ASF-IWA Brisbane protest against 20% wage cuts

85 posts / 0 new
Last post
Lugius's picture
Lugius
Offline
Joined: 19-04-10
Jul 15 2012 09:52

Shitfights? Guilt trips? Cheap shots? Aren't we being just a little too precious? I, for one, are not having a go at any individual but any idea is fair game.

Quote:
It doesn't have the power to accept or reject industrial campaigns on behalf of members, Branches or Industrial Unions. Branchs and Industrial Unions are autonomous to intiate or support any action they see fit.

This includes the right to reject actions. Which I see is a fundamental organising difference with the ASF and IWW, as ASF branches are "compelled to act" according to ASF statutes.

And it's a strucutral point I disagree with. Because you can't coerce solidarity, and it removes the autonomy of individuals, Branchs and Unions to decide for themselves.

WTF? If your union decides to go on strike, does the individual have the autonomy to break the strike? Should we respect the individual autonomy of the scab to decide to cross a picket line?

From the ASF Aims, Principles and Statutes;

Quote:
In the present we take an active part in the struggle for worker solidarity, shorter hours, immediate wage increases and improved working conditions. And we actively oppose all attacks on workers such as conscription of labour, strike breaking, drives for increased production and longer working hours, wage cuts or unemployment.

This compels the Melbourne affiliate to respond to the Brisbane affiliate's request for support and solidarity. I would have thought that this would be the case for the IWW as well. You appear to be suggesting that individual IWW members or branches can decide for themselves whether or not they will support a campaign or show solidarity, surely this is not right. When you join an ASF affiliated union you agree to abide by the aims, principles and statutes. The act of joining is voluntary one. Is this not the same for the IWW? I'd suggest that the conception of individual autonomy you have outlined is consistent with middle-class notion of individual freedom. An anarchist conception of individual freedom is not absolute as it is necessarily limited by a social responsibility. A good unionist will act against their own interests (go on strike and lose money) in favour of a social interest (sticking fat to win for all) and would feel that sense of responsibilty.

Quote:
Diminishing this process by throwing around lines like "It's just a popularity contest that leads to concentrations of power" is just immature and inaccurate.

It also makes me wonder how the ASF decides who is going to be the 'Secretariet' if you don't also vote. If you do vote, then aren't 'ASF Secretariet' elections also "just a popularity contest"?

And if an 'ASF Secretariet' can be removed within a day, I wonder how is that possible using proper concensus methods, in a Federation spread accross a continent as large as Australia?

Immature? An attempt to infantilise my point and position yourself as a sensible adult. Not really an argument. Inaccurate? Maybe. I was making a broader point about electing a committee by popular vote by the entire membership (as the the IWW does) runs the risk of becoming a popularity contest where the winners are there because they're more likable. If you read the ASF statutes, you will find that the Secretariat is the responsibility of the affiliate chosen by ASF Congress which is made up of delegates of those affiliates. Furthermore, all Congress decisions must be ratified by affilates post-Congress in order to be binding. Ratification acknowledges that proper process has been adhered to. This is a fundamental difference as it diffuses or dissipates power through the affiliate as opposed to the popularly elected individual who can claim a mandate on the basis of his or her popularity. This makes the ASF practice far more consistent with anarchist practice than the IWW I would suggest.

Quote:
And this is what we are seeing play out right now, with IWW members from Brisbane and Wollongong participating in pickets, Melbourne Branch now supporting the campaign, and now a write-up in Direct Action.

These are tangible displays of solidarity and support for the pizza delivery drivers and this campaign, from the IWW.

It is quite possible that there are now more IWW members involved in participating in the pickets, then ASF members. But who's counting, and really who cares.

Anyway, if you want local support contact the local IWW branch, which for the record ASF-Brisbane never did.

As explained earlier in this thread, The Melbourne ASF initiated contact with the Melbourne IWW in 1997 with a view to maintaining fraternal relations. The Melbourne IWW reponsed telling the Melbourne ASF that communication should be directed through the ROC of the IWW. This is what ASF-M advised ASF-B to do based on that advice from the IWW. The support shown by individual IWW members is greatly appreciated. But I would point out that not the ROC nor any IWW branch or individual member made direct contact with any ASF affiliate asking what support was needed which might have avoided the situation where the IWW was calling for a boycott of Domino's which drivers concerned did not want. What about that for 'an external other'?

Quote:
Personally I think the comments made about these pickets being 'an external other' comming in on the pizza workers have some validity.

Unless the pizza delivery drivers are driving this campaign themselves, it doesn't increase any form of workplace organising, radical self-activity or working class resistance.

The delivery drivers who are members of the Brisbane affiliate of the ASF are driving this campaign. You did not know this? You live in Brisbane do you not? The suggestion that it is 'an external other' has no validity at all.

The ideas and actions of the IWW are fair game for scrutiny as are the ASF's or any other organisation or, indeed, individual. I know this is now getting off topic so here is notice of starting a new thread that looks at the similarities and differences between the IWW and the ASF and other IWA affiliates.

axxs's picture
axxs
Offline
Joined: 16-03-06
Jul 16 2012 08:30

Two members of ASF Brisbane attended the Domino's driver hearing today, (a larger write up to follow later) ...

The start of the FWA proceedings it was unsuccessfully argued by Domino's lawyers and SDA to the commissioner that testimony from ASF-B Members should not be recognised.

SDA stated that the 2009 agreement did not include the drivers because they and Domino's couldn't come to an agreement for them at the time. They put forward that negotiations are happening atm, Domino's has agreed to a ~$1 increase, and they wished to adjourn.

ASF-B argued against the SDA submission as to an open ended adjournment with no time frame on any agreement or negotiations between Domino's and the SDA, unsuccessfully.

The ASF-B put forward that the Domino's Industrial Relations Advisor/Lawyer stated in previous discussions with ASF that Domino's overpaid $13 million in DPE owned franchises alone, that if they chose too could recover off the drivers. This equates to around $80,000 per week bonus for Domino's delaying any agreement.

It was also argued at the hearing that the drivers should be put on either base catering award, or base TWU (Transport Workers Union) award for such work until an agreement is made. Again unsuccessfully.

The Commissioner accepted the adjournment, current drivers wages stand until SDA and Domino's can come to an agreement ... if they ever get around to making another, let alone coming to any agreement.

happychaos's picture
happychaos
Offline
Joined: 14-04-06
Jul 17 2012 01:04

Hi Peops,

I'm making up a leaflet for an action at Domino's Hq in NZ (which is the same company as the OZ franchise title holder.) It would be good to get some direction on the leaflet from ASF.

In solidarity,
Simon

axxs's picture
axxs
Offline
Joined: 16-03-06
Jul 17 2012 03:08
simono wrote:
Hi Peops,

I'm making up a leaflet for an action at Domino's Hq in NZ (which is the same company as the OZ franchise title holder.) It would be good to get some direction on the leaflet from ASF.

In solidarity,
Simon

Hi Simon, sorry for the delay.

We are writing up a big information sheet of what has occurred to date tonight, which will cover everything from when things started to what occurred yesterday at the hearing.

I'll pass it on to you as soon as it is done.

happychaos's picture
happychaos
Offline
Joined: 14-04-06
Jul 17 2012 05:10

Thanks!

happychaos's picture
happychaos
Offline
Joined: 14-04-06
Jul 17 2012 09:34

Hey can someone either send me the two awards, or flick me the link to the awards on the net (I've lost the link) in a private message.

Thanks
Simon Oosterman

happychaos's picture
happychaos
Offline
Joined: 14-04-06
Jul 17 2012 10:31

Basic factsheet I prepared to help develop a leaflet to distribute outside the company's NZ head quarters. Excuse the spelling and grammatical errors thanks!

Domino's company factsheet1

Domino's

Domino's is an international pizza brand owned by American company Domino's Pizza Incorporated.

Domino's stores are owned by the company, franchised to individual owners and give grand franchises (and networks) to individual companys, who may subsequently franchise stores.

Domino's in Australia and New Zealand

The grand franchise owner of the Domino's brand in Australia and New Zealand is Domino's Pizza Enterprises.

Domino's Pizza Enterprises is an Australian owned multination. It began in 1960 and is now the largest Domino's brand franchise owner in the world.

It has over 860 stores and with exclusive master franchise rights for the Domino's brand and network in Australia (469 stores), New Zealand (81), France (189), Belgium (20), the Netherlands (107) and Monaco.

It operates a ‘hybrid’ model based on a combination of approximately 20% company-owned stores and 80% franchised stores.

The network (i.e. company and franchised stores) employs approximately 21,000 people worldwide including 14,000 in Australia and New Zealand.

Domino's Pizza Enterprise opened its first stores outside Australia in Wellington, New Zealand in July 2003.

Financial situation

Domino's Pizza Enterprise says it has performed strongly in the last five years, with 2010-11 was one of its most succesful and it expects the situation to continue to improve. The company sites growth in Australia and New Zealand as major factors.

The company annual net profit after tax growth rate between 2007-2011 was 23.9%.

In 2010-11 the company has its biggest year on year sales growth.

The company increased their net profit after tax in 2010-11 by 20.3% on the previous year, up to AUS$21.4 million (NZ$27.46 million)

2010-11 was their biggest sales growth in five years with total network sales of AUS$746.4 million. (NZ$957.83 million)

The company says strong growth in Australia and New Zealand is partly responsible, withsales growth of 13.2% with Australia being the “stand out performer”with the strongest same store sales in the last ten years

Domino's Pizza Enterprises CEO Don Meij

In 2010-2011 Don Meij:

Got a total income of AUS$933,630 (NZ$1,198,090) including a AU$250,000 (NZ$320,815) bonus.

Had 2,516,802 fully paid ordinary shares and 710,000 share options

Potential points of external leverage (e.g. not their stores)

Australian facebook page2 (which anyone can post to) with 686,381 likes and 28,351 talking about it.

New Zealand facebook page3 (which anyone can post to) with 194,922 likes and 34,252 talking about it.

A free calling number for orders in Australia: 1300 DOMINOS (1300 366 466) and New Zealand: 0800 30 40 50. The New Zealand number accepts cellphone calls. The HQ also has a free calling number on 0800 720 634.

The company expect 60% of sales to be digital (either through their websites4 or their Iphone App) by 2014

The Australian head office fax number is +61 7 3633 3399.

The Australia head office is at: Head office Level 8, TAB Building, 240 Sandgate Road, Albion, Qld, 4010 and can be contacted on Tel. +61 7 3633 3333.

The New Zealand head office is at: Domino’s Pizza New Zealand, Unit 1 475 Mount Road (Corner of Fairview Road), Mt Eden, Auckland 1024 and can be contacted on 0800 720 634

1 This information is taken from Domino's Pizza Enterprises 2011 Annual Report (http://dominospizza.co.nz/pdf/annualreports/2011_DPE_Annual_Report.pdf) and 2010 Fact Sheet (http://dominospizza.co.nz/pdf/Fact_Sheet_October_2010_Final.pdf). Both were last accessed on 17/07/2012.

2 https://www.facebook.com/DominosAustralia

3 https://www.facebook.com/DominosNZ

4 http://www.dominos.com.au and http://www.dominospizza.co.nz/

axxs's picture
axxs
Offline
Joined: 16-03-06
Jul 18 2012 02:53

Great stuff Simono!

Hope to have more information for you by the end of the day.

axxs's picture
axxs
Offline
Joined: 16-03-06
Jul 18 2012 03:03

Sorry, I think the discussion in regard IWW is off topic, is there another thread for this? I must correct some statements not already covered by a Melbourne comrade:

Quote:
Anyway, if you want local support contact the local IWW branch, which for the record ASF-Brisbane never did.

ok then, 'for the record'

I think that's a bit disingenuous considering the point was directly raised with yourself, the contact for IWW in Brisbane, when we asked twice on a local solidarity network mailing list about the lack of replies to our emails to ROC. We followed procedure set out by the IWW itself in past communiques directing these contacts from ASF to the ROC. We followed your procedure.

After no response to two emails over a number of weeks, we asked IWW Brisbane on that mailing list, in response to your email over an IWW constitution reading group, to find out what is going on with lack of contact and the reasons for it. Absolutely no response, although you were good enough to apologise for saying the IWW is just like the CNT whilst spruiking the IWW constitution.

The last email contained a repeat of stuff asked in the first (if you missed it) :

"I'd be interested in knowing what current projects the IWW are involved in with industrial unionism here in Brisbane so that we can show solidarity as well with your actions.

Is there a reason the IWW has not responded to an anarchist revolutionary union in it's call for solidarity with it's members and thousands of other Domino's drivers struggle? Is it simply that email for the ROC is never read? Would you be able to poke the ROC as to this issue?"

axxs's picture
axxs
Offline
Joined: 16-03-06
Jul 18 2012 03:17
simono wrote:
The network (i.e. company and franchised stores) employs approximately 21,000 people worldwide including 14,000 in Australia and New Zealand.

FYI, It was raised at the hearing that around 70% of the Domino's workforce are employed as drivers.

For Australia and Aotearoa this equates to about 9,800 workers.

bootsy
Offline
Joined: 30-11-09
Jul 18 2012 04:13

Could someone in the know clarify something for me. In my experience its common for delivery drivers to be expected to provide and maintain their own vehicle, is this the case for the Brisbane drivers?

Best of luck!

With Sober Senses's picture
With Sober Senses
Offline
Joined: 14-07-08
Jul 18 2012 05:55

Hmmm, when I use to work at Pizza Hut in the 90s the drivers provided their own vehicles. But from what I can see in Brisbane there seem to be some drivers whizzing around on what look like company bikes. But that is a casual observer of an outsider....

axxs's picture
axxs
Offline
Joined: 16-03-06
Jul 19 2012 02:41

I would say around 90% of drivers own their own vehicle, but there are company vehicles depending on the store.

Sorry for delays on getting information out to folk, the hearing gave us a lot more information on what has been occurring (or claimed to be occurring) between the DPE and Domino's and we are trying to get together a flyer for other drivers to bring everyone up to speed. Not so easy given the amount of information to fit into a readily accessible information sheet and the fact information on past dealings only came to light during the hearing.

SDA rolled over on the workers.

In the meantime drivers have been working on the start of something to better put forward points they see as a necessity of negotiations and achievable results. points which they see the SDA have failed representing them on. THIS IS NOT A FINAL, it's just to keep folk updated a bit more clearly on what the drivers have been requesting, that they see as achievable.

proper write ups soon, sorry for the delay.

KEY POINTS FOR NEGOTIATION & DISCUSSION FROM DRIVERS:

1 The basic rate of pay must always be at least equivalent to the national safety net minimum wage prescribed by FWA which will include casual loading to casual employees. For an adult driver of 21 years & over this would currently be basic rate of $15.96 per hour + casual loading of 23 % = $3.67 giving a minimum wage of $19.63 per hour.

2 That notwithstanding anything else in any agreement, under no circumstances whatsoever will the minimum wage payable by Dominos ever fall below the national prescribed minimum wage by FWA and that all employees engaged on a casual basis shall have the casual loading prescribed by FWA in the minimum wage safety net included in the minimum wage payable to any casual employee.

3 Payment of wages at the normal rate of pay (which will include casual loading to casual employees) shall be paid to all employees required to complete any training or attend any meeting whether that training or meeting is held in-store, via the Dominos training website DOTTI or by any other means. Payment of wages will be made for the period of time taken by the employee to complete the training specified by Dominos.

4 All tips received by drivers shall remain the sole property of the driver to whom they are given. At no time and under no circumstance will Dominos ever be entitled to any tip money received by any driver.

5 All hours worked by any employee regardless of what employment status the employee may hold will be paid for by the employer Dominos at the appropriate rate of pay. This will include all hours worked before, during and after any trading hours of any store.

6 That Dominos agrees to make good faith progress with the union towards including all casual staff to public holiday rates equivalent in ratio to those entitlements currently received by full-time, and part-time employees to the extent that by 2014, all casual workers including drivers be paid at the rate of double-time for all hours of work performed on public holidays.

happychaos's picture
happychaos
Offline
Joined: 14-04-06
Jul 19 2012 03:47

I couldn't actually find out the number of workers in NZ and the number in OZ. Any ideas? Take your time, you guys are doing the key work. We're just here to support ya!

Malcy
Offline
Joined: 13-04-07
Jul 19 2012 04:42

simono and bootsy

do we have a date set for solidarity actions in NZ yet?

axxs's picture
axxs
Offline
Joined: 16-03-06
Jul 19 2012 05:15
simono wrote:
I couldn't actually find out the number of workers in NZ and the number in OZ. Any ideas? Take your time, you guys are doing the key work. We're just here to support ya!

I thought you posted that there was 14,000 between them? We will look into it.

It may be worth trying to get something going at the same time, across the waves and across a number of regions here?

We can be contacted off-site via brisbane@asf-iwa.org.au or info@ fyi

happychaos's picture
happychaos
Offline
Joined: 14-04-06
Jul 19 2012 22:03

Sorry - I meant to say how many of the 14000 are in NZ and how many of those are in OZ.

happychaos's picture
happychaos
Offline
Joined: 14-04-06
Jul 20 2012 14:40

.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Jul 20 2012 15:20

Just as a total trivia cast-ff .... I see that Dominos was previously purchased by US Republican Prz. candidate Mitt Romney's Bain Capital. It was then "turned around" and sold. No take wawys from this mere trivia factoid.

ites's picture
ites
Offline
Joined: 10-02-11
Jul 22 2012 11:39
Lugius wrote:
I think this is a significant difference between IWW and the ASF with regard to methods of organisation. I'm told every IWW member votes for candidates running for the ROC with the most popular winning a seat on the committee as it were. (Is this right?) The ASF has a Secretariat that is the responsibility of the member affiliate chosen to fulfil that administrative task. If there's a problem, that affiliate would be recalled and another affiliate would be selected, it would take no more than a day. The key difference is that where the ASF is a federation of member affiliates, the IWW has a general membership of individuals. I think the IWW ROC model risks being a popularity contest and consequently concentrating power in the hands of particular individuals.

I disagree; if anything I think the secretariat model risks concentrating hands in the power of particular individuals, particularly if the local involved is riddled with informal heirarchies. The idea that the ASF is a federation of member affiliates while the IWW has a general membership of individuals is rediculous. The IWW puts as much value on the branch or workplace assembly and the sovereignty of the directly democratic decision-making process contained therein as any other syndicalist organisation. What you describe is I believe a propaganda line trotted out by certain individuals who repeat the same garbage over and over in order to forestall a more open debate.

Lugius wrote:
I'm told that the IWW has over a hundred members. With those kind of numbers, I was hoping that there would have been a response from IWW far greater than it has been. I know that some individual members have been supportive here and there but I would have expected more from the larger branches in Sydney and Melbourne (30 odd members I'm told).

I'm personally sorry that there hasn't been more supposed but by the same token there is a fair amount of bad blood between certain ASF and IWW members which has yet to be rectified. I for one would rather provide solidarity with people who spend less time playing personality politics than they do organising.

Lugius wrote:
The total individual members of ASF affiliates is nowhere near that but at least there seems to be greater activity. I guess the question of absolute numbers is a relative one.

Well again I've had this particular debate with a certain prominent individual in the ASF and I don't think it's any coincidence that the same line is trotted out about the IWW using almost exactly the same language. I know there are some who think the membership numbers don't mean anything but for my part I like to think that people join an organisation like the IWW because they see that it has an inclusive and democratic culture and puts more importance on focusing on what we've got in common with others rather that on what divides us.

Lugius wrote:
I find it hard to fathom that an ROC election would prevent even the basics of organisational abilities such as the answering of emails for so long. I must confess some disappointment so for now, I'll be lowering my expectations.

Well you could always pick up a copy of Direct Action; if you couldn't get through to the ROC you could always call a delegate and ask their advice. My phone number is in the directory as well as on the website. You can't tell me that you haven't seen a copy of Direct Action or that it was too damn difficult for you to pick up the phone and call someone to find out what was going on.

Lugius wrote:
In my view, the IWW is a historical response to a primarily American situation and I think it presumptuous to imagine that the IWW template will export easily to other countries/cultures as evidenced by its near non-existence outside the Anglosphere. The IWA sections were created and developed in their countries/cultures of origin which makes far more sense to me.

Well, to argue that seems to me to argue that there's something particular about the Australian wage system which differentiates it from the rest of the world, which seems to me at least to be patently absurd.

akai
Offline
Joined: 29-09-06
Jul 22 2012 12:03

This ASF/ IWW topic seems to merit another thread.

I cannot comment expertly comment on what happens in Australia, but in some cases where I have seen internal functioning of the IWW elsewhere, there are more discretional powers and defacto decision making taken by officers, members of committees, etc. than in more horizontal anarchosyndicalist federations that I know. Perhaps it depends a bit of the behaviour of individuals involved but it seems just like a different concept from different conditions.

In any case, I am interested in the Dominos case and the ASF, so welcome updates on that subject. Good luck!

axxs's picture
axxs
Offline
Joined: 16-03-06
Jul 24 2012 09:01

So sorry for delays, we should have an update tonight out to those contacting us, there has been need to coordinate across multiple drivers not all of which in the ASF, and now across various states.

In the meantime, Domino's is now ranked number 6 of the top companies in QLD economic growth, up 69.7% :

6. Domino's Pizza, Fast food, $289 million, + 69.7 per cent

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/top-10-queensland-index-20120719-22c5s.html#ixzz21WlmJpYo

axxs's picture
axxs
Offline
Joined: 16-03-06
Jul 25 2012 02:27

We are at the moment trying to organise a date for action as well as some background work, and open to suggestions. We have to hear back from various groups in this regard to coordinate.

Our main aim atm is to increase membership of the General Transport Workers Association, now an affiliate of the ASF here in Australia so as the drivers can better represent at future hearings with numbers. This could lead us to entering an F24 termination of an old agreement by the workers, rather than the registered union that they feel has failed them.

Some info on what has occurred :

Greetings comrades,

The workers of ASF Brisbane have been in an industrial dispute since 9th of April with Domino's Pizza Enterprises (DPE), after ASF members that are employees of the DPE raised the issue of their wages being cut.

The union for Domino's employees in Australia is also one of the largest unions, the SDA (Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association) with a membership of around 230,000 workers. The SDA is 'managed' by a right wing catholic hierarchy led by Joe De Bruyn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_de_Bruyn) that is not adverse to using the union to push christian views (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_de_Bruyn#Christian_views).

The ASF Brisbane organised a meeting with Tim Van Schyndel, Domino's Industrial Relations Advisor at the Australian Domino's Head Office demanding the reinstatement of drivers wages. This meeting was unsuccessful. Tim Van Schyndel stated to ASF Brisbane that Domino's lost $13 million dollars in overpaid wages in just it's corporate owned stores, not the franchises. This equates to near $80,000 a week savings in Domino's maintaining any delay to the reinstatement of the drivers wages.

Following this, ASF-B organised a picket outside the DPE head office, with a very good community respons, and ASF Melbourne was approached for support. ASF Melbourne unanimously agreed to supporting our members and starts rolling pickets every weekend outside a different Domino's store, with ASF Brisbane following suit.

We contacted the SDA and demanded that they enter an F24 to terminate the 2001 agreement, with absolutely no response to our emails. We therefore prepare to enter proceedings to terminate the agreement as employees.

On the 16th May we then contacted the SDA wanting to know why our members and other drivers should hold off on immediately filing the F24 proceedings as employees to abandon the 2001 EBA, as there appeared to be near 6 weeks of inaction by the SDA as the representative union to get the workers wages reinstated.

The SDA entered the F24 the next day, which leads to a date set for a hearing before Commissioner Gay in FWA (Fair Work Australia, the national workplace relations tribunal. FWO is the Fair Work Ombudsman).

The start of the FWA proceedings it was unsuccessfully argued by Domino's lawyers and SDA to the commissioner that testimony from ASF-B Members should not be recognised. The commissioner accepted ASF-B worker testimony due to a worker-signed statement, including pay slips and other submissions.

SDA stated that the 2009 agreement did not include the drivers because they and Domino's couldn't come to an agreement at the time. They put forward that negotiations are happening again and that Domino's has agreed to a ~$1 increase, therefore they wished to adjourn.

ASF-B argued against the SDA submission of an open ended adjournment with no time frame on any agreement or negotiations between Domino's and the SDA, unsuccessfully.

The ASF-B put forward that the Domino's Industrial Relations Advisor/Lawyer stated in previous discussions with ASF that Domino's overpaid $13 million in DPE owned franchises alone, that if they chose too they could recover overpaid wages off the drivers. This equates to around $80,000 per week bonus for Domino's in delaying any agreement.

It was also argued at the hearing that the drivers should be put on either base catering award, or base TWU (Transport Workers Union) award for such work until an agreement is made (both awards are in the $19 range). Again unsuccessfully.

The Commissioner accepted the call for adjournment by the SDA, current drivers wages stand until SDA and Domino's can come to an agreement, if they ever actually get around to making another.

At this hearing, Joe De Bruyn from SDA testified that 2 days after entering the F24 application (22/5/2012), it had a meeting with Domino's to negotiate the drivers wages...

The testimony of Joe De Bruyn regarding the meeting between SDA & Dominos on 22/5/12 and its outcome of 4 key points of agreement (and not certified agreements) has outraged and disgusted most and sadly disappointed the rest. It is unanimously perceived and held that the SDA effectively 'sold out' the drivers. This is highlighted by the statement that SDA believes that the casual loading is in fact payable and that FWO made an error in ruling.

The SDA should have made an official challenge to FWO and followed through with appropriate court action for judicial ruling before succumbing to Dominos whims. The outcome of this hearing was already pre-determined by a 'back-room deal' on 22/5/12. Neither SDA nor Dominos had the common decency to advise the drivers that this deal had been made prior to the hearing and that the drivers were not even consulted prior to this agreement being made.

There are two takes of perception on this deal from drivers, with neither holding SDA nor Dominos in good stead. The first and outright most popular perception is that of a knowingly corrupt deal. That is to say that SDA and or its representatives must have received some sort of reward/incentive from Dominos and or its representatives in a 'sleight of hand' deal designed to manipulate the F24 hearing outcome with a clear benefit to Dominos at the expense of the drivers. Simple theory being that instead of Dominos taking advantage of the drivers casual loading in full that Dominos continue to benefit by $2.67 p/h at the expense of the drivers and virtually guarantee that the outcome of the hearing would be as it did in fact turn out to be. The second perception (and a well & truly clear minority perception) is that SDA was 'taken' by Dominos in a very clever move by Dominos to take advantage of SDA. This is to say that the SDA and or its representatives were one or more of: too inept, too weak or too disinterested to fight for the drivers they are supposed to represent and that Dominos took advantage of this weakness.

The negotiations (as testified to at the hearing) that are currently ongoing have been going on for 8 weeks. Dominos and SDA have been either unable or unwilling to meet on an agreement since 2004 so why would there be any belief that suddenly there will be this magical occurrence of a suitable interim agreement to 2013?

It does not make sense to any of the drivers. It only adds to the perception of corruption and or weakness. The SDA needs to get this agreement signed soon and to the satisfaction of the drivers. The drivers are requesting only what can readily be considered realistic, basic and fair.

Below is a list of six key points that must be included in any further discussions and negotiations. The drivers will not support any agreement without these inclusions.

KEY POINTS FOR NEGOTIATION & DISCUSSION:

1 The basic rate of pay must always be at least equivalent to the national safety net minimum wage prescribed by FWA which will include casual loading to casual employees. For an adult driver of 21 years & over this would currently be basic rate of $15.96 per hour + casual loading of 23 % = $3.67 giving a minimum wage of $19.63 per hour.

2 That notwithstanding anything else in any agreement, under no circumstances whatsoever will the minimum wage payable by Dominos ever fall below the national prescribed minimum wage by FWA and that all employees engaged on a casual basis shall have the casual loading prescribed by FWA in the minimum wage safety net included in the minimum wage payable to any casual employee.

3 Payment of wages at the normal rate of pay (which will include casual loading to casual employees) shall be paid to all employees required to complete any training or attend any meeting whether that training or meeting is held in-store, via the Dominos training website DOTTI or by any other means. Payment of wages will be made for the period of time taken by the employee to complete the training specified by Dominos.

4 All tips received by drivers shall remain the sole property of the driver to whom they are given. At no time and under no circumstance will Dominos ever be entitled to any tip money received by any driver.

5 All hours worked by any employee regardless of what employment status the employee may hold will be paid for by the employer Dominos at the appropriate rate of pay. This will include all hours worked before, during and after any trading hours of any store.

6 That Dominos agrees to make good faith progress with the union towards including all casual staff to public holiday rates equivalent in ratio to those entitlements currently received by full-time, and part-time employees to the extent that by 2014, all casual workers including drivers be paid at the rate of double-time for all hours of work performed on public holidays.

The list is seen by drivers as realistic and only requests that the most basic of wage entitlements be payable.

Regardless, the workers are organising to achieve these goals via the General Transport Workers Association, with or without the SDA.

----------------------------------------------------------
Flyer for updating drivers to events, and a call out to drivers organising as the General Transport Workers Association.
----------------------------------------------------------

WHY DRIVERS lost a chance at ~$5ph increase of wages

- SDA union and Domino's could not come to a deal in a 2009 agreement for the drivers, only for the in-store staff.
- Domino's apparently did not know they didn't, and overpaid drivers to the 2009 agreements rates.
- Domino's argues to FWO that drivers do not fall under the 2009 agreement, and wages are cut to the 2001 agreements rates
- Drivers pressure SDA to enter an F24 to terminate 2001 fall-back agreement or the drivers themselves will.
- SDA capitulates and enters an F24.
- 2 days later the SDA agrees with Domino's to continue negotiations and drop F24, Domino's agrees to $1 pay rise
- SDA testifies at hearing that they are remaining in negotiations with Domino's, and thus wish to adjourn on terminating the 2001 agreement.
- Hearing results in SDA withdrawing the F24 and adjourning, with no time frame on reaching an agreement outside revisiting the hearing next year

If the SDA had not adjourned and continued with the F24 application for termination, Domino's and the SDA upon not reaching an agreement would have the drivers wages fall back to the fast food award of around ~$21ph

Domino's and the SDA have not come to an agreement since 2001 for the drivers, there is no reason to think they will nor any compulsion for Dominos too, as the F24 has been adjourned with no time limit. SDA withdrawing the F24 has left Domino's with no requirement at all to agree to any further negotiations.

As drivers we need to organise, there is strength in numbers. If the SDA claim they speak for us and not do anything, we have to change that.

We are organising a General Transport Workers Association to better represent ourselves in further action.

THE SDA SOLD THE DRIVERS OUT,
THE GTWA IS FIGHTING BACK
JOIN US.

Below is pending domain creation later in the week :

Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/GeneralTransportWorkersAssociation
Website: http://www.gtwa.org.au (pending)
Email: info@gtwa.org.au (pending)

----------------------------------------------------------