turnbull
115 Mr Turnbull began his career within the electricity industry as a Boilermaker in 1977 with the EC at Munmorah Power Station where he remained until 1982 when transferred to Bayswater Power Station in the capacity of Power Station Construction Welding Inspector.
116 Mr Turnbull deposed that he was transferred back to Munmorah Power Station after the EC's Power Projects Division was disbanded in 1989.
117 It is Mr Turnbull's evidence that on appointment he suffered a reduction of one salary point on the basis that he would never have to move from his permanent location again.
118 The evidence of Mr Turnbull is that following appointment to Munmorah he was required to undertake work at Vales Point and Eraring Power Stations and in June 1999, when the EC became PPI, first at the Lake Macquarie Centre and than at Morisset. Mr Turnbull undertook work at Eraring and Bayswater Power Stations in NSW and assignments for PPI at Rockhampton, Mt Isa, Burringjuck and a one year assignment at the Phai Lai Power Plant in Vietnam.
119 The evidence of Mr Turnbull at pts 6 and 7 of exhibit 33 is:
6. After completing my assignment at the Phai Lai Power Plant project in Vietnam, I was transferred (without consultation) from Pacific Power international to Pacific Power, which contained the employees not utilised for the consultancy work that was undertaken by Pacific Power International.
7. In 2002, I was relocated to the Advance Technology Centre (ATC) due to the imminent closure of Pacific Power. Pacific Power Management informed me that even though we were being located at the ACT, we would not be eligible to be considered for a placement with Connell Wagner as part of the PPI sale process.
120 At the time of giving evidence Mr Turnbull was 55 years of age and had been engaged in the power industry for some 27 years. It is appropriate to reprint items 13, 14 and 15 from the testimony of Mr Turnbull (exhibit 33) which succinctly describe his circumstances:
13. Since being placed in the RBMC, I have undertaken training in project Management and have actively participated in all processes such as the Workforce Management Centre, career coaching and the Voluntary Notification Scheme (VNS). To this date I have been frustrated at the lack of permanent opportunities available to me under this system. With my training and experience being specialised in the Power Generation Sector, the opportunities available to me in other Government Departments are almost non-existent, other than the Power Stations.
14. I feel that I have been greatly disadvantaged over the last 3 years, as I have not had a salary adjustment since 2002. The difference in salary between my salary of $1,260.50/wk/gross, Salary Point 30, and the equivalent salary point in the other Generators are as follows; Eraring Energy $1,438.76/wk/gross, Salary Point 30; Delta Electricity $1,414.18/wk/gross, Salary Point 30; Macquarie Generation $1,442.90/wk/gross, Salary Point 30.
15. This does not take into account the lack of opportunity to increase my income through overtime and the possible allowances. This has reduced the purchasing power of my pay and has led to frustration and anxiety due to the stagnation in RBMC of my salary and the overall effect it will have to my projected superannuation entitlements in the State Superannuation Scheme, which, when extrapolated over the years, is significant. In addition I cannot transfer my sick leave accruals to another State Owned Corporation unless it agrees to take them on.