Event and Time
Event Description
- Parties Involved: Employees of the Emergency Services Telecommunications Authority (ESTA) vs. ESTA
- Context: The plaintiffs, employees in the positions of Workplace Trainers (WPTs), allege that ESTA did not pay them a mentoring allowance for mentoring shifts they performed.
- Enterprise Agreements: The dispute centers around two enterprise agreements: the Emergency Services Telecommunications Authority Operational Employees Enterprise Agreement 2015 and the Emergency Services Telecommunications Authority Operational Employees Enterprise Agreement 2019.
Application and Claims
- The plaintiffs claim the right to a Mentor Allowance as outlined in the enterprise agreements.
- They argue that the Mentor Allowance applies to all accredited mentors, including WPTs, who perform mentoring duties.
Judicial Decisions
- The court agreed to first consider the liability of ESTA to pay the mentoring allowance to the plaintiffs before addressing issues related to quantum and penalties.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Plaintiffs' Claims:
- Assert that the terms of the Mentor Allowance are unqualified and should be construed in their ordinary meaning. - Noted a historical distinction between mentoring duties and WPT duties, asserting that WPTs are entitled to the allowance while performing the function of a mentor.
- ESTA's Arguments:
- Contended that the mentoring duties were included within the responsibilities of WPTs and reflected in their salary, arguing that WPTs effectively lose their identity as mentors upon promotion to WPT. - Claimed that paying both the Mentor Allowance and the WPT salary would constitute "double dipping." - Provided evidence that historically, no WPTs have received the Mentor Allowance.