A little over two years later, the Tribunal has already requested submissions on matters that it should identify for enquiry in its third annual work program, as required of it under the Road Safety Remuneration Act 2012. There is little doubt that the TWU will continue applying for draft orders which will make life difficult for the majority of transport operators without a real benefit to road safety. It is unfortunate that the Government initiated Jaguar consulting report into the operation of the Tribunal has not yet been released, and that this means that the Tribunal will continue to function (as it was set up to do) as a body that increases the compliance load on the transport industry, without a discernible effect on road safety that is its sole purpose.
Meanwhile, and according to quarterly report statistics published by the Tribunal that cover 26 reporting items under four major headings (nine reports to date), there has been one Road Safety Remuneration Order (RSRO) made; and eight disputes dealt with in over two years. There is no published information about the disputes dealt with by the Tribunal.
Whilst a figure cannot be attributed to the cost of operating the Tribunal, or to the cost to the transport industry of preparation and representation at Tribunal proceedings over the past two years, it would be many millions of dollars. The TWU and employer groups are represented by significant numbers of senior legal practitioners at each of these proceedings, and when one considers the research and work involved prior to attending each proceeding, the cost to industry and taxpayers is substantial.
Industry operators, observers and commentators should by now have had sufficient time to reflect on whether or not the Tribunal is fulfilling a need for the industry to have yet another level of regulation that will genuinely affect road safety in its own right. Further orders of the Tribunal initiated by the TWU for its own purposes will continue to flow until such time as Government can be persuaded that the Tribunal is ineffective in achieving its objectives and an unnecessary burden on the industry.
The first order of the Tribunal came into effect on the 1st of May 2014 with industry operators continuing to report that a majority of the industry is simply finding that most of the Order is impractical and unworkable. Critics of the initial Order of the Tribunal continue to refute that the Tribunal ever reasonably established any objectively identifiable link with improvements in road safety that will accrue from the making of the order. It is evident from several years of information available from reputable industry and government sources that other factors are demonstrably and significantly lowering the incidence of heavy vehicle road safety incidents. The alleged effects on safety of the remuneration are considered as doubtful by the industry and will need to be proven through a suitable study using objective data obtained since the commencement of the Order.
A second RSRO that is considering minimum rates paid to contractors for road transport contracts throughout Australia is likely to be made before the end of the year. Despite knowledge that the NSW contract Determination minimum rates scheme that has been in place for more than twenty years has proven to be ineffective, the Tribunal is likely to issue a minimum rates order. The major fault with a minimum rates order is that a ‘one size fits all’ methodology to establish minimum rates cannot reflect the array of transport operations it is meant to cover. Additionally, issues that will affect regional, remote area and intermittent transport operations, including back loading opportunities, will be extremely difficult to manage under the proposed Order.
There is already existing Commonwealth and State legislation including that of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator; Work Health and Safety; Contractor; Chain of Responsibility; Road safety; and general road law that address the objects of the Road Safety Remuneration Act.
It appears, however, that for the foreseeable future the transport industry can only continue to voice its opposition to Orders of the Tribunal that are unable to demonstrate an appreciable benefit to road safety.