In this case there has been no serious challenge to the
unions' submission that there has been substantial compliance. The Commonwealth although viewing "the level of industrial
disputation with concern" did "not argue that there has been
a
lack of compliance".
The fact that no one submitted that there has not been
substantial compliance does not absolve
us from looking at
the material and making up our own minds about it. We are still concerned at the incidence of strikes with their consequent effect on the economy as a whole including our overseas trade.
Once again the figures of rates paid show little movement
outside indexation.
On balance we think there has been substantial compliance
with the guidelines.
The economy continues to cause concern and the submissions
before us varied only in emphasis on the state of the economy.
The figures which we have included in the Appendix bear out
the assessment of the employers that there "are some signs of
economic improvement but the signs
are few
and they are faint.".
For its part, the Commonwealth claimed that
it had further
tightened all the instruments of economic policy under its control.
The rate of recovery, it said. will depend on the movement of wages.
In this connection the Commonwealth stressed the vital importance
of correcting what it submitted to be
a distortion in economic
relationships caused by the excessive growth in wages during 1973-75. of the extent to which the real wage may be said to be excessive.
This, it argued, called for a reduction in real wages "to a level
consistent with continuing recovery and increased job opportunities.".
The contending arguments
on what are the most appropriate
actions to promote rapid recovery put us once again in a difficult
position on what should be done about wages.
In coming to its
decision, the Commission is. of course, moved by the weight of
argument and evidence, and not by the party or intervener submitting
it.
On the material before us, it is not clear that a reduction
in real wages without immediate compensatory action from other sources will provide a stimulus for recovery. A reduction in consumption spending with further deterioration in economic
activity could ensue.
A further point to consider is the increased
risk in these circumstances of a breakdown in our indexation package,
which could add to inflation and discourage spending even more.
On the other hand, a slowing down of labour costs would help to
reduce the rate of inflation and could assist recovery.
It is
impossible to say with
any confidence how these forces would balance
out.
The Comission embarked on indexation on the assumption that
its viability would depend on wide consensus and support and in
particular on supporting mechanisms which
would enanate from
governments.
In effect, it had hoped that the economic pollcies
of governments would not be inconsistent with our indexation
principles and with the objectives which…
Grounds of appeal
[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.
[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.
[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.
Consideration
[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.
[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.
Continue reading Allen v Townsend
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Allen v Townsend [1977] FCA 10
Case
[1977] FCA 10
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Allen v Townsend involved a dispute related to wage adjustments and inflation control within the Australian industrial framework. The central issue was whether the wage increases proposed by the unions could be fully indexed or if they should be subject to some form of discounting to prevent exacerbating inflationary pressures. The Commonwealth government argued for a reduction in real wages to correct what it perceived as a distortion caused by excessive wage growth in previous years, while the unions argued for full indexation to protect the purchasing power of workers. The court had to balance these competing interests while considering the broader economic implications of their decision.
The court recognised the need for wage adjustments that would support economic recovery while also being mindful of the inflationary risks associated with substantial wage increases. The court deliberated on the evidence and submissions presented by the unions, the Commonwealth, and other stakeholders. It concluded that while there had been substantial compliance with the wage guidelines, the economic context necessitated a departure from full indexation to prevent further inflationary pressures. The court decided to grant a wage increase that would offer a continuation of a systematic approach to wages, taking into account both the current high unemployment and the need for economic recovery.
The court's decision was to award a wage increase that would address the health insurance contributions separately from the general Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase. For the health insurance component, the court decided to award a flat amount of $2.90 to all workers to satisfy union demands without excessively increasing the wage bill. For the remaining 2.8% CPI increase, the court granted a flat amount of $2.80. The court also dismissed the catch-up claim for the 2% that was not awarded in previous quarters, stating that there was no basis to alter the previous decisions. The court emphasised the importance of avoiding retrospective increases to maintain certainty and regularity in wage adjustments. The court scheduled a future hearing to investigate broader issues related to the wage indexation system, including the total wage system, the use of the CPI, and the period between wage reviews.
The court's final orders provided for the wage variations to take effect from the beginning of the first pay period commencing on or after 31 March 1977, with specific timelines for the applications before the court. The court aimed to strike a balance between protecting workers' incomes and managing inflationary risks, while also paving the way for a more comprehensive review of the wage indexation framework.