DISPUTE RE DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE CONCERNING UNION MEMBER

WESTERN AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

PARTIES The State School Teachers' Union of WA (Incorporated)

APPLICANT

-v-

The Director General, Department of Education

RESPONDENT

CORAM Commissioner S J Kenner

DATE Monday, 18 October 2010

FILE NO. C 32 OF 2010

CITATION NO. 2010 WAIRC 00997

Catchwords Industrial Law (WA) – Application for interim orders – Minute of proposed order issued – Minor variations made – Industrial Relations Act 1979 s35.

Result Order issued

Representation 

Applicant Mr M Amati

Respondent Mr J Misso of counsel

Supplementary Reasons for Decision

1         The Commission’s reasons for decision and minute of proposed order in this matter were published on 12 October 2010.  The parties were given an opportunity to speak to the minutes of the proposed order in writing pursuant to s 35 of the Industrial Relations Act 1979 (“the Act”).

2         Both parties have identified an error in the proposed order 1, which amendment will be made.

3         In relation to the proposed order 2, the respondent submitted that given the purpose of the Commission’s order is to enable Mr Dakoor to remain employed until the current disciplinary proceedings under Part 5 of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 (“the PSM Act”) and any appeal from those proceedings have been completed, order 2 should be expressly so confined.  The applicant opposes such an amendment and submits that the terms of the proposed order 2 currently expressed are consistent with the Commission’s reasons for decision and the order as an interim order. 

4         Having considered the matter I am not persuaded to vary the terms of proposed order 2.

5         There is a degree of flexibility intended by the Commission in the order as proposed. Whilst the order is interim, and only for the purposes as expressed in the Commission’s reasons for decision, the proposed order 2 enables some flexibility in either varying, revoking or setting aside the order in the event that the parties resolve the current dispute without the necessity for Mr Dakoor to exercise any right of appeal pursuant to s 78 of the PSM Act. 

6         In such a circumstance, given the liberty to apply granted to the parties, the Commission may take appropriate steps in accordance with the proposed order 2.  In any event, however, on the disposition of any appeal by Mr Dakoor, the intent of the Commission is that the order be brought to an end by further order of the Commission.

7         Accordingly, an order now issues.