tradeunionroyalcommission.gov.autradeunionroyalcommission.gov.au/hearings/documents/... · web...

ROYAL COMMISSION INTO TRADE UNION GOVERNANCE AND CORRUPTION

Level 19, 55 Market Street, Sydney, NSW 2000

On Thursday, 28 May 2015 at 10am

Before the Commissioner: The Hon. John Dyson Heydon AC QC

Counsel Assisting: Mr Jeremy Stoljar SC Mr Richard Scruby

Instructed by: Minter Ellison, Solicitors

.28/05/2015 AWU M'SHIP 1 Transcript produced by Merrill Corporation

1 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Stoljar? 2 3 MR STOLJAR: May it please the Commission, in the hearings 4 beginning today, the Commission will investigate the 5 payment of what are described as membership fees by various 6 employers or organisations to the Australian Workers Union 7 or the Victorian Branch of the Australian Workers Union. 8 The issues arising in relation to this investigation may be 9 more clearly explained by reference to a specific example. 10 11 Take the first of the case studies which these 12 hearings will examine, namely that of a cleaning business 13 operating through the corporate vehicle Cleanevent 14 Australia Pty Ltd. 15 16 The central issue here is whether the AWU Vic inflated 17 its membership numbers by issuing invoices for membership 18 fees in circumstances in which there were no such members. 19 20 Cleanevent is, and at all relevant times was, part of 21 a large business providing cleaning services across 22 Australia. The Cleanevent business provides cleaning 23 services for sporting and other events. Cleanevent was in 24 2010 acquired by Spotless Group Pty Ltd or its related 25 companies. 26 27 In 2006, the AWU and Cleanevent entered into an 28 enterprise bargaining agreement which came into force on 29 22 December 2006, the 2006 EBA. The 2006 EBA applied to 30 all employees of Cleanevent in Australia who fell within 31 the classification structure set out in the 2006 EBA, 32 including permanent and casual employees. The term of the 33 2006 EBA nominally expired at the end of 2009. Had 34 Cleanevent and the AWU not entered into the 2006 EBA, the 35 conditions of employment of Cleanevent employees would have 36 been determined by the application of the Cleaning Industry 37 AWU/LHMU Cleanevent Pty Ltd Award 1999, for employees who 38 fell within the classification structure of the 1999 Award. 39 40 The 2006 EBA was made under Part 8 of the 41 Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Commonwealth). In other 42 words, the Work Choices regime was in force. Therefore, 43 the 2006 EBA was not required to pass a "no disadvantage" 44 test as between it and the 1999 Award. 45 46 In approximately 2010, the AWU and Cleanevent entered 47 into negotiations with respect to a replacement for the


1 2006 EBA. These negotiations proceeded for some time. Had 2 a replacement EBA been agreed upon, it would have been 3 necessary for that instrument to have been approved by the 4 Fair Work Commission. 5 6 The Fair Work Commission could not have approved a new 7 EBA unless satisfied that it passed the "better off 8 overall" test. For reasons explained further below, that 9 test would not have been satisfied. 10 11 That would appear to be the reason that Cleanevent and 12 the AWU did not ultimately enter into a replacement EBA. 13 Instead, at the conclusion of negotiations, they reached an 14 agreement comprising two parts. 15 16 On or about 12 November 2010, AWU and Cleanevent 17 entered into a Memorandum of Understanding - (MOU). 18 Pursuant to the MOU, Cleanevent and AWU agreed that the 19 2006 EBA would continue to apply in relation to all 20 employees covered by the 2006 EBA, except as modified by 21 the MOU. 22 23 The MOU made various adjustments to the rates of pay 24 and penalty rates for Cleanevent for permanent and casual 25 employees. 26 27 Clause 3.1 of the MOU provided that the MOU would 28 operate and have full effect from 1 July 2010 until 1 July 29 2013. 30 31 Clause 2.7 of the MOU provided: 32 33 During the period of operation of this MOU 34 it is agreed that the AWU, the employees 35 and/or Cleanevent will not: 36 37 a) take industrial action as defined in 38 section 19 of the Fair Work Act 2009; 39 40 b) commence or take any step which may 41 result in the commencement of enterprise 42 bargaining under the Fair Work Act 2009; or 43 44 (c) seek to terminate (or support or 45 encourage the termination of) the 46 Cleanevent Agreement, the Cleaning Industry 47 - AWU/LHMU - Cleanevent Pty Ltd - Award


1 1999 or this MOU. 2 3 In other words, the MOU purported to bind all Cleanevent 4 employees, although it is doubtful it could have had such 5 an effect in law. And two, separately, at about the same 6 time, Cleanevent agreed by letter to pay the AWU up to 7 $25,000 per year for what were described as membership 8 fees. 9 10 As part, or in performance, of this separate 11 agreement, Cleanevent supplied lists of names of cleaners 12 to the AWU. In some cases these persons were then entered 13 upon the membership roll of the AWU Vic, but these persons 14 knew nothing of any of this. They did not know that their 15 names had been supplied to the AWU. They did not know that 16 they had purportedly become members of the AWU Vic. They 17 did not know that their employer had entered into an 18 arrangement with the AWU, pursuant to which it was paying 19 the AWU $25,000 per year. They did not know that the MOU 20 had been executed or that the EBA had been purportedly 21 extended by agreement. Indeed, in some cases, these 22 persons were already members of the AWU Vic or other 23 branches of the AWU and were regularly paying their Union 24 dues by payroll deduction. They did not know that their 25 dues were being paid twice over. 26 27 What was the point of this complicated two part 28 arrangement? 29 30 Take first the position from the point of view of 31 Cleanevent. For Cleanevent, the benefits of the 32 arrangement were obvious and substantial. The great bulk 33 of Cleanevent employees were casuals. Casual cleaners 34 often work after business hours or on weekends or public 35 holidays. If their pay and penalty rates had been 36 regulated by the relevant Award, namely, the Cleaning 37 Services Award 2010, Cleanevent's casual workers would have 38 been much better off because they would have been paid 39 considerably more for weekend, public holiday and 40 afterhours work. 41 42 The short point is this: the benefit to Cleanevent 43 from the MOU is that it saved a great deal of money it 44 would otherwise have paid its employees, especially by way 45 of penalty rates. 46 47 To take one concrete example, in 2010, under the 2006


1 EBA, Cleanevent was required to pay a Level 1 casual 2 employee working at events $18.14 per hour. Under the 2010 3 Award, Cleanevent would have been required to pay at least 4 $50.17 per hour, about 176 per cent more. Another example 5 is a Level 3 casual employee working at events on Sundays. 6 He or she would have received $19.86 per hour under the 7 2006 EBA, but would have been entitled to at least $41.44 8 under the 2010 Award, about 121 per cent more. 9 10 Cleanevent also obtained other benefits. As is set 11 out above, the MOU provided that no industrial action could 12 be taken, nor could any enterprise bargaining be commenced. 13 14 Cleanevent also enjoyed a close relationship with the 15 AWU Vic or some of its officials: 16 17 "Cleanevent looked forward to continuing 18 the many years of positive association with 19 the AWU." 20 21 These benefits to Cleanevent are summed up in an email 22 which the General Manager of Operations sent to the Group 23 General Manager on 25 June 2012: 24 25 In May 2010, the EBA was reworked. This 26 was a very difficult negotiation and at 27 times it looked as though it would not get 28 done. We managed to lock a new arrangement 29 away through an MOU for a further three 30 years. 31 32 The $25,000 was part of that negotiation and was approved 33 by the then General Manager. 34 35 The $25,000 is an annual cost. The 36 implication to the business by not having 37 the EBA, and employing labour through the 38 Modern Award, is circa $2 million per 39 annum. 40 41 We are about to enter our third and final 42 year of this agreement to which we will 43 need to start discussing how we can 44 continue this. 45 46 In other words, so far as Cleanevent was concerned, keeping 47 the MOU in place saved it some $2 million per year that it


1 would otherwise have had to pay its employees by way of 2 wages or penalty rates. Unsurprisingly, the author of this 3 email was interested in exploring ways of keeping the 4 arrangement on foot. 5 6 Indeed, according to the evidence of another witness, 7 "The beneficial casual pay rates and overall agreement 8 terms were very attractive to Spotless and one of the 9 reasons it acquired the Cleanevent business in 2010." 10 11 Next, viewed from the point of view of the AWU, that 12 is, from the point of view of the Union and its senior 13 officials, as distinct from the members, the benefits are 14 also immediately apparent. 15 16 To begin with, the AWU Vic received $25,000 per year 17 plus GST. Quite apart from this financial benefit, the 18 AWU Vic also received the benefit in the sense that it 19 acquired additional purported members, although, as noted 20 above, these people were only members in the sense that 21 their names were entered upon the membership roll of the 22 AWU Vic without their knowledge or authorisation. 23 24 There are many reasons why senior officials at the the 25 AWU Vic would have regarded it as beneficial to increase 26 its membership numbers in this way. 27 28 Increasing membership can be an indicator of a 29 successful union and, for that matter, a successful union 30 official. 31 32 Generally speaking, union membership has been 33 declining in recent years. Someone who can achieve 34 increased membership is bucking the trend. It looks good. 35 Such increasing numbers can give legitimacy to a union's 36 industrial objectives in a particular negotiation or across 37 an industry as a whole. 38 39 By operation of the Union's rules, increased 40 membership can also increase the influence of a particular 41 Branch or Division within the Union's National 42 organisation. Thus, membership numbers for each Branch of 43 the AWU are used to determine entitlements to 44 representation on the National Executive and the allocation 45 of votes on that Executive. Membership numbers are also 46 used to determine Branch representation and voting 47 entitlements at National Conference.


1 2 More specifically, if the Union is affiliated with the 3 Australian Labor Party, inflated membership numbers 4 increase the entitlement of that Union to delegates at the 5 ALP National Conference which in turn leads to greater 6 influence over ALP policy formation, greater influence over 7 membership of powerful ALP committees and, in particular, 8 greater influence over the selection of ALP candidates for 9 political office. 10 11 In short, the benefits to Cleanevent and the AWU were 12 obvious. The persons who miss out are the workers. 13 Cleanevent's employees, or at least its casual employees, 14 appear to have been significantly worse off under the MOU 15 than they would have been under the relevant 2010 Award. 16 17 The hearings over the coming days will consider not 18 just issues of this kind relating to Cleanevent. In a 19 number of other instances, the AWU has raised revenue which 20 it has accounted for as membership fees, leading to an 21 apparent increase in membership. 22 23 Other examples of this sort of activity which will be 24 investigated during the coming hearings include payments 25 made to the AWU by BMD Constructions Pty Ltd, Winslow 26 Constructors Pty Ltd, or its related companies, the 27 Australian Netball Players Association, the Australian 28 Jockeys Association, and others. 29 30 The Commission's Terms of Reference require it to 31 consider, among other things, conduct which may amount to a 32 breach of any law, regulation, or professional standard by 33 any officer of an employee Association. 34 35 In the coming hearings, the Commission will 36 investigate, among other things, whether there may have 37 been breaches of section 287 of the Fair Work 38 (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 (Commonwealth) in that 39 officials of the AWU, or the AWU Vic, seemed to have been 40 entering into an arrangement which gained benefits for 41 themselves and Cleanevent, as set out above, but which were 42 detrimental to their own members. 43 44 Instead of securing better wages or penalty rates for 45 members, some officials may have preferred to obtain 46 benefits which strengthened the Union balance sheet and 47 which falsely inflated membership numbers.


1 2 If false accounting has been practised in order to 3 conceal the payment of membership numbers, then the 4 consequences are serious. 5 6 Section 83 of the Crimes Act 1958 (Victoria) provides, 7 among other things, that: 8 9 Where a person dishonestly, with a view to 10 gain for himself or another ... falsifies 11 any account or any record or document made 12 or required for any accounting purpose; ... 13 or produces or makes use of any account, or 14 any such record or document as aforesaid, 15 which to his knowledge is or may be 16 misleading, false or deceptive in a 17 material particular, that person may be 18 guilty of an indictable offence. 19 20 There may also have been other contraventions of the 21 Fair Work legislation. Section 253 of the Fair Work 22 (Registered Organisations) Act provides, among other 23 things, that: 24 25 The financial statements and notes for a 26 financial year must give a true and fair 27 view of the financial position and 28 performance of the reporting unit. 29 30 Section 230 of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 31 (Commonwealth) provides: 32 33 An organisation must keep ... a register of 34 its members, sharing the name and postal 35 address of each member and ... remove from 36 that register the name and the postal 37 address of each person who ceases to be a 38 member. 39 40 Likewise, Rule 39(1)(h) of the AWU Rules required the 41 Branch Secretary to keep a correct register of members. 42 43 The Commission has previously investigated issues of 44 this kind. In particular, chapter 10.2 of the Interim 45 Report addresses matters concerning the membership rolls of 46 the Transport Workers Union of Australia, NSW Branch, and 47 the Transport Workers Union of New South Wales.


1 2 On that occasion, the Commissioner drew an inference 3 that there was some advantage to be gained from presenting 4 false membership numbers to the ALP, and stated: 5 6 The relevant advantage was an increase in 7 TWU voting power at the ALP Conference and 8 an advantage to Mr Sheldon as leader of the 9 TWU delegates. 10 11 The hearings which will begin today and continue into next 12 week suggest this problem is not one that is confined to 13 the TWU. 14 15 Lastly, on 19 May 2015, the Commission released 16 a Discussion Paper which included discussion of payments of 17 the kind described above by employers to unions. 18 19 The Discussion Paper described such payments as 20 "corrupting payments" and sought views on whether 21 significant penalties should be imposed on employers who 22 make payments of this kind to unions. The hearings over 23 the coming days may reveal evidence relevant to this 24 question. 25 26 Commissioner, that is what I wish to say in opening. 27 28 I should advise the Commission that the solicitors for 29 the Commission were advised yesterday evening that the AWU 30 does not wish to appear today or tomorrow. The AWU does 31 not wish to cross-examine any of the witnesses who have 32 been called for today and tomorrow. The practical 33 consequence of that, of course, is that the hearings over 34 the next two days may move more swiftly than they might 35 otherwise have done, but there are some other appearances 36 before I call my first witness. 37 38 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Mr Addison, you appear for 39 Mr Webber. 40 41 MR M ADDISON: I do, Commissioner. 42 43 THE COMMISSIONER: Very well. And, Mr Moore, you're for? 44 45 MR MOORE: Mr Melhem. 46 47 THE COMMISSIONER: Have you actually applied for


1 authorisation? 2 3 MR S MOORE: I am about to do that. I don't believe a 4 formal application has been made and in lieu of that, 5 Commissioner, I do seek authorisation to appear. 6 7 THE COMMISSIONER: That authorisation is granted. 8 9 MR MOORE: Thank you. 10 11 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. 12 13 MR STOLJAR: The first witness is Mr Webber. 14 15 <STEVEN DENNIS WEBBER, affirmed: [10.18am] 16 17 <EXAMINATION BY MR STOLJAR: 18 19 MR STOLJAR: Q. Could you tell the Commission your full 20 name? 21 A. Steven Dennis Webber. 22 23 Q. You're a resident of Victoria? 24 A. Yes. 25 26 Q. And you're the Business Development Executive for 27 Cleanevent and Cleandomain businesses? 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. You have prepared a witness statement dated 20 May 31 2015? 32 A. Yes. 33 34 Q. Do you have a copy of that with you? 35 A. I do, yes. 36 37 Q. I'll give you a clean copy, if you like. I have 38 provided you with a copy of your witness statement and a 39 bundle of documents which has on the front Steven Webber 40 Documents "SW1". Just before I ask the Commissioner to 41 receive these into evidence, would you have a look at 42 paragraph 4 of your statement. 43 A. Mmm-hmm. 44 45 Q. A small point, but in the second-last line there's the 46 words "an EBA exhibited". Should there be a full stop 47 after "EBA"?

.28/05/2015 AWU M'SHIP 10 S D WEBBER (Mr Stoljar) Transcript produced by Merrill Corporation

1 A. Yes. 2 3 Q. Then, if you come through to the final paragraph, 4 paragraph 17, you make reference to a "Side Letter", with a 5 capital S and a capital L. If you open up the bundle that 6 I've given you and go to page 83 in the bottom right-hand 7 corner - it is tab 10 -- 8 A. Yes. 9 10 Q. -- is that the document you are referring to by the 11 term "Side Letter"? 12 A. I believe so, yes. 13 14 Q. Is the content of your witness statement true and 15 correct? 16 A. Yes. 17 18 MR STOLJAR: Commissioner, I'd ask that Mr Webber's 19 witness statement be received into evidence, together with 20 the bundle that's been provisionally marked SW1. 21 22 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Mr Webber's witness statement 23 will be received into evidence. I think it is probably 24 convenient to treat SW1 as part of the witness statement in 25 view of the close connection between the two of them. 26 27 MR STOLJAR: May it please the Commission. 28 29 THE COMMISSIONER: So that material is received into 30 evidence. 31 32 STATEMENT OF STEVEN DENNIS WEBBER TOGETHER WITH BUNDLE OF 33 DOCUMENTS MARKED "SW1" 34 35 MR STOLJAR: Q. Mr Webber, can you tell the Commission a 36 bit more about your background and experience. What did 37 you do after you finished school? 38 A. Predominantly worked in a factory from the age of 16 39 until predominantly 20, and worked in an abattoir and then 40 became - I guess, did a bit of work with a company that 41 eventually became Cleanevent. 42 43 Q. You say in your statement that you have been involved 44 with the Cleanevent business in various capacities since 45 1987. So when you say you became involved with the 46 business that became Cleanevent, was that in 1987? 47 A. Yes, yes.


1 2 Q. And what was your capacity at that time? 3 A. I was basically a casual supervisor. 4 5 Q. You say that you are currently employed - this is 6 paragraph 2 of your statement - as a Business Development 7 Executive. Have you worked your way up in the 8 organisation? 9 A. Yes. 10 11 Q. How long have you been Business Development Executive? 12 A. I commenced that role July 1 last year. 13 14 Q. And what do you do in that capacity? 15 A. Basically, I oversee our tenders and relationships for 16 our cleaning business. 17 18 Q. When you say "our relationships", do the relationships 19 include those with the different unions? 20 A. No. 21 22 Q. Who was in charge of that? 23 A. Oh, that would have been more an operational focus 24 once - you know, to maintain the day-to-day relationships, 25 I guess. 26 27 Q. Go to paragraph 3 of your statement. You say: 28 29 Cleanevent provided cleaning and associated 30 services in relation to major and minor 31 events and venues nationally. 32 33 When you talk about "Cleanevent", you're distinguishing 34 that from what you refer to in paragraph 2 as the 35 Cleandomain business; is that correct? 36 A. Correct, yes. 37 38 Q. What is the Cleandomain business? 39 A. The Cleandomain business focuses on commercial and 40 retail cleaning. 41 42 Q. I see. The Cleanevent business relates to events, 43 does it? 44 A. Predominately, so, yes. 45 46 Q. Could you just tell us a bit more about the Cleanevent 47 business, what are some of the examples of the events,


1 first? 2 A. The Australian Formula 1 Grand Prix. Predominantly, 3 prior to the Spotless acquisition, it was a cleaning 4 business that started in Australia that grew to, you know, 5 the USA and the United Kingdom in regards to major events. 6 Wimbledon in the UK, for instance, and predominately 7 stadiums and racecourses, anywhere where there was, you 8 know, a sporting, I guess, attachment to it. 9 10 Q. The Cleandomain business, is that also international 11 or in Australia? 12 A. It was up until 2010, I believe, yes. 13 14 Q. It was what? 15 A. International. 16 17 Q. 2010 is when it was acquired by Spotless? 18 A. Yes. 19 20 Q. Focusing on the Cleanevent business for the moment, 21 you say in paragraph 3 that during any given year, the 22 number of Cleanevent's employees varies. Let's just look 23 at the current position. Roughly how many employees does 24 the Cleanevent business have? 25 A. In full-time or a casual capacity? 26 27 Q. Well, I am going to break it down. Okay, start with 28 full-time? 29 A. Full-time, there's probably around 40ish, maybe 30 pushing close to 50. I'm not sure today to put forward 31 exact numbers. 32 33 Q. And then part time? 34 A. Again, that ranges depending what's on, yes. There 35 could be nothing on in the week and there could be three 36 casual employees; there could be a Melbourne Cup carnival 37 when there's 500 casuals on. 38 39 Q. When you say "part time", you mean casual, do you? 40 A. Yes. 41 42 Q. Focusing on casual, what is, as it were, the size of 43 the casual workforce at any one time? 44 A. The biggest event in Australia was the Melbourne Cup 45 Carnival where that ranged close to 500 employees, I'd say. 46 47 Q. How large is the pool of persons that might become


1 casual employees from time to time? 2 A. That's probably - that's probably at its maximum. 3 4 Q. That's only in relation to Melbourne Cup, isn't it? 5 A. Yes. 6 7 Q. What about Australia-wide at any one time? 8 A. Again, we kept a staff pool, a database of people that 9 we could call and predominantly, you know, we'd have to get 10 on the phone and call around to make sure people were 11 available. They may have other work elsewhere. They may 12 not be available for certain reasons, so I'd say, 13 predominantly, Australia-wide, there could have been 1,000 14 people on the database. 15 16 Q. Well, you say "there could have been". Can you be any 17 more precise than that? 18 A. No, not really. No, I've never gone and looked at 19 specific numbers. I've always known we've had sufficient 20 people within the database. 21 22 Q. All right. Other witnesses -- 23 A. And we've done recruiting drives. We do recruiting 24 drives prior to major events as well to, I guess, get more 25 people. 26 27 Q. So you have never, yourself, turned your mind to what 28 size that total pool of casual employees might be? 29 A. No, not a number, per se. I've always known we had 30 enough. If there wasn't enough, we'd go and do a 31 recruitment drive for a specific event. 32 33 Q. The operations or the events that Cleanevent provides 34 services in respect of are Australia-wide? 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. Was that the case in 2010, as well as now? 38 A. Yes. 39 40 Q. In fact, in 2010, you were saying there were some 41 international events? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. Let's focus on the Australian ones for the time being. 45 Was the position in 2010 similar to what it is now, that is 46 to say, in respect of permanent employees, about 40 to 50? 47 A. I'd say pretty close, yes.


1 2 Q. Are you able to give an estimate of the number of the 3 pool of casual workers that could be drawn from, from time 4 to time, for events Australia-wide in 2010? 5 A. That's when I'd say it would be around that - I'll say 6 the 1,000 mark, yes. There was -- 7 8 Q. Is that really just a guess, or do you know? 9 A. No, I don't know. 10 11 Q. Well, can you not just guess. Just try and focus on 12 what you know. If you don't know, just say so. 13 A. Well, as I said, I knew there was enough to cover it. 14 If there wasn't enough to cover, if I was told there wasn't 15 enough to cover, then we went on a recruitment drive. 16 17 Q. What's the distinction between a casual worker and 18 what's described as an "event casual"? 19 A. There was a day - for instance, there was Etihad 20 Stadium, which was a venue, that - and then there was 21 one-off events. So the Etihad Stadium was a regular 22 ongoing, I guess, site, where there was continuous work and 23 an event is a one-off that may go for, you know, one 24 weekend or four days, so to speak. 25 26 Q. In 2006, an EBA was negotiated between Cleanevent and 27 the AWU, you're aware of that? Were you involved in those 28 negotiations, yourself? 29 A. No. 30 31 Q. Who was involved in those negotiations, to your 32 knowledge? 33 A. That would have been our Chairman and our CFO. 34 35 Q. Who were they? 36 A. Craig Lovett was the Chairman and Ivan Dalla Costa was 37 the CFO. 38 39 Q. Would you have a look at tab 1 of the bundle that's 40 before you, page 33 identifies the signatories to the 2006 41 EBA. That's Mr Dalla Costa to whom you made reference? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. It was signed - this is the 2006 EBA - by 45 Mr Graham Roberts, Assistant National Secretary. So, it 46 was entered into between Cleanevent and the AWU in its 47 capacity as a National Union; correct?


1 A. I'd say correct, yes. 2 3 Q. To your knowledge it applies - well, in fact, if you 4 look at page 2 in the bottom right-hand corner, the 5 position is that this was the EBA applying to all 6 Cleanevent employees across Australia; is that right? 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. Do you know whether, from your involvement in the 10 Cleanevent business, there had been previous enterprise 11 agreements with the AWU? 12 A. Prior to 2006? 13 14 Q. Yes. 15 A. Yes, I believe so, yes. 16 17 Q. By 2006, in fact, Cleanevent is dealing with the AWU. 18 Cleanevent had had some dealings with the LHMU before then. 19 Was there any particular reason that Cleanevent was 20 negotiating with the AWU rather than the LHMU, to your 21 knowledge? 22 A. To my knowledge, I believed it was a tripartite 23 agreement originally and that's - yes. 24 25 Q. What about Cleandomain, does it have EBAs? 26 A. No. 27 28 Q. The term of the 2006 EBA was to expire on 1 December 29 2009 or the nominal term, you can see that on page 2. 30 A. Yes. 31 32 Q. At some point, in the latter part of 2009 or 2010, 33 negotiations commenced with regard to replacement; is that 34 right? 35 A. What was the date again, sorry? 36 37 Q. Well, you tell me. You were involved in those 38 negotiations? 39 A. I thought you mentioned a date, that's all. 40 41 Q. What I mentioned was that the nominal expiry date was 42 1 December 2009, so what I said was is it the case that 43 either at the end of 2009 or some time during 2010, 44 negotiations started with respect to a replacement? 45 A. Yes. 46 47 Q. Who was involved in those negotiations?


1 A. From the Cleanevent perspective? 2 3 Q. Yes. 4 A. Michael Robinson and myself. 5 6 Q. Who was involved from an AWU perspective? 7 A. John-Paul Blandthorn. 8 9 Q. What about Mr Melhem? 10 A. Mr Melhem, at the end of the negotiation, yes. 11 12 Q. I mention him because in paragraph 6 of your 13 statement, you describe negotiations with regard to - well, 14 you say they're an extension of the EBA, but, in any event, 15 you say: 16 17 ... Michael Robinson and I attended the 18 AWU's office to meet with Cesar Melhem and 19 John-Paul Blandthorn. 20 21 Do you see that? 22 A. Yes. 23 24 Q. You set out some things that you were told by 25 Mr Melhem in that paragraph. Was anyone present other than 26 the four persons that have been identified in paragraph 6? 27 A. No. 28 29 Q. Where were you at the meeting? 30 A. At the AWU offices. 31 32 Q. In a boardroom or -- 33 A. No, in Cesar Melham's office. 34 35 Q. Did anyone take notes of the meeting? 36 A. Not to my knowledge. 37 38 Q. You didn't take any yourself? 39 A. No. 40 41 Q. The last sentence of paragraph 6, you say: 42 43 I cannot now recall the precise words that 44 were said, or the number of union members 45 the AWU required, but this was my general 46 understanding of the effect of what the AWU 47 wanted.


1 2 What you have set out there is the gist of what you recall, 3 is it? 4 A. Yes. 5 6 Q. Can I ask you this: Mr Melhem, just so you know, has 7 given a different account of this meeting and he says that 8 he spoke of the payment by Cleanevent to the AWU of $25,000 9 as a service fee. To your memory, were those words said? 10 A. No. 11 12 Q. Did anyone raise the topic of service fees at this 13 meeting? 14 A. Not to my recollection, no. 15 16 Q. Have you heard that expression before? 17 A. In this context, no. 18 19 Q. Mr Melhem says in his account that the service fee 20 represented 1 per cent of Cleanevent's casual payroll. Did 21 he say anything to that effect at the meeting? 22 A. There was some talk about the percentage of payroll, 23 correct, but there was I think -- 24 25 Q. That's the best you can remember, is it? 26 A. Yes. There was some talk about it. 27 28 Q. You say in paragraph 6, simply, "At some point during 29 these discussions", and then you say: 30 31 ... and my recollection is towards the 32 conclusion of the EBA Extension MOU 33 negotiation ... 34 35 You attended this meeting. Can you give any more precise 36 date? 37 A. No. 38 39 Q. Were Cleanevent employees, to your knowledge, members 40 of the AWU at that time? 41 A. I knew there was full-time employees that were, but 42 I didn't know if any casuals were or were not. 43 44 Q. You just didn't know one way or the other? 45 A. No. 46 47 Q. In paragraph 6, you say:


1 2 The way this was put by Mr Melhem was that 3 the AWU wanted there to be a certain number 4 of union members amongst Cleanevent 5 employees ... 6 7 Do you remember whether anything was said about whether 8 those employees would be permanents or casuals, was there 9 any discussion about that, that you can recall? 10 A. No. No. 11 12 Q. You say in paragraph 5, if I can just go back to that 13 for a minute, that Mr Robinson was involved, and you say: 14 15 He took a lead role in the negotiations of 16 the EBA Extension MOU on the industrial 17 relations side of things. My role was to 18 consider the negotiations in the context of 19 Cleanevent operations. 20 21 Can you just expand on that? Just explain how that 22 distinction worked in practice? 23 A. Well, basically, Michael Robinson was our HR manager, 24 our National HR manager, so he took the lead for the 25 negotiation. My role was, I guess, to ensure that the 26 rates remained competitive from an operational point of 27 view. 28 29 Q. Who did most of the talking at this meeting that you 30 had that you refer to in paragraph 6? Who led the 31 discussion for Cleanevent? 32 A. Michael led the discussion, yes. 33 34 Q. Who led it for the AWU? 35 A. I'm not sure to be honest. 36 37 Q. In paragraph 7, you say: 38 39 ... I took no active part, except to 40 consider whether the amount of the 41 membership payment would have an impact on 42 Cleanevent's business ... 43 44 That's really talking about whether there was agreement to 45 be given to what was proposed. And then you say "which it 46 did not". You mean the figure of $25,000 was not material 47 to Cleanevent's bottom line, is that what you mean by that?


1 A. Yes, that's correct. 2 3 Q. What was Cleanevent's turnover at that time, roughly? 4 A. In 2010? 5 6 Q. Yes. 7 A. Maybe $25 million. 8 9 Q. That's as distinct from the Cleandomain business? 10 A. Correct, yes. 11 12 Q. Were negotiations going on at that time in respect of 13 Cleandomain and some sort of MOU or EBA? 14 A. Not that I was aware of. 15 16 Q. You had nothing to do with that? 17 A. No. 18 19 Q. Did you ever have anything to do with such 20 discussions? 21 A. No. 22 23 Q. Did you ever have anything to do with negotiations for 24 any other industrial agreement, other than this MOU? 25 A. No. 26 27 Q. In the whole of your time at Cleanevent, this MOU was 28 the only time you have been involved in such negotiations? 29 A. Yes, because 2006 was the one previous which I wasn't 30 involved with. 31 32 Q. You said you weren't involved in that? 33 A. Correct. 34 35 Q. You make mention in your statement, in paragraph 8, to 36 a series of emails which form tabs in Exhibit SW1. I just 37 want to go through some of those with you. Could you go, 38 first, to tab 2, page 34 in the bottom right-hand corner. 39 You should be looking at an email from Mr Robinson to 40 yourself and Julianne Page of 31 May 2010. Is that what 41 you're looking at? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. Julianne Page was the General Manager at that time? 45 A. Yes. 46 47 Q. Was she the General Manager of the Cleanevent event


1 business? 2 A. She was the General Manager for cleaning for the 3 entire Spotless business. 4 5 Q. Both Cleanevent and Cleandomain? 6 A. Yes, and Spotless accounts as well. 7 8 Q. Mr Robinson says: 9 10 Steven, 11 See the attached MOU adjusted by the legal 12 team. Note clause 2.2 and 2.3 that tie the 13 membership to the EBA. This cannot be our 14 approach. These clauses need to be 15 omitted. Please comment. 16 17 I'll come back to those words in a moment, but, first, 18 let's go to clauses 2.2 and 2.3, they're on page 35. The 19 MOU that's attached says at 2.2, in substance, Cleanevent 20 will pay employees' Union fees up to the following amounts: 21 $10,000 for the financial years ending 2011, 2012 and 2013, 22 and then 2.3 includes some conditions which would need to 23 be satisfied before an obligation to make the payments in 24 2.2 are enlivened. Do you see that? 25 A. Yes. 26 27 Q. If you go back to this email on page 34, it has been 28 sent on 31 May 2010. Do you remember whether that was 29 before or after the meeting with Mr Melhem and 30 Mr Blandthorn at the offices of the AWU? 31 A. No, I don't remember, no. 32 33 Q. The figure that is being talked about in the draft 34 MOU, which is an attachment to the email of 31 May 2010, is 35 $10,000 per year. Do you see that? 36 A. Yes, I do, yes. 37 38 Q. In the conversation to which you make reference in 39 paragraph 6 of your statement, the figure is up to $25,000. 40 Do you see that? 41 A. Yes. 42 43 Q. When was there first discussion about making some 44 payment by Cleanevent to the AWU? 45 A. My memory has that meeting the first time I was aware 46 of that. 47


1 Q. At that meeting the figure being talked about was 2 $25,000, wasn't it? 3 A. Correct. 4 5 Q. This email is talking about a figure of $10,000? 6 A. Correct. 7 8 Q. Well, do you know why the email makes reference to 9 $10,000, whereas you had a discussion with Mr Melhem when 10 he was talking about a figure of up to $25,000? 11 A. No. 12 13 Q. Is this a possibility, and I only put it for your 14 comment, that at an early stage in the negotiations, a 15 figure of $10,000 was being talked about and it gradually 16 was negotiated upward by the AWU? I don't know whether 17 that's right or not, I'm just asking you for your comment, 18 and if you don't know, please say so. 19 A. No, I don't know. I really don't know. 20 21 Q. In the email itself, it says: 22 23 Note clause 2.2 and 2.3 tie the membership 24 to the EBA. This cannot be our approach. 25 These clauses need to be omitted. Please 26 comment. 27 28 Did you make any comments to Mr Robinson? 29 A. Not that I recall, no. 30 31 Q. Did you answer the email? 32 A. I don't recall seeing an answer on the email. 33 I probably had a conversation with him. 34 35 Q. You say probably. Is it the case you don't know one 36 way or the other as you sit here today? 37 A. No, I don't know. 38 39 Q. To your understanding, what was Mr Robinson's concern 40 in saying "this cannot be our approach"? 41 A. Well, I assume he would have got advice from someone 42 within our team. 43 44 Q. Well, did he communicate to you what the substance of 45 that advice was? 46 A. No, I don't recall anything. I don't recall a 47 conversation about it.


1 2 Q. Well, was the concern, to your knowledge - and just 3 say "yes" or "no" - that it was not appropriate to have the 4 fee tied to entering into an EBA? 5 A. Well, by reading it, you would say that would be the 6 advice. Me, personally, I don't know whether that can or 7 can't be. 8 9 Q. All right. But as you sit here today, you can't shed 10 any light on the concerns that may have been ventilated at 11 that time about that arrangement? 12 A. No, I can't. 13 14 Q. Would you go back to paragraph 8 of your statement. 15 You say you were copied into some of those emails. But 16 looking at this email, page 34, you were specifically asked 17 to comment by Mr Robinson. Do you see that? 18 A. Yes. Yes. 19 20 Q. Would your practice have been that if you were asked 21 for a specific comment, you would ordinarily respond by 22 email with some sort of comment? 23 A. Not necessarily by email. We are in the same office. 24 You know, we are 30 steps apart at this stage, so -- 25 26 Q. You may have just gone over and discussed it? 27 A. I might have got up and had a discussion, yes. 28 29 Q. Come through to tab 3. This is an email chain that 30 begins on page 39 in the bottom right-hand corner. We are 31 now looking at an email of 19 August 2010. The email I was 32 just taking you to was dated 31 May 2010 and the next 33 email, on page 39, is dated 19 August 2010. I take it 34 negotiations were continuing between May and August? 35 A. I would assume so. 36 37 Q. Were they by email, those negotiations, in part? 38 A. Some questions may have been. 39 40 Q. I'm asking these questions, Mr Webber, because neither 41 Cleanevent nor the AWU has produced emails between May and 42 August 2010, there's just a gap in the production. To the 43 best of your memory, were there emails travelling between 44 the AWU and Cleanevent or within Cleanevent relevant to 45 this issue during that period, that is to say May and 46 August 2010? 47 A. I'm sorry, I don't know.


1 2 Q. It is likely that there were, isn't it? 3 A. I could guess. 4 5 Q. Anyway, let's have a look at the email on page 39. 6 This is an email from Mr Robinson to Mr Blandthorn but you 7 were copied in to those emails. The subject line reads 8 "EBA Changes"; do you see that? 9 A. Yes. 10 11 Q. Were the negotiations centred upon an EBA or an MOU at 12 this time, do you know, or do you not remember 13 specifically? 14 A. No, I don't remember, sorry. 15 16 Q. To your memory, what were the changes that Mr Robinson 17 was referring to when he says "Cleanevent accept those 18 changes"? 19 A. Unless it's in a previous email, I don't know. 20 21 Q. Well, would this be a reasonable summary of what 22 appear to be the events: that negotiations were ongoing in 23 respect of the MOU and that the parties were still trying 24 to finalise the document; does that sound right, at about 25 this time? 26 A. It looks that way if you read that. There is still 27 negotiation on some rates. 28 29 Q. And he says at the end of his email: 30 31 I think we are getting close to finalising 32 this document. 33 34 A. Mmm-hmm. 35 36 Q. And he looks forward to a response. Then come back to 37 page 38, Mr Blandthorn sent, on 31 August 2010, so some 38 12 days later, a response to Mr Robinson. He says: 39 40 Michael, 41 42 This seems fine. 43 44 Cesar would like a letter or email from 45 Cleanevent stating it is happy to pay a 46 contribution to the AWU if you are ok with 47 that?


1 2 Do we need to meet to wrap this up? 3 4 Probably best if I bring Cesar as well. 5 6 To your knowledge, what was the contribution to which 7 reference was being made at that time? 8 A. Oh, again, it's a long time ago. I don't recall 9 seeing the email obviously, but no, I -- 10 11 Q. Did you have any discussion with Mr Robinson about it? 12 A. Well, no, because as I - I guess as I say in my 13 statement, the first I was aware of, I guess, moneys was 14 when I met - which I'm assuming now was this meeting where 15 we met with Cesar, so -- 16 17 Q. Are you able to recall now, we are now looking in 18 August 2010, whether the meeting had occurred by this time 19 or did it occur at a later time? 20 A. Well, it would have occurred post this email from 21 Mr Blandthorn to Michael Robinson. 22 23 Q. Why do you say that? 24 A. Because it looks like it's to a point where the 25 negotiations are finalised and, yes, as it says, "We need 26 to wrap it up." 27 28 Q. Are you merely inferring, as you sit in the witness 29 box, from the content of the email when you think the 30 meeting had occurred, or do you say that because you have 31 some memory? 32 A. I'm inferring due to reading the documents. 33 34 Q. Don't worry about drawing inferences from the 35 documents, but as you sit here today, do you have any 36 memory of whether you had any discussion with Mr Robinson 37 about the contribution that the AWU was seeking from 38 Cleanevent -- 39 A. No, I don't. 40 41 Q. -- as at 31 August 2010? 42 A. My memory - no, no. 43 44 Q. Mr Robinson responds: 45 46 I will get the letter to you, and then if 47 you are happy with that, we will come over


1 and sign it off. 2 3 Then Mr Blandthorn says, "Sounds good." If we come, then, 4 to the next tab, page 41, later on the same day, 5 1 September 2010, Mr Robinson sent an email to 6 Mr Blandthorn and copied you in. The subject now is 7 "Membership Contribution". It says: 8 9 JP, 10 11 I thought Cesar might like this membership 12 contribution drafted as an MOU also. Let 13 me know if this is acceptable or if you 14 think changes are required. (This is what 15 I understood was agreed to by both 16 parties). It will be good to set this part 17 of the relationship out formally so that 18 each party understands the process. 19 20 Michael Robinson. 21 22 Do you see that? 23 A. Yes. 24 25 Q. When he says "(this is what I understood was agreed)", 26 had there been discussions or communications between 27 Cleanevent and the AWU by this stage, pursuant to which 28 some agreement could be said to have been reached in 29 respect of a membership contribution? 30 A. I think as I said in my witness statement, my memory 31 has the meeting which occurred in Cesar's office towards 32 the end, to use the terminology, to "wrap it up", is my 33 memory of that and that's - my belief is that's when 34 I first heard about moneys. That's my memory. 35 36 Q. And then -- 37 A. I may be wrong, but that's my memory. 38 39 Q. We'll come to page 43. We now have a draft MOU which 40 talks at 2.1 about a separate Memorandum of Understanding 41 that deals with wages and penalty rates, and the like, 42 concerning the current Cleanevent EBA, that's the 2006 EBA. 43 In effect, this is a second Memorandum of Understanding or 44 a draft one, pursuant to which, at 2.2, Cleanevent will pay 45 employees Union fees up to $20,000. Are you able to shed 46 any light on why the figure has gone from 10, as it was 47 back in May, to now in September, $20,000?


1 A. Again, I could assume reasons but, predominantly, 2 I wasn't in any discussions in regards to moneys going from 3 10 to 20 myself. 4 5 Q. The following day, go back to page 41, Mr Blandthorn 6 responds in a further email, into which you were copied, 7 saying: 8 9 Michael, 10 11 I think this is too formal and we should 12 steer clear of an MOU or deed as such. 13 14 Cesar is just looking for an undertaking 15 that Cleanevent will contribute the money 16 each year as discussed from year to year by 17 us. 18 19 I'm gathering, from your previous answers, that you're not 20 able to shed any light on whether you had any discussions 21 with Mr Robinson about those issues at the time? 22 A. Correct. My memory doesn't - no. No. 23 24 Q. Mr Robinson says: 25 26 Understood, will redraft. 27 28 A. Mmm-hmm. 29 30 Q. Do you recollect that in May 2010 - and we can go back 31 to the email if it assists your memory - Mr Robinson - it's 32 page 34 - attached an MOU which had clause 2.2 in it, 33 referring to a potential payment of $10,000 a year and he 34 says "this cannot be our approach". Do you remember that 35 at page 34? 36 A. I'm looking at it. 37 38 Q. If you come through to page 43, there's an MOU being 39 proposed with clause 2.2 in similar terms, except that it 40 is no longer $10,000, it's $20,000. Why the change of 41 heart, do you know? 42 A. No, I don't know, mate. 43 44 Q. Well, you and he were the only two people involved in 45 those negotiations, were you not? 46 A. For a period of time, yes. 47


1 Q. When you say "a period of time", throughout this 2 period in 2010; that's right, isn't it? 3 A. I'm just thinking when was it signed. It was 4 predominantly -- 5 6 Q. It was signed in about November 2010. 7 A. Others were involved, yes. 8 9 Q. By that stage? 10 A. Yes. 11 12 Q. You mean Ms Page? 13 A. Yes. 14 15 Q. It is fair to say - and correct me if I'm wrong - that 16 certainly between the early part of 2010 and August or 17 September 2010, you and Mr Robinson were the two primarily 18 involved from the point of view of Cleanevent? 19 A. You could say that, yes. 20 21 Q. Could you come to tab 5. On 6 September 2010, 22 Mr Robinson sends an email to Mr Blandthorn, and he says: 23 24 Just looking for your thoughts on this 25 letter. Does this reflect your 26 understanding of our agreement? If you 27 think it is fine I'll whack it on 28 letterhead or send it straight to Cesar and 29 then we can meet to finalise. 30 31 Then a draft letter is set out in the body of the email. 32 It would appear that Mr Blandthorn, the following day, made 33 some suggested changes to the text of that letter. Do you 34 see that? 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. You were cc'ed into Mr Robinson's email but not to 38 Mr Blandthorn's email. 39 A. Yes. 40 41 Q. Do you recollect now having any discussions with 42 Mr Robinson or, for that matter, Mr Blandthorn about this 43 issue? 44 A. No. No. 45 46 Q. In any event, this is the email which contained the 47 agreement, or the first version of the document which


1 became the "Side Letter", as you've called it in your 2 statement? 3 A. Yes. 4 5 Q. Just looking at that letter, it is said to be, in the 6 second paragraph, an undertaking by Cleanevent to pay on 7 behalf of employees of Cleanevent who are or become members 8 of the AWU, Union fees. In due course, lists of members 9 were sent, in at least one case by yourself to the AWU; is 10 that right? 11 A. Yes. 12 13 Q. How did you know at any one point whether someone 14 wanted to be or become a member or not? 15 A. I didn't. 16 17 Q. Perhaps I'll explore that with you now. For example, 18 one of the lists that you sent appears at page 106, behind 19 tab 15 of the bundle. This is an email that you sent 20 Mr Melhem on 20 April 2012, and you say: 21 22 Hi Cesar, 23 24 Hope all is well in your world and they are 25 not making you work too hard!! 26 27 Following on from your request to Michael - 28 29 - that's Michael Robinson - 30 31 - I have attached the names of cleaning 32 staff. 33 34 If you go over to page 107 there's a list and it continues 35 through to page 108. How did you cause that list to be 36 drawn up? 37 A. I got someone from administration to pull together a 38 list. 39 40 Q. So it was simply a list of the names of certain 41 cleaning staff of Cleanevent? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. That someone had pulled together -- 45 A. Yes. 46 47 Q. -- more or less at random?


1 A. Yes. 2 3 Q. All right. Come back to page 46, that's the draft 4 letter and then Mr Robinson, at page 48, tab 6, on 5 15 September 2010 sent an amended version of the letter to 6 Mr Blandthorn and then forwarded it to you, saying: 7 8 I sent this to JP. I have a copy on my 9 desk for you to sign when you get back in. 10 11 Indeed, what he's got there is the draft letter in the 12 email and he's attached an MOU. You were the designated 13 person to sign the MOU; is that right? 14 A. Not at that stage, no. 15 16 Q. Not at that stage? 17 A. No. I always sent it upstairs for review and I was 18 expecting someone up from above. 19 20 Q. At tab 7, as you say, you forwarded some documents to 21 Ms Page, and you say: 22 23 Michael and myself are meeting with the 24 union on Friday ... 25 26 That would be Friday, 17 September 2010: 27 28 ... to close our negotiation on the EBA. 29 30 Are you OK with me signing this off? 31 32 Now, at this point, the draft letter or the Side Letter - 33 why don't we call it the Side Letter for the time being, 34 Mr Webber, adopting the formulation in your statement. The 35 Side Letter is in the form of the email at page 48, if you 36 just come back to that for a minute. It refers to an 37 amount of $20,000; do you see that in the second paragraph? 38 A. I do, yes. 39 40 Q. Did you forward that to Ms Page as well, that letter? 41 A. I would say yes. 42 43 Q. It may well be, just looking at the two documents on 44 pages 48 and 55 respectively, that what you did was forward 45 Mr Robinson's email, sent at 1.41pm, to Ms Page, together 46 with the attachments to Mr Robinson's email. Does that 47 sound right?


1 A. That - yes. 2 3 Q. So, in that event, what you'd forwarded, if that is 4 the correct analysis, to Ms Page was a Side Letter 5 requiring payment of up to $20,000 each year; is that 6 right? 7 A. It looks that way, yes. 8 9 Q. Did you get to sign off for paying the $20,000 each 10 year, from Ms Page? 11 A. I can't recall in that exact letter there, but 12 obviously, eventually, there was sign off, yes. 13 14 Q. When you say "sign off", did you get something in 15 writing or did she just do it orally? 16 A. From my - yes, it must have been orally. 17 18 Q. When you say "it must have been", do you have no 19 memory one way or the other? 20 A. Well, no, and I can't find any record of it in a 21 written sense. 22 23 Q. You've looked for that record, have you? 24 A. Yes. 25 26 Q. Did she, likewise, give you authority to sign off on 27 the draft MOU at that time? 28 A. I would say yes or I wouldn't have done it, otherwise. 29 30 Q. Tab 8 is an email from Mr Blandthorn of 5 October 2010 31 to yourself and Mr Robinson, and he says: 32 33 Hi Guys, 34 35 Attached are two documents. 36 37 If you are happy Cesar will send to 38 National Office for signing. 39 40 And pages 63 through to 68 inclusive comprise the 41 Memorandum of Understanding, and page 69 is what we are 42 calling the Side Letter. 43 A. Yes. 44 45 Q. To your knowledge, why did it need to go to National 46 Office to be signed by the AWU? 47 A. I assume because it was for our business across the


1 country. 2 3 Q. Have a look at page 64. There is a clause 2.6 there. 4 I'm just drawing this to your attention because there are 5 some emails about it in a moment that I am going to take 6 you to. So this version that AWU has sent through at 7 5 October 2010 includes proposed clause 6, which reads: 8 9 It is agreed that the effect of this MOU is 10 to continue the operation of the 11 Cleanevent Agreement subject to the 12 operation of any provision more beneficial 13 to the relevant employees arising by virtue 14 of this MOU. 15 16 And I will just draw your attention to another clause. On 17 page 65, clause 3.3: 18 19 The parties agree that in the event that 20 approval is sought from FWA for a 21 replacement Cleanevent Agreement, the 22 appropriate reference instrument for the 23 purpose of the FWA better off overall test 24 is the Cleaning Services Award 2010. 25 26 The Cleanevent Agreement is the 2006 EBA? 27 A. Mmm-hmm. 28 29 Q. On page 69 there's the Side Letter and the Side 30 Letter, as you'll see in the second paragraph, has now 31 increased, or the proposal is that the amount to be paid 32 goes up to $25,000. Do you see that? 33 A. Yes. 34 35 Q. Are you able to shed any light on how it went from the 36 $20,000 we saw in the earlier email to $25,000? 37 A. Again, I can assume that the 25 figure was the amount 38 that was brought to my attention when we were in that 39 meeting. 40 41 Q. The next chain of emails are behind tab 9. Page 72 is 42 a further copy of the email of 5 October that we looked at 43 a moment ago. If you look at page 71, you'll see that 44 Mr Robinson responded on 8 October, copying you in, saying: 45 46 JP, 47 Three points.


1 2 1. Can you explain the intention of 2.6. 3 4 And then: 5 6 2. As our business changes ... 7 8 Et cetera. He's really talking there about, in substance, 9 clause 3.3, that is to say, whether the reference 10 instrument would be the Cleaning Services Award 2010 or 11 something else; do you see that? 12 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. And then 3, he says: 15 16 3. For the purposes of signing off this 17 document we need to keep the fee at $20k 18 because this is what we have gained 19 sign off for. It is outside our authority 20 limits to approve anything higher at this 21 particular point though you have SW's word 22 that upon winning an additional contract of 23 some significance we will meet with you and 24 discuss the amount again. 25 26 What is he referring to there? You're clearly the SW? 27 A. Yes. 28 29 Q. So what's he referring to there? 30 A. Well, it looks as though that if we gained more work, 31 yes, there could be an extra fee, so to speak. 32 33 Q. I'm not asking you to read the email and speculate on 34 what it might mean. I'm asking whether you, as you sit 35 here today, have a memory of discussing with Mr Robinson 36 how he would come to communicate to Mr Blandthorn that 37 Mr Blandthorn or Mr Melhem had your word about certain 38 matters. Can you remember how that came to pass? 39 A. Well, no, and I'll refer back to my original 40 statement. I said when I first became aware of money, it 41 was 25 and, you know, again, I'm trying to think back to 42 actually - whether my timings are correct, but that's my 43 memory. 44 45 Q. Well, it can't be when you first heard of money it was 46 25 because, as we have seen, there is a series of documents 47 pursuant to which the figures go from 10 to 20 and then to


1 25? 2 A. And that sounds fair enough, but my memory's only - 3 all I can recall is that meeting on the 25, that's all 4 I can recall. 5 6 Q. All right. Come back to page 71, Mr Blandthorn says: 7 8 Michael ... 9 10 1. The intention of 2.6 is that if a 11 clause in the MOU is more beneficial than 12 the agreement then it would apply. 13 14 2. I have changed the wording of 3.3 which 15 I think would be acceptable to Cleanevent. 16 17 3. Cesar is keen on the $25k. I would 18 have to get his approval to go back to 19 $20k. 20 21 You weren't cc'ed in to that email. And then if you go to 22 the top of the page, on 8 October, Mr Robinson responds and 23 says: 24 25 Thanks for that. 26 27 I'll work on getting the fee to $25k if we 28 can look at 3.3 again. 29 30 And he goes on to make some other comments which you can 31 read for yourself. Do I draw from your previous answers 32 that your evidence will be that you don't have any 33 recollection of this ongoing debate about the content of 34 the MOU? 35 A. That's correct, yes. 36 37 Q. Come back to page 70. Later on the same day, 38 8 October 2010, Mr Blandthorn says: 39 40 Michael, 41 42 The beauty of an MOU is it is not 43 enforceable. 44 45 Cesar is pretty keen on putting something 46 in there but I understand if you need to 47 run it past your legal department.


1 2 Did you have any involvement or discussion with Mr Robinson 3 about the matters that are canvassed in this series of 4 emails or do you not remember? 5 A. I don't recall but I doubt I would have. 6 7 Q. Did anyone say to you words to the effect "the MOU is 8 not enforceable"? 9 A. Again, I'm trying to think now. Enforceable by what? 10 I'm not -- 11 12 Q. By law, presumably. 13 A. No, I'm not sure about that. 14 15 Q. What was your understanding at the time? Did you 16 think it could be enforced by Cleanevent employees, for 17 example? 18 A. I'm assuming it went through our legal department and 19 all was fine. 20 21 Q. What was your understanding at the time? 22 A. I had no thought of whether it was, I guess, legal or 23 illegal or enforceable or unenforceable. 24 25 Q. Perhaps I'll come straight through to page 73 on 26 13 October 2010. Mr Blandthorn sends an email saying: 27 28 Michael, 29 30 Attached are final documents. 31 32 1. We have removed the reference to any 33 Modern Award. 34 35 That's 3.3: 36 37 2. The $25,000 needs to remain. 38 39 I am very keen to meet with members on 40 Thursday or Friday to do a vote ... as 41 I will be away the next two weeks. 42 43 If you could let me know if Cleanevent are 44 happy to proceed ... 45 46 This email attached what would become the final version of 47 the MOU, together with the Side Letter, on page 83 and you,


1 in due course, signed off on the agreement yourself. One 2 sees that on page 88 behind tab 11. Is that, by the way, a 3 personal address or a business address? 4 A. A business address. 5 6 Q. So you signed it on 13 October 2010, which appears on 7 page 88, the same day as you received the email that begins 8 on page 73; is that right? 9 A. (No response). 10 11 Q. The agreement, insofar as it is contained in a 12 Side Letter, contemplates that Cleanevent would supply a 13 list of Cleanevent employees. You can see that on page 83. 14 You've already given some evidence about one such list and 15 you said words to the effect that you got an administrative 16 assistant to prepare it and she chose a list of names at 17 random? 18 A. Yes. 19 20 Q. In due course, after signing this agreement, you 21 received a request from the AWU to start making payments. 22 Come through to page 92, behind tab 12. At the bottom of 23 that page is an email from Mr Blandthorn to you, saying: 24 25 Hi Steven, 26 27 Just following up from our phone call today 28 that you guys will action the payment? 29 30 Had you had a phone call from Mr Blandthorn on that day? 31 A. Oh, I don't recall. 32 33 Q. You responded the following day, 9 December 2010, on 34 page 92, by saying: 35 36 Sweet mate, can you send me the details of 37 who and where to send cheque to? 38 39 At page 91 Mr Blandthorn gives some details. At page 90, 40 you have some discussions with the finance manager at 41 Spotless about paying the first instalment of $12,500. 42 43 THE COMMISSIONER: I don't quite understand. According to 44 the Side Letter on page 83, minutes were only to be made on 45 receipt of the list of Cleanevent employees and these, 46 perhaps, incomplete materials don't seem to deal with any 47 receipt of any list of Cleanevent employees.


1 2 MR STOLJAR: Yes. 3 4 THE COMMISSIONER: Also, another condition was the 5 associated membership fees that Cleanevent are being 6 requested to pay is something that you would think 7 Cleanevent couldn't supply; it would be the Union who would 8 know what the membership fees were. 9 10 So I have two problems. One is how does that phrase 11 in the Side Letter about the associated membership fees 12 work and, secondly, was there ever a statement of 13 associated membership fees? 14 15 MR STOLJAR: Yes. 16 17 Q. If I could work through those questions with you, 18 Mr Webber. The first is, I've just been showing you some 19 correspondence from page 92, working backwards to page, 90 20 inclusive, which culminated in a payment of $12,500, being 21 the first instalment under the agreement contained in a 22 Side Letter. 23 24 The first question is the Side Letter itself talks 25 about payments being made biannually on receipt of a list 26 of Cleanevent employees. Pausing there, had Cleanevent 27 sent the list of employees at that stage to the AWU? 28 A. I don't know. 29 30 Q. If you go back to the Side Letter on page 83, one 31 condition precedent to the enlivening of the obligation to 32 make payments was the receipt of a list of Cleanevent 33 employees, but, separately, the associated membership fees 34 that Cleanevent are being requested to pay seem to be, or 35 the agreement seems to contemplate that they would be 36 supplied to - actually, I'll take that in steps. 37 38 Go to page 83 and look at those words: 39 40 ... the associated membership fees that 41 Cleanevent are being requested to pay. 42 43 What does that refer to? 44 A. Again, I don't know. This was - this was drafted by 45 our legal team, I assume. 46 47 Q. Do you know who did draft it?


1 A. No. 2 3 Q. So you're just assuming that the legal team did? 4 A. Yes. 5 6 Q. It might have been Mr Robinson? 7 A. It may have been but I doubt that. 8 9 Q. All right. But sitting here today, you can't shed any 10 light on who drafted it? 11 A. No. 12 13 Q. Can you shed any light on what is meant by the words 14 "the associated membership fees that Cleanevent are being 15 requested to pay"? 16 A. No. 17 18 Q. Could that correspond to amounts of under $25,000 19 being paid? You'll note that the second line refers to 20 Union fees of up to $25,000, or do you not know, you'd just 21 be guessing? 22 A. No, I don't know, yes. 23 24 Q. In any event, had anybody communicated - I think you 25 say in your statement, at paragraph 10, that you can't find 26 an invoice in relation to the payment of $12,500, but you 27 say: 28 29 ... I would be surprised if I did not 30 receive one as it is very difficult to 31 action payment within Cleanevent without an 32 invoice. 33 34 Is that right? 35 A. That's correct, yes. 36 37 Q. Would the ordinary practice be that you would have 38 received an invoice in the amount of $12,500 before you 39 made or caused any such payment to be made? 40 A. Absolutely. 41 42 Q. And would the invoice, in the ordinary course, be one 43 in similar terms to some of the other invoices that were 44 received from time to time, such as - I'm just tracking 45 down one of those invoices: Tab 21, page 127. I note this 46 one is for $25,000 plus GST. Is the effect of your 47 evidence in your statement that in all likelihood you


1 received, prior to causing a payment of $12,500 to be made 2 on 30 December 2010, an invoice substantial in terms of 3 that at page 27? 4 A. I would have to say yes. 5 6 Q. And if you or Cleanevent received any information 7 about what the associated membership fees were said to be, 8 it could have risen no higher than the information 9 contained within the invoice; is that right? 10 A. Yes, I'd say so, yes. 11 12 Q. I've taken you to paragraph 10 of your statement in 13 which you depose that - this is in about the fourth line, 14 if you look at it. You say: 15 16 I do not recall receiving an invoice ... 17 18 And those words appear immediately after you note that no 19 copy of an invoice has been located. You say: 20 21 I do not recall receiving an invoice ... 22 but I would be surprised if I did not 23 receive one as it is very difficult to 24 action payment within Cleanevent without an 25 invoice. 26 27 Do you see that? 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. If I take you back to some of the emails we were 31 looking at, at page 92, for example, you said to 32 Mr Blandthorn: 33 34 Sweet mate, can you send me the details of 35 who and where to send cheque to. 36 37 And then at 91 he provides those details. My question is 38 this - why did you ask for details of that kind if you 39 already had an invoice? 40 A. At that stage I mustn't have had an invoice. 41 42 Q. But doesn't that suggest that as at 9 December 2010 43 you didn't have an invoice, because you didn't know who or 44 where to send the cheque to? 45 A. I'd say that's correct. 46 47 Q. And at 91 you received that information in


1 Mr Blandthorn's email of 13 December 2010, at 2.47pm. And 2 then two minutes later, at 2.49pm, you forwarded that to 3 Mr Rohan Harris, who is the finance manager at Spotless, 4 and you simply say: 5 6 What suits us mate. 7 8 Mr Harris responded 16 minutes later, 3.05pm, by saying: 9 10 Steve 11 I think EFT is easier. 12 13 And four minutes later, Monday, 13 December 2010 at 3.09pm, 14 you say: 15 16 Cool, can we make this happen, is there 17 anything you need from me? $12,500 18 Big Ones!!! Then our next instalment will 19 be in June. 20 21 A. Mmm-hmm. 22 23 Q. Now, is a fair reading of that that you didn't get an 24 invoice and you simply paid on receipt of the information? 25 A. Again, I'd say that's very highly unlikely, almost 26 impossible. The details would have had to be set up within 27 our systems and you just couldn't pay anybody without 28 balancing up a purchase order with an invoice. 29 30 Q. Did you have a purchase order in this case? 31 A. I would have, but I assume one would have been 32 generated to match the invoice. 33 34 Q. Where is that purchase order? 35 A. I don't know. 36 37 Q. What does the purchase order say? 38 A. I haven't seen it. 39 40 Q. You're just guessing then, are you? 41 A. That's the process. 42 43 Q. You're saying that in the ordinary event there's a 44 process pursuant to which a purchase order is raised and 45 then an invoice generated, or an invoice received, and then 46 payment on the invoice, but this is a rather unusual 47 arrangement, isn't it?


1 A. Sorry, what's an unusual arrangement? 2 3 Q. What would a purchase order say for an arrangement 4 like this? 5 A. It could say anything; it could say "Payment to AWU". 6 7 Q. There was no purchase order, was there? 8 A. I don't know, but the process is an invoice comes, a 9 purchase order is raised and payment is made. 10 11 Q. In any event, if you did receive any information about 12 what the associated membership fees were, it would have 13 been in an invoice of the standard form kind that we've 14 looked at? 15 A. I would imagine so, yes. 16 17 Q. And otherwise, you received no information about what 18 the associated membership fee should be, other than perhaps 19 in the telephone call from Mr Blandthorn to which he makes 20 reference in his email of 8 December 2010? 21 A. Possibly. 22 23 Q. By this stage, you are, and when I say "you", I mean 24 Cleanevent is acting in performance of the arrangement that 25 had been concluded on the part of Cleanevent on 13 October 26 2010 and then subsequently by persons at the AWU; and you 27 had first the MOU itself and then secondly, the Side Letter 28 or the side deal. The subject matter of the MOU, looking 29 at that first, was important, it related to wages and 30 conditions and the like; is that right? 31 A. Yes. 32 33 Q. Why negotiate or why enter into an MOU rather than an 34 EBA? 35 A. I don't know that, sorry. I think, as I said, I don't 36 know where or when and what part of the process it was 37 decided to go from an EBA continuation to an MOU, yes. 38 39 Q. Was the MOU approved by employees or authorised by 40 employees of Cleanevent? 41 A. I would say yes. 42 43 Q. What do you mean you would say yes? Was it or wasn't 44 it? 45 A. I'm unsure, but I would say it would have been put 46 through the delegates. 47


1 Q. To the Union delegates, you mean? 2 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. But you yourself don't recollect or weren't involved 5 in that process? 6 A. Correct. 7 8 Q. Did you take any steps to notify employees - I'll take 9 it in steps. Did you take any steps to notify members of 10 the AWU about the arrangements contained in the Side 11 Letter, you, yourself? 12 A. The members that worked for us? 13 14 Q. Yes. 15 A. No, I don't think so. 16 17 Q. And I take it from that answer that you didn't take 18 any steps to notify or inform employees generally, whether 19 members of the AWU or not, about the arrangements contained 20 within the Side Letter? 21 A. I don't think so, no. 22 23 THE COMMISSIONER: I notice the time, Mr Stoljar. Is that 24 a convenient time? Do you want to have an adjournment? 25 26 MR STOLJAR: Yes, thank you, Commissioner. 27 28 THE COMMISSIONER: The hearing will resume at a quarter 29 to 12. 30 31 SHORT ADJOURNMENT 32 33 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Stoljar? 34 35 MR STOLJAR: Q. Mr Webber, I've been asking you some 36 questions about page 90 of the bundle, which was an email 37 chain culminating in an email of 13 December 2010 at 3.09pm 38 from yourself to the finance manager. Just to finalise 39 that sequence of events, can I take you to page 94 behind 40 tab 13. At 4.10pm on the same day, 13 December 2010, you 41 sent an email to Mr Blandthorn saying: 42 43 An EFT will take place before the end of 44 the week. 45 46 And you copied in Mr Melhem, Ms Mei Lin - just pausing 47 there, that's an accounts person at the AWU, to your


1 knowledge? 2 A. I believe so, yes. 3 4 Q. Rohan is presumably Rohan Miller, the finance manager 5 at Spotless? 6 7 THE COMMISSIONER: Rohan Harris. 8 9 MR STOLJAR: Q. Rohan Harris, I'm sorry. Mr Blandthorn 10 responded the next morning just saying, "Thanks mate." 11 Subsequently, I take it, the EFT was processed and the 12 money went across from Spotless to the AWU? 13 A. I would assume so. 14 15 Q. Can I then come to the next year, May 2011. An email 16 chain starts at tab 13A, at page 100. There's an email 17 from you to a Ms Michelle Ference, 26 May 2011 at 10.03. 18 Who is Ms Ference? 19 A. She was the payroll officer. 20 21 Q. You say: 22 23 Hi Michelle, 24 25 I need 100 names of our regular cleaners, 26 these names will go to the union as new 27 members as I pay for their memberships. 28 29 I need this fairly quickly. 30 31 That's sent on 26 May, 10.03. Come back to the previous 32 page. You say, on Monday, 30 May 2011, 1.35: 33 34 Michelle, the request below has now become 35 urgent, I need these names to me by 10.00am 36 tomorrow morning. 37 38 What was the urgency? 39 A. I don't recall. 40 41 Q. Had somebody asked you for a list of names? 42 A. They must have done, yes. 43 44 Q. You can't shed any light on who that was? 45 A. No. 46 47 Q. Your email is sent on Monday, 30 May at 1.35.


1 Ms Ference sends an email back 26 minutes later, Monday, 2 30 May at 14.01: that's on page 47. She has simply 3 inserted in the body of the email a list of names. Do you 4 see that? 5 A. Yes. 6 7 Q. And the list goes from pages 97 through to 98 through 8 to 99? 9 A. Yes. 10 11 Q. And it looks as though that is simply an alphabetical 12 list of names? 13 A. It appears that way, yes. 14 15 Q. It gets to "G" and stops? 16 A. It does. 17 18 Q. At page 99 - presumably because she'd got to 100. 19 A. I imagine so, yes. 20 21 Q. You didn't give her any instructions about how to pick 22 the names? 23 A. No. 24 25 Q. As far as you were concerned, your evidence earlier 26 was that they would be picked at random? 27 A. Yes. 28 29 Q. No thought was given, was there, as to where these 30 employees worked? They could work anywhere in Australia; 31 is that right? 32 A. Well, if it's alphabetical, then yes. 33 34 Q. I'm sorry? 35 A. Yes. Yes. 36 37 Q. You gave no thought, did you, to whether they were 38 levels 1, 2 or 3 employees? 39 A. Correct, yes. 40 41 Q. As far as you were concerned, she just had to grab 100 42 names, whoever they might be, and you would pass that on? 43 A. That was my note to her, yes. 44 45 Q. She sent that to you on page 97, 14.01, and one minute 46 later you forwarded it on to Mr Blandthorn, saying: 47


1 Hi JP. 2 3 100 names below as requested. 4 5 And then the two emails above are internal AWU emails; 6 I won't ask you about those. 7 8 THE COMMISSIONER: Except for the fact that, if I can 9 raise this, Mr Blandthorn's email to Angela Leo spoke of 10 100 names from Cleanevent for May. They are forwarding 11 addresses on. 12 13 MR STOLJAR: Yes. 14 15 THE COMMISSIONER: None of these earlier emails said 16 anything about Cleanevent forwarding addresses on. 17 18 MR STOLJAR: No. 19 20 Q. Did anyone ask you to collect addresses as well for 21 the names that you were forwarding? 22 A. Not to me, not to my recollection, no. 23 24 Q. Did you give an instruction to that effect to 25 Ms Ference? 26 A. No, because no-one asked me, from my memory, no. 27 28 Q. Can you shed any light on why someone at the AWU 29 expected that addresses would be forwarded? 30 A. I can assume - to contact the people. 31 32 Q. But you're just assuming or guessing; you don't have 33 any memory as to why that may have occurred? 34 A. No, correct. 35 36 THE COMMISSIONER: There is another matter. This simply 37 doesn't seem to comply with the terms of the Side Letter of 38 13 October. I may be wrong, but the impression you get 39 from that Side Letter is that Cleanevent would find some 40 employees who wished to join the AWU and then the names of 41 those people would be made known to the Union and the Union 42 would work out some fees that were to be paid for those 43 employees and then Cleanevent would pay those fees, but 44 only up to $25,000 a year. 45 46 What actually happens is there seems to have been no 47 concern about whether the employees wished to join the AWU


1 and there seems to have been no pressure from the Union 2 side - I withdraw that. The idea of the agreement being 3 fees up to $25,000 seems to have been replaced by a 4 practice of treating it as if it were $25,000, period. 5 Now, I know that Mr Webber wasn't a signatory to the 6 Side Letter itself, but no-one on either side seems to have 7 really worried too much about the terms of the Side Letter 8 as events actually came to pass. 9 10 MR STOLJAR: That appears to be -- 11 12 THE COMMISSIONER: To be blunt about it, the Side Letter 13 seems to be a sham. If you judge parties, and this may be 14 an impermissible thing in the law of contract, but if 15 you're trying to work out what parties agreed and draw 16 inferences from what they actually did, the inference you 17 would draw from what they actually did is that the actual 18 agreement was quite different from the Side Letter. The 19 actual agreement was simply to pass on $25,000 a year and 20 some names of people who had never been asked whether they 21 wanted to join the AWU. Some people don't want to join the 22 AWU. Some people probably would have but they weren't 23 asked. It is a matter for you really whether Mr Webber can 24 answer some of those questions or not. 25 26 MR STOLJAR: Q. Perhaps I'll approach it this way, 27 Mr Webber, and just focusing on your memory about the facts 28 of what occurred, when you were causing either payments to 29 be made by EFT or names to be supplied, did you give 30 consideration to the Side Letter of 13 October 2010 that 31 appears on page 83? 32 A. At what stages, sorry? 33 34 Q. When you were causing payments to be made or names to 35 be supplied? 36 A. No, I didn't, no. 37 38 Q. Did you really think more about the discussion that 39 you'd had with Mr Melhem and Mr Blandthorn to which you 40 make reference in paragraph 6 of your statement? 41 A. Sorry, the question is? 42 43 Q. I'm only asking about your understanding and your 44 thought process at the time, but did you think that you'd 45 reached some sort of deal with Mr Melhem and Mr Blandthorn 46 at the meeting at AWU that you describe in paragraph 6 in 47 your affidavit?


1 A. No, I didn't, no. 2 3 Q. You didn't? 4 A. No. 5 6 Q. Did you give any consideration to what legal 7 obligation you had to make payments or provide names to the 8 AWU when you did so in 2010 and 2011? 9 A. As I said, following that meeting, everything then 10 went to legal and to senior executive management. Once 11 that was all finalised, hence, the agreement was signed, 12 hence, the Side Letter, to an effect, went. My role was 13 I received the invoices, so authorised the payments because 14 I knew they were part of that agreement and acted on - if 15 I got asked to do something I'd generally do something and 16 I did do something with the names. So if someone asked me 17 to get some names, I followed that up, the names were 18 passed on. 19 20 Q. But they weren't names of members, were they? 21 A. I wouldn't know if they were members or not; no, I 22 don't know that. 23 24 Q. They were just random people who had been selected by 25 the payroll officer? 26 A. We've established that; they were in alphabetical 27 order, yes. 28 29 Q. In alphabetical order. You gave no consideration as 30 to whether these people were members of the AWU, did you? 31 A. I think I said that: I didn't know if they were or 32 they weren't. 33 34 Q. And you gave no consideration as to whether they were 35 to become members of the AWU; that's right, isn't it? 36 A. Yes. Yes. 37 38 Q. The way the Commissioner put it was that the agreement 39 that had been reached in this regard, that is to say, that 40 $25,000 would be paid for persons who were or would become 41 members, was a sham; is that right? 42 A. Oh, I'd disagree with that. 43 44 Q. It was a sham, wasn't it, because these persons were 45 not members and you didn't know whether they were to become 46 members either, did you? 47 A. Can I tell you my assumption?


1 2 Q. No, I'm not interested in your assumption. I want to 3 know what -- 4 A. Can I tell you my thought process? 5 6 Q. All right. 7 A. My thought process was once the Union had the names, 8 they'd follow those names up and then see if people wanted 9 to join the Union or not. 10 11 Q. Is that really your evidence, Mr Webber? 12 A. Well, that was my thought, yes. 13 14 Q. That you thought the Union was going to, what, track 15 down each of these people and say to them, "Would you like 16 to become a member"? 17 A. They visited our sites on a regular basis, I would 18 imagine. 19 20 Q. You would imagine? 21 A. Yes. Well, I'm not at site. I'm sure, yes, through 22 our delegates they would have gone around to sites. 23 24 Q. You're really just guessing as you go along, aren't 25 you? 26 A. I'm not guessing. I asked you if I could put my 27 thought process ahead and you said yes: that's my thought. 28 29 Q. You had no idea where these persons were actually 30 located, that is, the persons on pages 97 through to 99? 31 A. Personally, no. 32 33 Q. They could be anywhere in Australia? 34 A. Yes. 35 36 Q. They could be coming or going; I mean, they could be 37 on one job or another, they're casuals? 38 A. All correct. 39 40 Q. So the Union, what, they were going to turn up at 41 sites or events and just sort of ask around, was that what 42 you understood -- 43 A. From memory back then, the Union attended all of our 44 site inductions for major events. 45 46 Q. The fact is you simply forwarded this on, forwarded on 47 the names without any regard as to whether the persons were


1 or would become members; is that right? 2 A. I think I've agreed - I think I've said that, yes. 3 4 Q. In substance, these payments that were being made were 5 simply, as far as you were concerned, a cost of getting the 6 MOU agreed; that's right, isn't it? 7 A. Part of the process, yes. 8 9 Q. It was a cost of getting the MOU agreed, as far as you 10 were concerned, 25 grand a year; is that right? 11 A. Part of the process, yes. 12 13 Q. What you do you mean "part of the process"? 14 A. Part of the agreement. 15 16 Q. In order to get this MOU across the line, Cleanevent 17 had to pay AWU $25,000 a year, simple as that; is that 18 right? 19 A. My assumption was for membership. 20 21 Q. You say that, but the truth of the matter is that 22 these people were not - you gave no consideration as to 23 whether these people were or actually would become members; 24 you've already agreed to that, correct? 25 A. Yes. 26 27 Q. Is that right? 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. As far as you were concerned, this was just a cost of 31 getting the MOU agreed; that's right, isn't it? 32 A. No, I think I've answered that question. 33 34 Q. And it was a cost of getting good relations with the 35 AWU? 36 A. Relations were okay with the AWU: we didn't need to 37 buy their relationship. 38 39 Q. And as far as you were concerned - we'll come to this 40 in a bit more detail - it was an investment of $25,000 a 41 year to get a $2 million benefit? 42 A. Again, there's no basis on that $2 million. That was 43 a figure that I plucked out of the air. 44 45 Q. You plucked it out of the air? 46 A. Yes. 47


1 Q. All right, we'll come to that. At tab 14, pages 101 2 and 102, are some emails involving an Industry 2020 lunch. 3 Did you have any involvement yourself in that? 4 A. No. 5 6 Q. At tab 15, we come through to April 2012 and, just to 7 put it in context, at the bottom of page 103 is an email 8 from Ms Lin to Michael Robinson, with the subject heading 9 "Membership Invoice". Ms Lin says: 10 11 Please find attached invoice for membership 12 for financial year 2011-2012. It would be 13 much appreciated if you could arrange the 14 payment as soon as possible. 15 16 That invoice would appear to be the one that is at 17 page 111, if you come through to tab 16. It is an invoice 18 to your attention at Cleanevent Australia for an amount of 19 $27,500 and for what is described as "Membership Fees for 20 Financial Year 2011-2012". Now, come back to page 103. 21 Mr Robinson responds: 22 23 Good afternoon Cesar, you were on my 24 call back list but I see the subject below. 25 I have sent that through to Steven Webber 26 and the Accounts payable department and 27 spoken to them both and this should be 28 sorted soon for you. Please let me know if 29 there are any delays ... 30 31 Did you have a conversation with Mr Robinson about 32 Mei Lin's email? 33 A. I don't recall. 34 35 Q. And then Mr Melhem responds to Mr Robinson: 36 37 We need an up to date list of employees for 38 the financial year so we can put them on 39 our system. 40 41 And then if we come through to 106, we now have a list of 42 cleaning staff. This is your email to Mr Melhem of 43 20 April 2012 and I've already asked you some questions 44 about this, but in substance, you said that those names had 45 been gathered together randomly by an administrative 46 assistant? 47 A. Yes.


1 2 Q. You forwarded them through to Mr Melhem. And then 3 could you come to page 109, behind tab 16. At the bottom 4 of that page, you received an email from a gentleman who 5 appears to be an accounting officer at AWU. It says: 6 7 Good morning Steven, 8 9 Could you please advise the payment date 10 for these 2 invoices. 11 12 The two invoices are the one at 111 and then another 13 invoice at 112. Go back to 109. You forward that on to a 14 Mr Simon Jaensch, with a copy to Simon Dixon, saying: 15 16 Simon could you please put through a prompt 17 payment for these please, we have to keep 18 the union happy!!! 19 20 Who is Mr Jaensch? 21 A. He's from accounts. 22 23 Q. Who is Mr Dixon? 24 A. He was looking after our purchase orders at the time. 25 26 Q. That's on 13 June. If you go through to tab 17 and 27 look at page 114, Mei Lin, from the AWU, follows up on 28 27 June and says: 29 30 The attached invoice... has been 31 outstanding for more than 2 months. 32 33 That's on the 27th. On the 29th, at the top of the page, 34 she says: 35 36 Could you please investigate how it is 37 processing? It would be much appreciated 38 if you could make the payment by today. 39 40 And then come through to the page before, 113. You say: 41 42 This one has been going around in circles 43 for 3 weeks. 44 45 This has the ability to cost us some 46 $2 million if we pee them off. 47


1 Can this be finalised today!! 2 3 Who is Mr Johansson? 4 A. Finance. 5 6 Q. And Mr McBride? 7 A. Finance. 8 9 Q. When you say "finance", what's the position? 10 A. One was an accountant. One was - Andrew McBride was 11 senior, a senior finance guy, and the other two were 12 accountant-type roles. 13 14 Q. When you said, "This has the ability to cost us some 15 $2 million if we pee them off", you mean, "If we pee them 16 off and they" - well, by "them" you mean the AWU? 17 A. At that time we were going through a change in process 18 in regards to our accounting processes. Every account was 19 three, four months late in being paid and it was me getting 20 up my finance people, to be honest. 21 22 Q. By "them" you mean the AWU? 23 A. Well, that's who we owed and that's "yes". 24 25 Q. I'm sorry? 26 A. I would say yes. 27 28 Q. The point was that you were concerned that the AWU 29 would put an end to the arrangements that had been agreed 30 back in October or November 2010? 31 A. Oh, no, I wasn't concerned with that. 32 33 Q. That is of course what you meant when you said, 34 "This has the ability to cost us some $2 million if we pee 35 them off"? 36 A. No, I think that's more me just getting up my people 37 to, "Let's get our socks up and get things paid." 38 39 Q. That's not a truthful answer, is it, Mr Webber? 40 A. Absolutely it is. 41 42 Q. And then Mr McBride says, "This invoices was with 43 Wendy for sign off", et cetera? 44 A. Yes. 45 46 Q. And then Elena Young says, "Hi Andrew." He's the 47 senior finance person. Who is Elena Young?


1 A. She was Wendy's assistant. 2 3 Q. And Wendy was the Group General Manager? 4 A. At the time, yes. 5 6 Q. And she says: 7 8 I was under the assumption that Steven was 9 meant to provide the approval from Julianne 10 to Wendy for her review as per the attached 11 email? Wendy won't sign it unless she gets 12 the information. 13 14 Do you see that? 15 A. Yes. 16 17 Q. It has nothing to do with getting your accounts people 18 up to the mark. The delay was that Wendy Field was 19 concerned about seeing some approval for this $25,000 20 payment? 21 A. From my memory back then, I hadn't realised that it 22 escalated that far, or that high, sorry. 23 24 Q. You certainly knew a short time later that it had 25 escalated that far, didn't you? 26 A. Of course, once I was aware of it, yes. 27 28 Q. And you knew that that's what had caused the delay in 29 having the invoice paid; that's right, isn't it? 30 A. That was a smaller delay. As I said, we changed our 31 accounting systems and every invoice was two, three months 32 late; it was a horrific time. 33 34 Q. When you gave your evidence a moment ago, you were 35 giving the impression that this was just about some problem 36 with the accounting system, the delay in making the 37 payment; that was the impression you gave, correct? 38 A. Correct, yes. 39 40 Q. In fact, the delay was that Ms Wendy Field, who was 41 the Group General Manager, wanted to see the approval from 42 Julianne Page in relation to this $25,000 payment? 43 A. Yes. 44 45 Q. That's what caused the delay, wasn't it? 46 A. No. No. That caused - as I said, that caused a 47 smaller delay at the back end of it, but predominantly the


1 delay was through our accounting systems. 2 3 Q. It says at the top of that page: 4 5 Wendy won't sign it unless she gets the 6 information. 7 8 Do you see that? 9 A. And obviously, once I was aware of that, I got the 10 information for her. 11 12 Q. There is then a further email on page 116 from 13 Mr Robinson, and that's to Mr Jaensch, and then if we come 14 to page 120, on 25 June Ms Field herself sent you an email, 15 saying: 16 17 Steve, I have been presented with the 18 following two requests for payment which 19 I require justification for: 20 21 1. Membership Fees for the Australian 22 Workers Union? What does this membership 23 do and why do we need it? Why is it in 24 Cleanevent's name anyway. This type of 25 expense must be submitted for approval in 26 advance before even being considered as you 27 do not have LOA for memberships and 28 subscriptions. 29 30 What is "LOA"? 31 A. Level of authority. 32 33 Q. And then 2 deals with another matter. That seems to 34 relate to the second invoice that Ms Lin had sent through, 35 but focusing on 1, this was a request from your Group 36 General Manager? 37 A. Mmm-hmm. 38 39 Q. Was that the person to whom you reported? 40 A. Yes. 41 42 Q. Was she higher up the chain? 43 A. Higher up, yes. 44 45 Q. How many levels were between you and Ms Field? 46 A. There was one in between. 47


1 Q. Who was that? 2 A. Tom Gibbons. 3 4 Q. Mr Gibbons is also cc'ed on this? 5 A. Yes. 6 7 Q. What was Mr Gibbons' position? 8 A. I think he was, I'd say, the national cleaning 9 manager. 10 11 Q. You reported to Mr Gibbons, did you? 12 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. He reported to Ms Field? 15 A. Yes. 16 17 Q. Who did she report to? 18 A. I would assume the CEO. 19 20 Q. You assume the CEO? 21 A. Yes. 22 23 Q. This is a request from a person with a very high 24 office in the company to you? 25 A. Mmm-hmm. Yes. 26 27 Q. And she's asking for an explanation as to, "What does 28 this membership do and why do we need it?", and pointing 29 out that you don't have level of authority for memberships 30 and subscriptions. Do you see that? 31 A. Correct. 32 33 Q. You were concerned about that, were you not? 34 A. No. 35 36 Q. It had been escalated to a person - the Group General 37 Manager and the National Cleaning Manager had also been 38 involved? 39 A. That's where the level of authority has come into it, 40 yes. 41 42 Q. These are the persons to whom you report. You then 43 set out to provide an explanation in your response on 44 25 June 2012, which begins on page 119; is that right? 45 A. Yes. I was asked to do that and I did, yes. 46 47 Q. Yes. You sent a response about an hour or so later on


1 the same day? 2 A. Mmm-hmm. 3 4 Q. And you knew that that was going directly to the Group 5 General Manager, Ms Field? 6 A. Correct. 7 8 Q. And you were careful in your response, I take it; is 9 that right? 10 A. I responded. 11 12 Q. You were careful in your response, I take it? 13 A. I imagine I was, yes. 14 15 Q. You wrote it yourself? 16 A. Yes, of course I did. 17 18 Q. You were truthful? 19 A. Yes. 20 21 Q. What you said to the Group General Manager was the 22 following: 23 24 The below is all associated with our EBA. 25 In May 2010 the EBA was reworked. This was 26 a very difficult negotiation and at times 27 looked as though it would not get done. We 28 managed to lock a new agreement away 29 through an MOU for a further three years. 30 The $25,000 was part of that negotiation. 31 It was approved by Julianne. The $25,000 32 is an annual cost. 33 34 You regarded it as an annual cost of $25,000 at that stage, 35 did you? 36 A. Well, that was the amount within the agreement, yes. 37 38 Q. As far as you were concerned, it was an agreement to 39 pay $25,000 a year? 40 A. Yes. 41 42 Q. And you say: 43 44 The implication to the business by not 45 having the EBA and employing labour through 46 the Modern Award is circa $2 million per 47 annum.


1 2 Correct? 3 A. Through the Modern Award. 4 5 Q. That's right. Because the Modern Award is the 2010 6 Award, the Cleaning Services Award, that had come into 7 effect earlier in 2010? 8 A. 2010. 9 10 Q. That's right? 11 A. At the time, yes. 12 13 Q. And under that Award, you have to pay casuals, for 14 example, double time-and-a-half for public holidays and the 15 like? 16 A. If we went via that Award. 17 18 Q. You weren't paying that under the MOU, were you? 19 A. The Modern Award? 20 21 Q. You weren't paying casuals double time-and-a-half or 22 the like for weekends? 23 A. No, we paid the EBA rate. 24 25 Q. You paid the EBA rates? 26 A. Yes. 27 28 Q. The 2006 EBA rates as adjusted by the MOU? 29 A. Correct. 30 31 Q. The 2006 EBA was a Work Choices arrangement, wasn't 32 it? 33 A. Was it? I don't know. 34 35 Q. Well, in any event, you were paying the 2006 EBA rates 36 as modified by the MOU which was agreed in 2010; is that 37 right? 38 A. Yes. 39 40 Q. You weren't paying the Modern Award rates? 41 A. Correct. 42 43 Q. Either by way of wages or penalties; correct? 44 A. Correct. 45 46 Q. And the saving, as you say in your email to Ms Field, 47 to Cleanevent by not having the EBA, and employing labour


1 through the Modern Award was about $2 million per annum? 2 A. Through the Modern Award it would have cost a lot 3 more, yes. 4 5 Q. Well, it would have cost about $2 million? 6 A. Yes, I've written that there. Do I know that for a 7 fact? No, I don't. 8 9 Q. That was your best, careful and truthful estimate of 10 the saving to the business by not paying what would have 11 been required under the Modern Award; is that right? 12 A. It was a best guesstimate, yes. 13 14 Q. Well, you were endeavouring to be truthful with your 15 group General Manager, weren't you? 16 A. I was. Absolutely. 17 18 Q. And you were being careful in the response you'd 19 given? 20 A. Absolutely. 21 22 Q. You had been asked for an explanation as to, "What 23 does this membership do and why do we need it?"; is that 24 right? That is what she's asking you for? 25 A. Yes, correct. 26 27 Q. Your response to that was to do the best you could to 28 indicate what the savings to the Cleanevent business were 29 by not having an EBA and employing labour through the 30 Modern Award? 31 A. We went through the Modern Award, correct. 32 33 Q. The best you could do was to say that it would be 34 circa $2 million per annum? 35 A. Yes. There was no due diligence. It was through, you 36 know, an assumption that I've come up with. 37 38 Q. Well, an assumption that you'd come up with, but you 39 were a senior member of the organisation; correct? 40 A. Yes. 41 42 Q. It wasn't an assumption, it was your best estimate, 43 wasn't it? 44 A. As I said my best guesstimate, yes. I said that. 45 46 Q. You say "guesstimate", do you? 47 A. Yes.


1 2 Q. My suggestion to you is it was your best estimate 3 based on your experience in the business at the time -- 4 A. Correct. 5 6 Q. -- as to what the savings to the business would be by 7 not -- 8 A. My best guesstimate, yes. 9 10 Q. Well, if you just let me finish my question. As to 11 what the savings in the business would be by not employing 12 labour through the Modern Award; is that right? 13 A. That's if it went through - that's if we had to go 14 through the Modern Award. There were other Awards we could 15 align to. We just put it through in discussion. 16 17 Q. Such as? 18 A. The Amusement Awards. 19 20 Q. The Amusement Awards? 21 A. Yes. 22 23 Q. Then come back to page 119. Ms Field says: 24 25 Thanks Steve, Please provide a copy of the 26 approval from Julianne and advise how many 27 years we are obligated to pay. 28 29 You say further up the page: 30 31 After looking through the files I can't 32 locate a written approval. I have followed 33 up also with Julianne and HR who recall the 34 agreement - It appears that the approval 35 from Julianne was only a verbal approval. 36 37 Was Ms Page still working in the business at that time? 38 A. I don't know. 39 40 Q. When you say "HR", who had you talked to at HR? 41 A. Oh, it might have been Michael. 42 43 Q. Could you just go back to page 120. I'd taken you 44 through your email to Ms Field, up to the sentence 45 culminating in the words "$2 million per annum". If we 46 continue looking that the paragraph, you say: 47


1 We are about to enter our third and final 2 year of this agreement to which we will 3 need to start discussing how we can 4 continue this. 5 6 You mean continuing the MOU? 7 A. Continue - yeah, continue along with the EBA/MOU, yes. 8 9 Q. And continue along with the payment of $25,000 a year? 10 A. Not necessarily, no. 11 12 Q. You talk about the training. That's really dealing 13 with paragraph 2 of Ms Field's email at the bottom of that 14 page? 15 A. Yes. 16 17 Q. And then you say: 18 19 The relationship with the union was been 20 long and very good which has allowed us to 21 continue to remain competitive with what is 22 a pretty good EBA. 23 24 You mean a pretty good EBA from Cleanevent's point of view? 25 A. Well, yes. 26 27 Q. Come back to page 119. You say you can't find a 28 written approval. Was that unusual, that there would be no 29 written approval? 30 A. It seems to have happened a couple of times with 31 Julianne, so it may not be that unusual. 32 33 Q. Is the arrangement still going? Is Cleanevent still 34 paying $25,000 a year? 35 A. Well, as I say in my thing, it was paid for - was it 36 14-15 - which was an oversight and should not have been 37 paid. 38 39 Q. Sorry, as you say where? 40 A. Do I mention that in my witness statement? I think 41 it's in clause 17. 42 43 Q. That relates to the 13-14 financial year. Wasn't your 44 evidence a moment ago that some payment was made in the 45 14-15 year? 46 A. Well, it was the fourth year of agreement, which 47 I assumed it was, and it was a three year agreement. So it


1 might have been 13-14. 2 3 Q. Who is in charge? Has anyone gone back to the AWU now 4 and talked to them about whether to continue this 5 agreement? 6 A. I believe that's in tow. 7 8 Q. It's in -- 9 A. I believe someone is talking to them, yes. 10 11 Q. Who is that? 12 A. The general manager of HR. 13 14 Q. Who is that? 15 A. John Douglas. 16 17 Q. Who is he dealing with at the AWU? 18 A. Oh, I don't know. 19 20 Q. That is about whether to continue this arrangement on 21 into the future; is that right? 22 A. I'd imagine so, yes. 23 24 Q. You're not personally involved? 25 A. No. 26 27 Q. Can I just ask you this, Mr Webber - were you, 28 yourself, familiar with the requirements of the 2010 Award, 29 the Modern Award, as you call it, in 2010, 2011, 2012? 30 A. Sorry, you're asking me if I knew about the -- 31 32 Q. If I wanted to ask questions about pay rates and the 33 like for casuals under the Modern Award, were you a person 34 who had responsibility for that kind of detail in the 35 organisation? 36 A. No. 37 38 Q. Who was? 39 A. Oh, HR/payroll, I'd imagine. 40 41 Q. So Mr Robinson? 42 A. I assume he would, yes. 43 44 Q. But you, yourself, didn't - you were more concerned 45 with operations and didn't get into that detail; is that 46 right? 47 A. Yes, correct.


1 2 Q. I just want to put this to you, Mr Webber. If you go 3 to page 111, that was the invoice for 2012. I'm just 4 putting this to you to see if you agree with me or not. 5 The words under the heading "Description", "Membership Fees 6 for Financial Year 2011-2012" are not true or accurate 7 because what was being charged for was not membership fees 8 at all; what do you say to that? 9 A. I'm not sure, to be honest. 10 11 Q. What was being charged for by this invoice and the 12 others issued in relation to this matter by the AWU were 13 for costs of getting the MOU in place, in truth, and not 14 for membership at all? 15 A. No. As I said I'm not sure what he did with the names 16 that were passed through. No, I assume that was what - as 17 I said before - what was taking place. 18 19 MR STOLJAR: Nothing further. Thank you, Mr Commissioner. 20 21 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Moore. 22 23 MR MOORE: Thank you, Mr Commissioner. 24 25 <EXAMINATION BY MR MOORE: 26 27 MR MOORE: Q. Mr Webber, it's fair to say that the 28 negotiations which led to the making of the MOU in 2010 29 were conducted for Cleanevent, the negotiations with the 30 AWU that is, and Mr Blandthorn was principally responsible 31 for those? 32 A. Yes, I'd say so, yes. 33 34 Q. And your perspective was a removed one, in that you 35 had responsibility for the operational interests of the 36 company? 37 A. Yes. 38 39 Q. You kept abreast, though, in broad terms, of the 40 progress of the negotiations, would you agree, through both 41 informal conversations with Mr Blandthorn and also by 42 seeing emails that you were cc'ed into? 43 A. To a certain level, yes. 44 45 Q. In your statement to the Commission, you refer to this 46 meeting which Mr Melhem and Mr Blandthorn and Mr Robinson 47 attended at the AWU offices. Mr Stoljar asked you some

.28/05/2015 AWU M'SHIP 62 S D WEBBER (Mr Moore) Transcript produced by Merrill Corporation

1 questions about that today. You placed that meeting at 2 being towards the end of the negotiations? 3 A. That was my belief, yes. 4 5 Q. Yes. In this meeting, the matter of a payment of 6 $25,000 was raised - is that the case? 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. Yes. You initially said today in answer to a question 10 from Mr Stoljar that the first time there was discussion of 11 payment of an amount of money or moneys was in this meeting 12 that Mr Melhem attended. You later said in your evidence - 13 and this is at page 24 of the transcript - that you first 14 heard of the payment of money in that meeting, but you 15 might be wrong. That's what you said in your evidence 16 A. Well, my -- 17 18 Q. I'm building to a question, Mr Webber. Mr Stoljar has 19 shown you today a good number of emails which, would you 20 agree, refer to proposals for Cleanevent to pay different 21 amounts ranging from between $10,000 to $25,000 to the AWU; 22 is that right? 23 A. Yes, it is, yes. 24 25 Q. Do you accept that you were cc'ed in to many of those 26 emails? 27 A. Yes. 28 29 Q. That's right. Can I suggest to you that the position 30 really is this: you were, through those emails and through 31 discussions with Mr Robinson, generally aware that there 32 was a claim being made by the Union for payment of moneys 33 of an amount which varied? 34 A. I said my memory had that being the first time I'd 35 heard that, but obviously you can see through me being 36 copied into documentation, that it was raised earlier than 37 that. 38 39 Q. Yes. Can I suggest to you that the explanation for 40 that, if I can say, perhaps uncertainty, is because what 41 you're saying is that that meeting which Mr Melhem attended 42 is the first time that you verbally heard from the Union 43 about a claim for money, $25,000? 44 A. Possibly, yes. 45 46 Q. But you were aware of that subject matter through the 47 emails before that time, it was just that you had not


1 attended any meetings with AWU where the matter had been 2 raised, is that a fair analysis? 3 A. That could be a fair analysis. 4 5 Q. Thank you. And you would agree with this summary, 6 having been taken through the emails, that what occurred 7 was that initially it was proposed that Cleanevent would 8 pay to the AWU $10,000 - yes? 9 A. That's what it appears. 10 11 Q. Then the proposal was for payment of $20,000. Do you 12 recall seeing that email? 13 A. Yes. I think we've established that, yes. 14 15 Q. And then the final figure was $25,000 - yes? 16 A. Yes. 17 18 Q. If I could ask you to look at the documents behind 19 attachment 8 -- 20 A. 8, sorry? 21 22 Q. Yes, 8, thank you, Mr Webber. 23 24 MR MOORE: I apologise to the Commission, I don't have 25 page numbering on my documents. 26 27 THE COMMISSIONER: Page 62. 28 29 MR MOORE: Q. This is one of the documents that 30 Mr Stoljar showed you before. You'll see that it is an 31 email from Mr Blandthorn to you and Mr Robinson attaching 32 an MOU and the letter to Cesar from Cleanevent. That's the 33 attachments as they are so described at the top of the 34 email. Mr Stoljar took you, if you go into the attachments 35 to the document to the final page, there's an unsigned 36 letter which bears the date 5 October 2010 to Mr Melhem 37 with Mr Robinson's name at the bottom. You will see in the 38 second paragraph there is reference to: 39 40 ... Cleanevent will pay, on behalf of 41 employees of Cleanevent who are or become 42 members of the AWU, the employees' union 43 fees to $25,000 ... 44 45 You understood, Mr Webber, that by this time, that is, at 46 5 October 2010, the AWU's position, as you understood it, 47 was that an amount of $25,000 was to be paid, as you


1 understood it, in respect of membership dues? 2 3 THE COMMISSIONER: Up to, Mr Moore. 4 5 MR MOORE: Up to. I'm sorry, Commissioner. 6 7 Q. Is that as you understood it? 8 A. That was raised at the meeting. 9 10 Q. Yes. What I'm suggesting to you is that you became 11 aware that that was the Union's position -- 12 A. At that meeting, yes. 13 14 Q. No. Let me finish the question Mr Webber. You became 15 aware that was the Union's position at or soon after you 16 received this email from Mr Blandthorn, which is dated 17 5 October. Do you agree with that? 18 A. I don't know if I had the meeting in the AWU office 19 prior to that, or after that, but I am saying it was prior 20 to that because that's the first I heard of 25. 21 22 Q. What I'm suggesting to you is that you became aware 23 for the first time that the AWU's position was for payment 24 of an amount of up to $25,000 on behalf of Cleanevent 25 employees who are or became members of the AWU, and you 26 first became aware of that, would you agree, this email 27 would suggest, at or soon after the date of the email, that 28 is, 5 October? 29 A. It was at that meeting that I first became aware of 30 that, yes. 31 32 Q. You signed the MOU? 33 A. Correct. 34 35 Q. And it is dated 13 October? 36 A. Yes. 37 38 Q. Can I suggest to you that what occurred is this, that 39 some time shortly after receiving the email which is behind 40 tab 8, of 5 October, you understood that agreement was 41 reached with the AWU to pay an amount of up to $25,000 in 42 relation to the payment of Union subscriptions and that 43 that understanding of an agreement being reached was before 44 the meeting with Mr Melhem. Do you accept that may be a 45 possible -- 46 A. No, the first I heard of the 25 being raised was at 47 the meeting with Cesar Melhem, and the meeting came to a


1 fairly abrupt end after that because, again, it was out of 2 Michael and I's responsibility to take any further 3 conversation because we couldn't do anything. We had to go 4 back to our office, to take it to our Executive. 5 6 Q. Can I suggest to you, Mr Webber, that you're mistaken 7 in that recollection of events and that the meeting which 8 Mr Melhem attended, that agreement, as you understood it, 9 had been reached in relation to all elements pertaining to 10 the MOU and the Side Letter, including this payment, and 11 that at least an in-principle agreement in relation to 12 those matters had already been reached? 13 A. It was some five years ago, but my memory is telling 14 me that that's - you know, the first I heard of the number 15 25 was within that discussion. 16 17 Q. Can I suggest to you that's the first time you heard 18 it said orally - might that be the case? 19 A. I don't think so because, as I said, the meeting ended 20 fairly abruptly because it was pointless discussing 21 anything more because we couldn't go any further with it. 22 23 Q. The purpose of the meeting which Mr Melhem attended, 24 to which you refer, was simply for the parties to come 25 together and confirm the in-principle agreement which had 26 already been reached; is that so? 27 A. Well, to finalise it before the end of the year. 28 29 Q. Yes, to finalise it, that's right. 30 A. Yes. 31 32 Q. It needed to be finalised? 33 A. Correct. 34 35 Q. And matters such as the approval of employees, 36 arrangements for that to occur, were discussed as well? 37 A. I can't recall most of that conversation, as I said, 38 but I do - what sticks in my mind is when I heard the 25 39 amount. 40 41 Q. There were other administrative matters that needed to 42 be attended to -- 43 A. Of course. 44 45 Q. -- such as the provision of the MOU to the National 46 Office of the AWU? 47 A. Of course.


1 2 Q. Can I suggest to you, to be clear, that before the 3 meeting with Mr Melhem occurred, which you attended, the 4 question of the payment of up to $25,000 in relation to 5 membership Union subscriptions, that that had been agreed 6 in principle? Do you accept that that may be the case? 7 A. The terms may have been. I don't think the amount 8 was, but, yeah. 9 10 Q. Your understanding from the reports provided to you 11 informally by Mr Blandthorn and from seeing the emails that 12 you were cc'ed into and were sent to you, was that the 13 amount to be paid to the AWU was in respect of AWU 14 membership fees? 15 A. Yes. 16 17 THE COMMISSIONER: In that last question did you mean 18 Robinson or did you mean Blandthorn, as you said? 19 20 MR MOORE: I meant Robinson. I apologise. 21 22 Q. Do you understand that question? I incorrectly 23 referred to Mr Blandthorn when I intended Mr Robinson. 24 A. Yes. 25 26 Q. In the meeting which Mr Melhem attended, Mr Melhem's 27 evidence to this Commission is that he referred to the 28 payment of $25,000 as a service fee. Do you accept that he 29 may have said that? 30 A. No, it doesn't ring a bell with me. 31 32 Q. You don't recollect that? 33 A. No. Correct. 34 35 Q. Your recollection of that meeting is pretty limited, 36 would you agree with that? 37 A. Yes, I would - yes, yes. 38 39 Q. In paragraph 6 of your statement you give an account 40 of what Mr Melhem said in the meeting. You say, though, in 41 that paragraph that you don't recall precisely what 42 Mr Melhem said, but that what you've set out is your 43 understanding of the effect of what the AWU wanted. I take 44 it, then, Mr Webber, you're not in a position to say with 45 any certainty to this Commission that Mr Melhem said what 46 you refer to in paragraph 6? You can't be certain he said 47 that?


1 A. We discussed membership. We discussed - and 25 was 2 mentioned. 3 4 Q. What's in paragraph 6 is your interpretation or 5 understanding of what Mr Melhem meant; not an account of 6 what he said? Do you accept that? 7 A. You could say that, yes. 8 9 Q. Thank you. Can I suggest to you that because you 10 understood, as you indicated in an answer a few moments 11 ago, that the payment of the fee was to be in relation to 12 Union membership subscriptions, you've assumed, in making 13 your statement, that that is what Mr Melhem meant in 14 referring to the payment in the meeting? Do you accept 15 that might be the case? 16 A. Can you -- 17 18 Q. Yes, I'll come at it again. 19 A. Yes. 20 21 Q. You've got in your mind before this meeting that the 22 Union wants payment of an amount and you believe that that 23 payment is an amount, or up to an amount, in relation to 24 Union membership subscriptions; yes? That's what you 25 understand to be the Union's position? Are you with me so 26 far? 27 A. Sort of. 28 29 Q. All right. You said before, in answer to a question 30 I asked you, that it was your understanding that what the 31 Union wanted, what this payment represented, was in 32 relation to Union membership subscriptions? 33 A. Yes. Yes. 34 35 Q. So you've got that in your mind. Can I suggest to you 36 that with that belief in your mind, you've assumed that 37 that's what Mr Melhem was referring to as to the character 38 of the payment to be made; you've assumed that's what he 39 meant? Is that a fair proposition? 40 A. It could be. I'm just trying to think what - yes. In 41 an assumption sense - in an assumption sense, yes, 42 membership, yes. 43 44 Q. You've assumed that's what he wants the money for? 45 A. Yes. 46 47 Q. Yes. But in fact what he referred to it as was as a


1 fee? 2 A. Well, as I said, the service fee, I don't recall that 3 in the conversation at all, to be honest. 4 5 Q. You do later, in your emails, refer to it as a fee, 6 though, don't you? 7 A. I'm not sure. I haven't got that in front of me. I'm 8 not sure - fee, fees. 9 10 Q. Do you recall the email that you sent to Wendy Field 11 of 25 June 2012 which is behind tab 19, in which you 12 referred to it as an annual cost; do you recall that? 13 A. Tab 19, sorry? 14 15 Q. Yes, behind tab 19. 16 A. It does say annual cost. 17 18 Q. Yes, in your email to Ms Field? 19 A. Yes. Yes, that's what it says. 20 21 Q. I don't need to ask that question any further. You 22 say in your statement that in the meeting attended by 23 Mr Melhem that he said, "To obtain the AWU's agreement to 24 the EBA extension MOU, it would be necessary for Cleanevent 25 to pay $25,000 per annum for membership fees." Now, that's 26 what you say. Mr Melhem expressly denies saying something 27 to that effect. Do you accept that you may be mistaken in 28 attributing those words to him? 29 A. As I said, I think my -- 30 31 Q. It is your recollection of that meeting -- 32 A. I cannot now recall the precise words. I'm just 33 trying to get - I can't recall the precise words. There 34 was discussion around membership and around - the 25 was 35 mentioned. 36 37 Q. You're not saying to the Commission they are the 38 precise words that Mr Melhem used? 39 A. As I said, it's written out, I cannot now recall the 40 precise words. 41 42 Q. Yes. And you're not even saying to the Commission 43 that that is definitely the substance of what he said? You 44 can't be sure of that, can you? 45 A. They were discussed at that meeting. 46 47 Q. Those matters were discussed --


1 A. Correct. 2 3 Q. -- but the proposition that to obtain the AWU's 4 agreement to the EBA extension MOU it would be necessary 5 for Cleanevent to pay $25,000 for membership fees, 6 Mr Melhem never said that, did he? 7 A. He certainly spoke about $25,000, yes. 8 9 Q. That's all that he spoke about, though? 10 A. And we spoke about membership. 11 12 Q. Yes. Can I suggest to you, though, you can't be 13 certain of those two things - I withdraw that. In the 14 meeting, Mr Melhem referred to the payment of the $25,000 15 and he also referred to the MOU. He never said that to 16 have the MOU made, the $25,000 had to be paid; is that so? 17 A. Oh, I don't recall if he -- 18 19 Q. You don't recall? So your evidence is you don't 20 recall whether or not he said that? 21 A. I don't recall in the context of that, yes. 22 23 Q. You also make reference, in paragraph 6 to your 24 statement, to Mr Melhem saying that the AWU wanted to have 25 a certain number of members among the casuals. Can 26 I suggest to you that he didn't say that either, did he? 27 A. There was discussion around membership. 28 29 Q. In a general way? 30 A. Yes. They would have liked more membership. 31 32 Q. Yes. Did you understand that at the time there was a 33 high percentage or proportion of Cleanevent permanent 34 employees who were members of the AWU? 35 A. Yes, I thought there would have been, yes. 36 37 Q. Yes. They paid their Union dues via payroll 38 deduction, as you understood it? 39 A. I presume so, yes. 40 41 Q. Did you also understand that in the few years before 42 2010, similar arrangements for the payment of Union 43 subscriptions by payroll deduction were also in place for 44 at least some casual employees? 45 A. Oh, I would have assumed so. 46 47 Q. Yes.


1 A. I didn't know but I would assume so. 2 3 Q. You didn't know but it wouldn't surprise you if that 4 was the case? 5 A. Yes, absolutely. 6 7 Q. Did you understand at about this time, in 2010 or 8 2009, that problems had arisen about the payment of Union 9 dues for casual employees by way of payroll deduction? 10 A. No. 11 12 Q. You weren't aware of any issues in that regard? 13 A. No. 14 15 Q. Were you aware that the company had told or indicated 16 to the AWU that it couldn't continue doing payroll 17 deduction of Union subscriptions for casual employees some 18 time in 2009 or 2010? 19 A. I don't recall being in any of those conversations. 20 21 Q. You weren't aware of that? 22 A. No. 23 24 MR MOORE: Nothing further, Commissioner. 25 26 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Mr Addison? 27 28 MR ADDISON: Yes, I have some questions, Commissioner. 29 30 <EXAMINATION BY MR ADDISON: 31 32 MR ADDISON: Q. Mr Webber, you have been employed by 33 Cleanevent for a significant period of time? 34 A. Yes. 35 36 Q. Where were you in 2006? 37 A. Where was I in 2006? 38 39 Q. Where were you in 2006? 40 A. I could have been anywhere. 41 42 Q. Were you employed by Cleanevent? 43 A. Sorry, yes, yes. Yes, I was. 44 45 Q. In what capacity in 2006? 46 A. I think I was the GM of Operations. 47

.28/05/2015 AWU M'SHIP 71 S D WEBBER (Mr Addison) Transcript produced by Merrill Corporation

1 Q. You weren't involved in the negotiation of 2006 2 agreement, as I understand it? 3 A. No. 4 5 Q. Were you aware of the 2006 agreement when it was made? 6 A. I believe so, yes. 7 8 Q. Was it voted on by the employees? 9 A. I would imagine so, yes. 10 11 Q. Yes. You've given evidence that you're not the 12 industrial relations person, you're the Operations person? 13 A. Yes. 14 15 Q. But do you know what happens to an enterprise 16 agreement when it passes its nominal expiry date? 17 A. I believe it continues. 18 19 Q. Correct. And if you had not entered into the MOU, 20 what would be the status of the 2006 agreement today? 21 A. I guess we would have just continued with that 22 agreement. 23 24 Q. Correct, it would still be in force. In relation to 25 the 2006 agreement, it was made under the legislation that 26 existed at the time? 27 A. I'd say yes. 28 29 Q. And it was a legally enforceable agreement? 30 A. Mmm-hmm. Yes. 31 32 Q. The MOU, as I understand it, and as the evidence has 33 been led, what was your understanding of the purpose of the 34 MOU? I'm talking about the one that extended the agreement 35 rather than anything else. 36 A. Oh, just to - again, I'm going to assume, just to 37 update it, make sure it's still in continuance and it's all 38 aboveboard. 39 40 Q. So it rolls over the agreement and provides pay 41 increases; is that correct? 42 A. Correct, yes. 43 44 Q. You were asked some questions with regards to the MOU 45 and the Side Letter. Did you draft either of those 46 documents? 47 A. No.


1 2 Q. Do you know who did? 3 A. No. 4 5 Q. In terms of the questions that the Commissioner asked 6 earlier in the proceedings with regards to the Side Letter, 7 and the precise meaning of the Side Letter, are you in any 8 position to give evidence with regards to that? 9 A. I believe not, no. 10 11 Q. I just want to take you to a couple of documents. Can 12 I take you to PH-90, which is an email that you were taken 13 to by Mr Stoljar. In that email on 13 December, you asked 14 Mr Harris if there's anything he needs from you. What was 15 the purpose of asking that question? 16 A. I guess he needs to have - ensure he's got all the 17 details to ensure things can take place. 18 19 Q. Did he ask you for anything, or can you recall if he 20 asked for anything? 21 A. I can't recall, no. 22 23 Q. You can't recall that? Okay. In terms of the 24 payments of the invoices, what was your role in that 25 process? 26 A. I seemed to be the go-to person where they come to, so 27 predominantly forward it to accounts, who then went through 28 the levels of authority. 29 30 Q. In terms of the list of employees - you were asked a 31 question about the list of employees. Do you recall what 32 you were actually asked to produce? 33 A. No. 34 35 Q. No? 36 A. No. 37 38 MR ADDISON: I have nothing further, Commissioner. 39 40 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Addison. Anything 41 further, Mr Stoljar? 42 43 MR STOLJAR: Just one point, Commissioner. 44 45 46 47 <EXAMINATION BY MR STOLJAR:


1 2 MR STOLJAR: Q. Mr Webber, you gave at some point 3 evidence about the number of the pool of casual employees 4 that Cleanevent had from time to time, and you said that 5 you thought it was in the order of 1,000. I just wanted to 6 ask you this, or draw this to your attention for your 7 comment. Mr Robinson's evidence to this Commission is to 8 this effect: that during his time with Cleanevent, the 9 business employed about 50 permanent staff who were covered 10 by the EBA and 4,000 to 5,000 casual staff; Cleanevent 11 directly employed the casual staff. Do you agree with -- 12 A. Through the years. Yes, through the years. 13 14 Q. No -- 15 A. Not a singular time. 16 17 Q. I see. So you would say it was fewer than 4,000 to 18 5,000 at any one time? 19 A. Oh, yes. 20 21 Q. And your estimate as to any one time was what you gave 22 earlier on? 23 A. Yes. Yes. 24 25 MR STOLJAR: Nothing further, thank you, Commissioner. 26 27 THE COMMISSIONER: Is there any objection to Mr Webber 28 being excused? 29 30 MR STOLJAR: No, Commissioner. 31 32 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. Mr Webber, you are excused from 33 any further attendance on the summons that you responded to 34 in coming here. You can leave the witness box now. 35 A. Thank you, Commissioner. 36 37 THE COMMISSIONER: Shall we resume at 2pm? 38 39 MR STOLJAR: Yes, Commissioner. 40 41 THE COMMISSIONER: The hearing will resume at 2pm. 42 43 <THE WITNESS WITHDREW 44 45 LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT 46 47 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Stoljar.


1 2 MR STOLJAR: Commissioner, the next witness is Mr Holland. 3 4 <KENNETH ALLAN HOLLAND, sworn: [2.00pm] 5 6 <EXAMINATION BY MR STOLJAR: 7 8 MR STOLJAR: Q. Can you tell the Commission your full 9 name? 10 A. Kenneth Allan Holland. 11 12 Q. You are a resident of Victoria? 13 A. Yes. 14 15 Q. You are a cleaning supervisor employed by Cleanevent? 16 A. That's correct. 17 18 Q. We will give you a copy of your witness statement. 19 A. Thank you. 20 21 Q. Is the content of your witness statement dated 23 May 22 2015 true and correct? 23 A. Yes. 24 25 MR STOLJAR: I ask that that statement be received into 26 evidence, Commissioner. 27 28 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Mr Holland's statement will be 29 received into evidence. 30 31 STATEMENT OF KENNETH ALLAN HOLLAND DATED 23/05/2015 32 33 MR STOLJAR: Q. Mr Holland, can you just tell us 34 a little about your background? What did you do after you 35 finished school? 36 A. I first went to work for the Bank of New South Wales. 37 38 Q. Were you in Queensland, or you were in New South 39 Wales? 40 A. No, I was born in Western Australia. 41 42 Q. Go on. 43 A. And had mainly a clerical background for a long time, 44 worked for Western Australian Railways as well, and in 45 mid-life I ended up landscaping. 46 47 Q. And you were doing that in Brisbane, were you?

.28/05/2015 AWU M'SHIP 75 K A HOLLAND (Mr Stoljar) Transcript produced by Merrill Corporation

1 A. Yes, I was. 2 3 Q. And you started doing some work for Cleanevent up in 4 Brisbane? 5 A. That's correct. 6 7 Q. What kind of events did you start doing? 8 A. The ones I did in Brisbane were working at The Gabba, 9 the Test Match that they had that summer of 2003-2004, the 10 Brisbane Royal Show, otherwise known as the EKKA, and the 11 IndyCar Grand Prix on the Gold Coast that year. 12 13 Q. And you were just doing cleaning work, it wasn't 14 supervising type work? 15 A. No. I started just as one of the regular workers, 16 yes. 17 18 Q. Say when a Test Match is on, how does it actually 19 work? Just talk me through. Do you go each day or -- 20 A. At that particular test match in Brisbane, I was part 21 of the overnight cleaning crew and -- 22 23 Q. What sort of hours were you doing? 24 A. I believe it was roughly a 10 o'clock start at night 25 through until when we got done. 26 27 Q. That went through over the weekend, I take it? 28 A. Yes. I believe, from memory, I think I did the - it 29 was a Test Match, Australia/India that year, and I think 30 I did all of the clean ups just from the night one until it 31 was completed. 32 33 Q. What about pre and post, was there any of that? 34 A. No, I didn't do it on that occasion. 35 36 Q. You say in your statement that you then moved down to 37 Melbourne in 2004 and again, you were doing casual work, 38 were you? 39 A. Yes. 40 41 Q. So just different events as you were needed? 42 A. Motor GP and the Melbourne Cup Carnival were the two 43 big ones that I did when I first moved to Melbourne. 44 45 Q. Just talk me through that. The Moto GP, what did you 46 have to do there? 47 A. I was part of - in my first year, part of a roaming


1 crew delivering to the various parts of the Phillip Island 2 circuit the required equipment that each of the areas 3 needed, and we kept going around the service road there, 4 two of us, and helping out whenever it was needed in 5 certain areas and just delivering stores mainly for the 6 toilets. 7 8 Q. Replenishing what was needed in the toilets, is 9 that the -- 10 A. Yes, the hand towel and toilets. 11 12 Q. You came back and did the Melbourne Cup Festival? 13 A. Yes. 14 15 Q. What sort of hours do you do there? How does that 16 work? 17 A. The first year I did a - I worked in the nursery and 18 I think it was about a 10-hour shift for the day. 19 20 Q. Are you what's called an event casual or casual? 21 A. Yeah. 22 23 Q. The different designations that they use there? 24 A. My situation is just working as an event casual, 25 whereas other - the company I know employed, because some 26 of them were my friends, they weren't sort of full-time 27 staff but they worked at either the stadium or Flemington, 28 you know, the bigger contracts that the company had. 29 30 Q. The Flemington Markets, you mean? 31 A. No, the racetrack. 32 33 Q. The racetrack? 34 A. Yes. 35 36 Q. So they're not permanent but are they there at 37 Flemington on an ongoing basis? 38 A. Yes. 39 40 Q. So using the company's terms, they're just casuals 41 because they're not doing particular events? 42 A. Mm-hmm. 43 44 Q. But a person like yourself was employed as an event 45 casual? 46 A. Yes. 47


1 Q. Meaning you did events -- 2 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. -- as it were, from time to time? Now, some of the 5 events that you did required you to work on weekends and 6 public holidays, I take it? 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. I don't mean to pry in to your personal affairs, but 10 were you on an hourly rate as a casual, were you? 11 A. Yes. 12 13 Q. When you worked on public holidays or weekends, was 14 there a change to your hourly rate? 15 A. Yes, there were different hourly rates for the 16 weekends. 17 18 Q. It was increased by some percentage, was it? 19 A. Yes. 20 21 Q. Did you get double time or double time and a half? 22 A. No, not loadings like that. 23 24 Q. In fact, did it increase or go down? What was the 25 change for public holidays? 26 A. I'm not certain. I think it was about roughly 27 20 per cent higher for the weekend work, 20 or 25 per cent. 28 29 Q. You're not sure? 30 A. Yeah. It was a percentage. I think I'd be pretty 31 accurate in that. 32 33 Q. You say in paragraph 7 that you don't recall being 34 given an Australian Workers' Union membership application 35 form at any time. Could you have been given one and signed 36 it and just forgotten, do you think? 37 A. I don't think so. 38 39 Q. Why do you say that? 40 A. I never got anything in the mail in regards to 41 membership card or any brochures or - telling me what they 42 had, you know, done during the year. 43 44 Q. Did you ever get a membership card from the union? 45 A. No. 46 47 Q. Did you ever get any information at all from time to


1 time from the Union? 2 A. Well, the only thing I can remember was, I didn't 3 think it was direct from the Union, I thought the casuals 4 did get a say in - I got an email, I'm trying to think 5 whether it was about 18 months ago, when they apparently 6 did a survey of whether there should be a new enterprise 7 bargaining agreement, but maybe I should have thought that 8 why am I getting it? 9 10 Q. But that was only last year -- 11 A. I thought it was just everybody was getting their say. 12 13 Q. This was in the last year or so, when you say 14 18 months? 15 A. Yeah, I'd say about 18 months ago. 16 17 Q. In fact, do you make reference to this in paragraph 10 18 of your statement? 19 A. I'll just check there. Yes, that's correct. 20 21 Q. You say that you are not aware of any arrangement - 22 this is in paragraph 12 - under which Cleanevent paid 23 moneys to the AWU on your behalf. Just to be specific 24 about it, are you aware of any arrangement pursuant to 25 which Cleanevent was paying $25,000 to the AWU? 26 A. No, I wasn't. 27 28 Q. No-one has ever raised that with you? 29 A. No. 30 31 Q. Did anyone from the Union ever approach you and say, 32 "Look, you are on a list of members we've received", and 33 ask you for any information? 34 A. No. 35 36 Q. Do you remember ever speaking to someone from the 37 Union about - well, do you remember ever speaking to anyone 38 from the union, the AWU? 39 A. Not the Union itself, only previous - I believe he was 40 a delegate years ago, I worked with him, but he worked for 41 Cleanevent and just being the delegate. 42 43 Q. But he was someone you worked with in the ordinary 44 course? 45 A. Yes, not anyone from the Union. 46 47 MR STOLJAR: I have nothing further, thank you,


1 Commissioner. 2 3 THE COMMISSIONER: It think it might be worthwhile to note 4 for the transcript, just so we remember things clearly, 5 that Mr Holland's name appears on page 107 behind tab 15 to 6 the documents annexed to Mr Webber's witness statement. 7 8 MR STOLJAR: Q. Perhaps just following that up, can I ask 9 you this, Mr Holland - your name was among those which was 10 forwarded to the Union by Cleanevent on 20 April 2012. Did 11 anyone speak to you before your name was forwarded to the 12 AWU? 13 A. No, I don't recall that. 14 15 Q. When did you first find out that that had happened? 16 A. Only last week when I was contacted. 17 18 Q. By someone from the Commission? 19 A. Yes. 20 21 MR STOLJAR: Yes, I have nothing further. 22 23 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Addison, any questions? 24 25 MR ADDISON: Just one, if I could, Commissioner. 26 27 <EXAMINATION BY MR ADDISON: 28 29 MR ADDISON: Q. Could I just take you to paragraph 10 of 30 your witness statement, Mr Holland. You say in 31 paragraph 10 that you voted regarding the EBA. Can I ask 32 which EBA that was? 33 A. I'm trying to think of the company that actually - it 34 was a private company I know that was engaged to do it 35 because I remember I hadn't heard of that company, once 36 I got the email, and they apparently do other elections for 37 companies or unions or whatever. 38 39 Q. Mr Stoljar has just pointed out to me it was the 2014 40 EBA; is that correct? 41 A. It was - I couldn't remember whether it may have gone 42 back into 2013 or whether it might have been early. 43 44 Q. Did you vote on the 2006 agreement? 45 A. No. The only one that I ever got to see was when 46 I got that email. 47

.28/05/2015 AWU M'SHIP 80 K A HOLLAND (Mr Addison) Transcript produced by Merrill Corporation

1 MR ADDISON: Thank you. I have no further questions, 2 Commissioner. 3 4 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. Any questions, Mr Stoljar? 5 6 MR STOLJAR: No. 7 8 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Holland can be excused? 9 10 MR STOLJAR: Yes. 11 12 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Holland, you were brought here on 13 a summons. You are excused from further attendance on that 14 summons. Thank you very much for making the time to come 15 along. 16 17 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Commissioner. 18 19 <THE WITNESS WITHDREW 20 21 MR STOLJAR: The next witness is Ms Cubban. 22 23 <ROBYN CUBBAN, sworn: [2.12pm] 24 25 <EXAMINATION BY MR STOLJAR: 26 27 MR STOLJAR: Q. Could you tell the Commission your full 28 name? 29 A. Robyn Cubban. 30 31 Q. You are a resident of New South Wales? 32 A. Correct. 33 34 Q. And you are a casual cleaner with Cleanevent? 35 A. Correct. 36 37 Q. And you have prepared a statement dated 26 May 2015. 38 I'll give you a clean copy. 39 A. I just need to grab my glasses. 40 41 THE COMMISSIONER: There is no need to run, Ms Cubban, we 42 have plenty of time. 43 44 MR STOLJAR: Q. Just glancing at that statement, is the 45 content of your statement true and correct? 46 A. Correct. 47

.28/05/2015 AWU M'SHIP 81 R CUBBAN (Mr Stoljar) Transcript produced by Merrill Corporation

1 MR STOLJAR: I would ask that Ms Cubban's statement be 2 received into evidence, Commissioner. 3 4 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Ms Cubban's statement is received 5 into evidence. 6 7 STATEMENT OF ROBYN CUBBAN DATED 26/05/2015 8 9 MR STOLJAR: Q. In paragraph 3 of your statement, 10 Ms Cubban, you describe the work that you do at major 11 events in and around Sydney. And you say, for example, it 12 includes the Royal Easter Show. Can you just tell us a bit 13 about how it actually works? How many days? 14 A. The Royal Easter Show goes approximately 10 to 15 14 days. We do pre-clean for that event. We work also 16 during the event and we also work after the event cleaning 17 it up. The section that I do and have been doing for the 18 last, say, six years of the Easter Show, I start at 6am - 19 well, this year it was 6am, previous to that it was 5am, 20 and I would work until 5 to 6pm daily for that 14. 21 Sometimes, the most I have worked in that Easter period is 22 21 days straight. 23 24 Q. So when you say you work 14 days, you mean right 25 through that? 26 A. Right through - and it can go up to 21 days, as I just 27 stated. 28 29 Q. Now, that is Easter. The 14 or 21 days, that includes 30 the Good Friday and - the public holidays, in other words? 31 A. The whole public holidays, yes. 32 33 Q. Just talk us through what you actually do, as it 34 were - what does the work actually require you to do? 35 A. For the Easter show? 36 37 Q. Yes. 38 A. I look after the General Manager's department for the 39 Easter Show, the people that do all the entertainment on 40 main arena for the Easter Show. I look after their living 41 quarters, their lounge room part. I also look after an 42 office for the judges for the dog section and I also look 43 after a gentleman that deals with the Easter Show ticket 44 rides that count them and whatever there. It's more 45 internal where I deal with VIPs, not actually the general 46 public. 47


1 Q. In paragraph 3 you say you also clean boats owned by 2 Spotless. You are an event casual, I take it? 3 A. Yes, I am. 4 5 Q. But these are boats which are used for functions, are 6 they? 7 A. Correct. 8 9 Q. Are there also, to your knowledge - and only say if 10 you know - persons employed by Cleanevent in New South 11 Wales who work on a semi-permanent basis as casuals but not 12 associated with events? 13 A. Yes, I have other work colleagues that work at venues. 14 Cleanevent has a thing called venues versus events. Venues 15 is a permanent building which would be, for example, Opera 16 House, ANZ Stadium, Rosehill Racecourse. Versus events, 17 would be Royal Easter Show, Sydney International Tennis, 18 Mercedes Benz Fashion, because they're, like, one-off 19 events, they're seasonal, but they are one-off events, they 20 are not held in a permanent venue. 21 22 Q. And those persons, again, just to your knowledge, if 23 they're working at a venue, do they work, even if casual, 24 more or less every day, or how does it actually work? 25 A. I have a work colleague that works at 26 Sydney Showgrounds. She's basically there sometimes five, 27 six, seven days a week. She's there 52 weeks a year, you 28 may as well say, and she is a casual. 29 30 Q. She is a casual. In paragraphs 4 and 5, you are 31 dealing with induction sessions at the Royal Easter 32 Showgrounds? 33 A. Correct. 34 35 Q. Were there many people there? 36 A. I'd say, for example, this year maybe 100 - 80 to 100. 37 38 Q. In paragraph 5 you say that you completed a membership 39 application form for the NSW Branch of the AWU? 40 A. Correct. 41 42 Q. And that was back in 2004, was it? 43 A. 2004, yes. 44 45 Q. I hadn't really asked about what you had been doing 46 before then. What was your work experience before you 47 became a casual at Cleanevent?


1 A. I was working for myself, cleaning, and I was also 2 doing exams for immigration, supervising exam work for 3 IOTS. 4 5 Q. In any event, you started work at Cleanevent in 2004 6 and you completed the AWU New South Wales membership 7 application form and became a member. In paragraph 7, you 8 say that you had regular payroll deductions? 9 A. When I started with Cleanevent in 2004, I attended an 10 Easter Show induction. In that induction, I was handed 11 a piece of paper stating what my pay rate would be and also 12 my role of the Easter Show at the time. Included in that 13 paperwork was a Union form which I just automatically 14 handed out - sorry, filled in, and I handed it back into 15 the induction. 16 17 Q. And since that time you've been a member of the NSW 18 Branch? 19 A. Yes. 20 21 Q. You had a look through your records and found some 22 further documents which you have provided to the 23 Commission. Can I show you a bundle that we have put 24 together of those. Just looking at paragraph 7 of your 25 statement, you say you have a pay slip from 9 January 2011 26 showing a deduction to AWU (Casual) New South Wales. The 27 documents that you found in the last day or so, if you go 28 to the first page of this bundle -- 29 30 MR STOLJAR: In fact, I'd ask that this bundle be received 31 into evidence, Commissioner. 32 33 THE WITNESS: Is this the pay slip for 14/08/05? 34 35 THE COMMISSIONER: This bundle will be known as 36 Cubban MFI-1. I direct that references to Ms Cubban's 37 residential address be kept confidential. 38 39 CUBBAN MFI-1 BUNDLE OF PAY SLIPS 40 41 MR STOLJAR: Q. Ms Cubban, in answer to your question, 42 yes, the pay slip for 14 August 2005, that shows, among 43 other things, a deduction of $9 for your AWU 44 New South Wales membership? 45 A. Yes. 46 47 Q. I am sorry to ask about your rates of pay, but you


1 have a day rate - this is back in 2005 - of $18.15 an hour 2 and a weekend rate of $20.50 an hour. So, for work on the 3 weekend, it goes up by $2 and something, does that sound 4 right? 5 A. Basically, yes. 6 7 Q. And then over on the next page, page 2, there is a pay 8 slip for 2006, 7 May, and, again, you have a payroll 9 deduction of $9 for AWU. Page 3 is a pay slip for 2007, 10 and I won't go through every one, but the short point is 11 that you have been a member of the AWU New South Wales 12 right from the time you started back in 2004; that's right? 13 A. Correct. 14 15 Q. I am going to ask you a few questions about 16 paragraph 8 and following of your statement. Can I take 17 you through to page 16. 18 A. Page 16? 19 20 Q. Of this bundle. 21 A. Or question 16? 22 23 Q. No, in the green bundle. 24 A. Oh, sorry. Yes, 16. 25 26 Q. That is a letter that you wrote - well, who did you 27 give the letter to? 28 A. We had rung up HR. We'd actually spoken to management 29 first, we weren't getting anywhere, so then we were 30 suggested to go to HR - Human Resources - from what we knew 31 of Cleanevent. My work colleague and I did this. We sent 32 in this form - and she has one as well which I don't have 33 in my folder - were sent to HR. When my work colleague 34 rang HR to find out what was going on with it, we found 35 that we were palmed off to Melbourne office HR. When we 36 rang up HR in Melbourne, we were referred back to Sydney. 37 We got nowhere. 38 39 Q. Did you ever discuss or show this with anyone from the 40 Union? 41 A. Not directly to the Union, but in the last three 42 weeks, when I was having dealings with the Union, 43 I mentioned to them that, you know, there's a lot of 44 problems that we were having; I had written letters before 45 to complain and we got nowhere. 46 47 Q. But just to be clear, you never gave this letter --


1 A. Never showed them this actual letter, no. 2 3 Q. I only really wanted to touch on a few things in the 4 letter. Just to get a feel for the hours of work, and the 5 like, on page 17, you say in the fourth paragraph: 6 7 Besides the normal ... running of the 8 RAS ... 9 10 That's the Royal Agricultural Society, is it? 11 A. Where is this? On page 17 - oh, yes. 12 13 Q. The fourth paragraph down: 14 15 Besides the normal day-to-day running of 16 RAS with permanent/casual day and night 17 shifts we also have a constant supply of 18 weekday and weekend events in which 19 separate staff are employed for these 20 events which is where I've mainly been 21 cleaning. 22 23 What year does this relate to, this letter? 24 A. 2011. 25 26 Q. Just talk me through how that - I am really just 27 interested in the working hours and what you're actually 28 doing. It says: 29 30 ... the normal day-to-day running of RAS 31 with permanent/casual day and night 32 shifts ... 33 34 What are they? 35 A. Okay. They have a permanent day staff which is hired 36 for day-to-day runnings of the actual showgrounds, offices, 37 toilets, because they have a lot of office staff. 38 39 Q. So this is a cleaning crew? 40 A. Cleaning staff, they are hired on a - they are 41 casuals, a permanent basis to clean after the office people 42 and at night -- 43 44 Q. That is year round, is it? 45 A. That's year round, yes. That's what they class 46 "permanent venues". 47


1 Q. So these would be not event casuals, just casuals? 2 A. Just casuals. 3 4 Q. Okay, go on. 5 A. On top of the people that are normally there, say, 6 five, six days a week, they also employ other staff when we 7 have events on. 8 9 Q. I see. So when you say "weekday and weekend events in 10 which separate staff are employed", you mean -- 11 A. For example, my work colleague would be cleaning up 12 during the offices and after office people during the day, 13 whereas I'd be in a hall next-door doing the actual 14 function. 15 16 Q. Looking at that first line, "Permanent/casual day and 17 night shifts", the cleaning work is done, is it, outside 18 business hours, typically? 19 A. No, it can be done 24 hours basically, depending on 20 the event. If it's an event, you've always got cleaners 21 24/7. 22 23 Q. But for the permanent, where they're doing the 24 offices, they come in after the people have finished up for 25 the day, do they? 26 A. No. The daytime staff are there during the day, the 27 whole eight hours. Night staff would then come in after 28 the offices had closed and do that site. 29 30 Q. Coming down a couple of paragraphs, you are 31 describing, and we don't really need to get into what the 32 disputes are about, but there was a shift that you were 33 doing from 6.30am to midnight, but that's due to lack of 34 staff, is it; that would be unusual? 35 A. That's correct, but we do do long shifts. 36 37 Q. You do long shifts. At the bottom of that page, you 38 say: 39 40 I worked every day from 2 April to April 29 41 in the lead up to and during the Sydney 42 Royal Easter Show. I had two days off 43 returned for a further six days for Fashion 44 Week. 45 46 That is an example, is it, of what you were telling me 47 about before when you work right through the Easter period?


1 A. Yes, correct. The most I've worked is six weeks 2 straight, and it was around this time. 3 4 Q. Can you come back to paragraph 8 of your statement. 5 A. Yes. 6 7 Q. You say there: 8 9 I am not aware of any arrangement under 10 which Cleanevent paid monies to the 11 Victoria Branch of the AWU on my behalf for 12 union membership fees ... 13 14 Are you aware of the fact that a sum of $25,000 a year was 15 paid by Cleanevent to the AWU? 16 A. Until I was sitting here this morning, no, I wasn't. 17 18 Q. That was the first time you heard about it? 19 A. That's the first time I've heard of it. 20 21 Q. I don't know if you are aware of this, but on 30 May 22 2011, someone from Cleanevent sent your name, among others, 23 to the AWU Victoria as part of this arrangement. Did 24 anyone ask you about that before it was done? 25 A. No. 26 27 Q. Were you aware that was done? 28 A. No. 29 30 Q. Did you know until I just asked you about it now? 31 A. No. Not until this sort of case started, I was not 32 aware of any agreements being made or unions contacting, or 33 anything. 34 35 Q. And by this stage, 30 May 2011, you had been a member 36 of the NSW Branch for, what, some eight years? 37 A. Seven, eight years. 38 39 Q. And you remained a member after 2011? 40 A. I still am, yes. 41 42 Q. So you just kept paying your payroll deductions and 43 did anyone ever say to you, "Look, someone is paying - you 44 have been entered on the AWU Vic", and someone is 45 apparently paying membership dues for you? 46 A. No, not at all. I've been paying my membership form 47 since 2004, and it was only recently that I heard money was


1 being exchanged. 2 3 Q. Have you ever received any correspondence, any letter, 4 from the AWU Vic, that's the Victoria Branch? 5 A. No. 6 7 Q. Has anyone ever come up to you, a Union official at 8 a meeting or induction session and said, "Look, your name 9 was on a list that was supplied to AWU Vic", and asked you 10 whether you were a member or whether you wanted to be 11 a member, has anything like that ever happened? 12 A. Only at the inductions of Easter Shows, when they're 13 doing their induction, they ask you to join it. I've 14 always said, "I'm already a member." 15 16 Q. Is that what you are talking about, for example, back 17 in paragraph 5 of your statement? 18 A. Oh, that's when we were in an induction and there was 19 a Union representative signing up new people. I actually 20 made the comment, "Why bother, they haven't helped me for 21 years." 22 23 MR STOLJAR: Yes. Nothing further. Thank you, 24 Commissioner. 25 26 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Mr Moore, any questions? 27 28 MR MOORE: No questions, Commissioner. 29 30 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Addison? 31 32 MR ADDISON: Just a couple. 33 34 <EXAMINATION BY MR ADDISON : 35 36 MR ADDISON: Q. Do you know Steve Webber? 37 A. I know of him, yes. 38 39 Q. Do you report to him anywhere at all? 40 A. Not at all. He's Melbourne based. I'm Sydney. 41 42 Q. He is national, isn't he? 43 A. Yes. 44 45 Q. Yes, I thought he was a national person. So you don't 46 have anything to do with Steve? 47 A. No. I've seen Steve Webber over the years coming to

.28/05/2015 AWU M'SHIP 89 R CUBBAN (Mr Addison) Transcript produced by Merrill Corporation

1 Cleanevent sites, but, no. 2 3 Q. He's responsible, as I understand it, for the overall 4 Cleanevent arrangements; is that right? 5 A. That's what I'm under the understanding. 6 7 Q. You were asked some questions with regard to your pay 8 rates and what have you. As I understand the evidence, you 9 have been a member of the AWU since 2004? 10 A. Correct. 11 12 Q. That means that in 2006 when the agreement was made - 13 were you involved in that? 14 A. There was talk at Telstra, which is now ANZ Stadium - 15 back then - of a new EBA coming in 2006, we would have to 16 vote on it. I, personally, did not vote on it. I was not 17 there the day they voted. 18 19 Q. But you'd seen the agreement prior to the meeting 20 about the agreement? 21 A. No, it was just a discussion in a cleaner's room. 22 There was no paperwork. 23 24 Q. You are aware of the agreement now, though, aren't 25 you? 26 A. I haven't actually read the 2006 agreement, but I am 27 aware of the agreement that's in place. 28 29 Q. And you don't say that you haven't been paid under the 30 terms of that agreement, do you? 31 A. Sorry, can you? 32 33 Q. There was a question put to you with regards to the 34 rate during the week and then the weekend rate. 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. They're the rates that exist within the agreement, 38 aren't they? 39 A. To my knowledge. 40 41 MR ADDISON: Yes. Thank you. Nothing further, 42 Commissioner. 43 44 THE COMMISSIONER: Thanks, Mr Addison. Any further 45 questions, Mr Stoljar? 46 47 MR STOLJAR: No, Commissioner.


1 2 THE COMMISSIONER: Ms Cubban may be excused? 3 4 MR STOLJAR: Yes. 5 6 THE COMMISSIONER: Ms Cubban, you are excused from further 7 attendance. Thank you very much for coming along today and 8 giving up your time like that. 9 10 <THE WITNESS WITHDREW 11 12 MR STOLJAR: The only remaining things is there are some 13 statements that I can simply tender of people who haven't 14 been required for cross-examination. 15 16 Commissioner, I am tendering the statements of 17 Mr Brian Miles, 22 May 2015; Mr Marcin Pawlowski dated 18 26 May 2015 and Mr Graeme Heatley dated 20 May 2015. 19 20 THE COMMISSIONER: Those three statements are received 21 into evidence 22 23 STATEMENT OF BRIAN MILES DATED 22/05/2015 24 25 STATEMENT OF MARCIN PAWLOWSKI DATED 26/05/2015 26 27 STATEMENT OF GRAEME HEATLEY DATED 20/05/2015 28 29 MR STOLJAR: Commissioner, the gist of the statements is 30 that these are persons who are identified on the list of 31 names supplied by Cleanevent to the AWU who say, as appears 32 from Mr Miles' statement, for example, that as far as he 33 was aware, he is not a member of the AWU and has never been 34 a member of the AWU. 35 36 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Just for the record, Ms Cubban's 37 name appears on page 98 of the annexures to Mr Webber's 38 statement; Mr Heatley's appears on page 107, Mr Miles 39 appears on page 108 and Mr Pawlowski appears on page 108. 40 Those statements, as I said, are received into evidence. 41 42 MR STOLJAR: May it please the Commission. Those are the 43 witnesses for today, Commissioner. 44 45 THE COMMISSIONER: So we will resume at 10am tomorrow? 46 47 MR STOLJAR: Yes, Commissioner.


1 2 THE COMMISSIONER: The hearing will resume at 10am 3 tomorrow, 4 5 AT 2.36PM THE COMMISSION WAS ADJOURNED TO FRIDAY, 6 29 MAY 2015, AT 10AM 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47
