Technicians to be “operationally” part of the farm crew physically at the farm pens.
Similarly, there was evidence about witnesses’ understanding of what the term “on farm”
meant, as that term appears in the definition of “Marine Operations” in the 2017
Agreement. I find those aspects of the parties’ evidence to be of limited assistance,
although I had regard to underlying facts supporting a witness’ opinion (where those
facts were stated) and to which facts were said to support particular legal conclusions.
• [66] The parties gave evidence about the progress and content of the bargaining
between the parties. Most of that evidence was largely unchallenged either way, with two
exceptions I describe below.
• [67] Mr Mundey gave an overview of various enterprise agreements with Tassal
involving the AWU. He identified five enterprise agreements with Tassal’s “processing”
business and two enterprise agreements for its “farming” business (which included the
2017 Agreement). Neither party considered it necessary to address the specifics of those
enterprise agreements, save for the 2017 Agreement, and I proceed on the basis they are
not material other than they show that enterprise agreements for different operational
or geographic locations exist.
• [68] Mr Mundey gave evidence about steps taken in bargaining for a new enterprise
agreement to replace the 2017 Agreement. Relevantly, Mr Mundey gave evidence to the
effect that since the first bargaining meeting on 6 September 2021 and consistently
since, employees in the Feed Centre had expressed their wish to pursue a separate
enterprise agreement specific to their circumstances. His evidence included
correspondence to Tassal setting out various grounds as to why Tassal ought to have a
discrete enterprise agreement for the feeders. I accept that evidence, which was not
controversial, as do I accept that Tassal had consistently stated that it would not agree to
a separate enterprise agreement of that kind and that, in Tassal’s view, a discrete feeders
agreement was not appropriate. Given that communications between the parties during
bargaining substantially reflected the positions of the parties before the Commission
(which I describe in detail below), it is not necessary to set it out here.
• [69] In respect of the 2017 Agreement, Mr Mundey gave evidence as to why, in his view,
the 2017 Agreement did not apply to the work activities of the Feed Technicians. This
concerns one of the ‘disputed’ categories of evidence about bargaining I foreshadowed
above.
• [70] Ms Murphy and Mr O’Dwyer were both bargaining representatives for their
respective crews. Their evidence in that respect was that the Feed Technicians wanted to
bargain for their own enterprise agreement, separate from the divers and works crew. It
was not in dispute that the Feed Technicians have been seeking their own enterprise
agreement since around September 2021, noting that bargaining was commenced by
Tassal in August 2021. In addition to that claim, the Feed Technicians’ log of claims
includes a fifteen percent pay increase, a parking allowance, mobile phone
reimbursement, set seasonal rostering, a 4.25 percent per year wage increase, and a new
level 5 classification. The initial log of claims by the AWU also stated that the Feed
Technicians wanted a separate agreement. Other claims in the AWU log of claims
included wage increases of 4 percent per year, matters about rostering, matters about
overtime, some changes to how certain allowances were paid (in particular divers’
allowances) and claims for additional allowances, among a number of other matters.
• [71] It is unnecessary to rehearse the cut and thrust of the bargaining. There are matters
Tassal agreed to, such as a Feed Technologist classification and a level 5 classification.
There are matters it has rejected. There have been revisions to previously stated
positions throughout bargaining.
• [72] Tassal has consistently rejected the fifteen percent pay claim. Tassal has also
consistently rejected any claim for a separate enterprise agreement solely with Feed
Technicians. In this respect, Tassal’s points out (and it was the case) that the 2017
Agreement was voted on after the feeders had been relocated to the Feed Technician
Centre. Tassal says those arrangements have worked well and are unnecessary to
change. The AWU submissions note that the F17 declaration accompanying the