Jacqueline Moore and Others and Mayne Nickless t/as Armaguard [2001] NSWIRComm 71

Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales

CITATION : Jacqueline Moore and Others and Mayne Nickless t/as Armaguard [2001] NSWIRComm 71 APPLICANTS: Jacqueline Francis Moore Rick McNamarra David Eyb Anthony Ellison PARTIES : David Koopmans Anthony Kildey David Paea Rodney Bulmer RESPONDENT: Mayne Nickless t/as Armaguard

FILE NUMBER: 5986, 6164, 6341, 6345 of 2000; 109, 110, 111, 341 of 2001 CORAM: Sams DP CATCHWORDS : Notice of motion - application for joinder before a single member of Commission - convenience of parties - efficient and timely conduct of proceedings - Rules of the Commission -Notice of Motion granted. LEGISLATION CITED : Industrial Relations Act 1996 HEARING DATES: 04/03/2001 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/03/2001

APPLICANT Mr H Boghossian, Agent LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: RESPONDENT Mr A Freeman of Mayne Nickless

JUDGMENT:

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES CORAM: SAMS DP

DATE: 3 April 2001 Matter No IRC00/5986 JACQUELINE FRANCIS MOORE Matter No IRC00/6164 RICK McNAMARRA Matter No IRC00/6341 DAVID EYB Matter No IRC00/6345 ANTHONY ELLISON Matter No IRC01/109 DAVID KOOPMANS Matter No IRC01/110 ANTHONY KILDEY Matter No IRC01/111 DAVID PAEA Matter No IRC01/341 RODNEY BULMER and MAYNE NICKLESS t/as ARMAGUARD Applications re unfair dismissal pursuant to section 84 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996.

DECISION (On notices of motion)

1 The Commission has been moved by eight notices of motion filed by Mr H Boghossian (Agent), on behalf of former employees of Mayne Nickless Ltd, t/as Armaguard ("the respondent"). The motions are in identical terms and relate to Pt 6, ch 2, unfair dismissal applications, lodged at various times by the applicants. Shortly put, the motions seek to have the applications joined and allocated to a single member of the Commission for determination according to the provisions of the Industrial Relations Act, 1996 ("the Act"). 2 The applications have been allocated to five members of the Commission, namely, Commissioners Patterson, Connor, Redman, McKenna and Neal. I am advised that each application is only at the preliminary stage of proceedings; seemingly none have proceeded to conciliation. The parties have indicated to the respective Commissioners that it is their desire to have all matters listed before a single member. Individual proceedings have been stood over on that basis. 3 Mr Boghossian filed the notices of motion on 15 March 2001 and they were subsequently allocated to me by his Honour the President. 4 At the hearing of the motion on 3 April, Mr A Freeman appearing for the respondent, consented to the motion, indicating that the course proposed by Mr Boghossian had been the respondent's consistently held position before all of the Commissioners. 5 While the Commission does not have the substantive applications before me, it is apparent that at least six of the applicants were dismissed at the same time (24 November 2000) and all applicants were said to have been terminated for reasons of redundancy, including a number of others who were made redundant about the same time.

CONCLUSION

6 In exercising its various functions under the Act, the Commission is required to act promptly and efficiently in order to ensure a just and effective determination of matters before it. Rule 84(1) of the Commission's Rules is particularly apposite to this requirement: "84(1) [Directions] A tribunal may generally give all such directions and do all such things as in its opinion will enable expense or delay to be reduced and will help to achieve a prompt hearing of the matters at issue between the parties and will contribute to the expeditious conduct of the proceedings and the just determination of the matter or dispute and the equitable disposal of proceedings." 7 I have no doubt that this objective will be best served by granting the motion as sought. Indeed, to do otherwise would involve unnecessary costs, duplication and delay for the parties and result in a waste of the Commission's valuable time. 8 While I note that not all the applications raise precisely the same issues, particularly in regard to those which have been filed out of time (see s85 of the Act), they all raise the same substantive issue; namely, the alleged unfairness of the terminations of employment for reasons of redundancy. 9 I am also conscious of the respondent's consent to the motion. 10 The Commission will advise his Honour the President of its decision in this matter in order that his Honour may allocate the matters accordingly and take such other steps as his Honour considers appropriate. I propose to inform his Honour expeditiously as there is a listing of matter 6164 of 2000, before McKenna C, on 12 April.

DIRECTIONS

11 The Commission, pursuant to the Industrial Relations Commission's Rules, directs that:

1. Matters IRC00/5986, 00/6164, 00/6341, 00/6345, 01/109, 01/110, 01/111 and 01/341 be joined and listed before a single member of the Commission.

2. His Honour, the President be so advised.

Peter Sams Deputy President.

DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.