New South Wales Local Government, Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines and Utilities Union v Shellharbour City Council re: proposed restructure [2016] NSWIRComm 1001

New South Wales Local Government, Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines and Utilities Union v Shellharbour City Council re: proposed restructure [2016] NSWIRComm 1001

The Commission found that the evidence did not support the union's claims that the council erred in evaluation or grading, or that the evaluation system was improperly applied. The evaluation methods, based on position descriptions and compliant with the Award and JIQ guidelines, were followed. There was insufficient evidence to order regrading. However, as input from job holders was not obtained for the Tractor Operator roles, a recommendation was made for PD review and a fresh evaluation. The Arborist claim was dismissed as correct process was followed due to lack of incumbents.

Parties
Notifier: New South Wales Local Government, Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines & Utilities Union; Respondent: Shellharbour City Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 January 2016
Procedural Posture
Industrial Dispute / Arbitrated Decision With Recommendations
Outcome
Claims for regrading dismissed; recommendations made for review and re-evaluation of Tractor Operator positions; Arborist claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Job Evaluation, Position Grading, Restructuring, Award Compliance, Dispute Resolution
Industrial Law Job Evaluation Position Grading Restructuring Award Compliance Dispute Resolution

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

New South Wales Local Government, Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines & Utilities Union

Notifier

Shellharbour City Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Industrial Dispute / Arbitrated Decision With Recommendations

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Council erred in evaluating and grading the positions of Tractor Operators and Arborists
  2. 2 Whether the Job Information Questionnaire (JIQ) process and Position Descriptions (PDs) were correctly applied
  3. 3 Whether there was proper input from job holders in the PD and JIQ processes

Ratio Decidendi

The Commission found that the evidence did not support the union's claims that the council erred in evaluation or grading, or that the evaluation system was improperly applied. The evaluation methods, based on position descriptions and compliant with the Award and JIQ guidelines, were followed. There was insufficient evidence to order regrading. However, as input from job holders was not obtained for the Tractor Operator roles, a recommendation was made for PD review and a fresh evaluation. The Arborist claim was dismissed as correct process was followed due to lack of incumbents.

Court Disposition

Claims for regrading dismissed; recommendations made for review and re-evaluation of Tractor Operator positions; Arborist claim dismissed.

Orders

  • The Tractor Operators classifications (Front Deck Mower, Tractor Operator and Tractor – Boom/Slasher) to provide input and feedback into the development of the Position Descriptions for their roles.
  • Pursuant to section 136(1)(a) of the Industrial Relations Act 1996, the position of Tractor Operator be re-evaluated in accordance with the requirements of the Job Information Questionnaire.