Lawyers and union seek to clarify GCCD impact


Both note livestock carriers, amongst others, are in the clear

Lawyers and union seek to clarify GCCD impact
The GCCD changes are the focus of advice to industry

 

Efforts are being made to cast more light on the ramifications of widening in New South Wales of General Carriers Contract Determination (GCCD).

In particular, both Cooper Grace Ward (CGW) lawyers and the Transport Workers Union (TWU) have noted that livestock and some other transporters are not covered in the changes.

"Some contracts of carriage are excluded, such as contracts for packaged goods by multiple hirers or the carriage of livestock, or using certain specialised vehicles such as tankers and floats," CGW partner Annie Smeaton and special counsel Gillian Bristow say.

The TWU quotes directly from the Industrial Relations Act 1996, section 309, which states:

"(4)A contract of carriage does not include a contract:

(a) that is, if the carrier is a common carrier, made in the ordinary course of the business of the carrier as a common carrier, or

(b) that is made in the ordinary course of business for the carriage of packaged goods for different principal contractors by the use of the same motor vehicle or bicycle, or

(c) for the carriage of mail by or on behalf of Australia Post, or

(d) for the carriage of bread, milk or cream for sale or delivery for sale, or

(e) for the carriage of goods that are to be sold pursuant to orders solicited during the carriage of the goods, or

(f) for the carriage of livestock, or

(g) if the principal contractor is a primary producer or a member of the family of a primary producer and the contract is for the transportation of primary produce (other than timber), or

(h) for the transportation of primary produce (other than timber) from or to land used for primary production, or

(i) for the delivery of meals by couriers to homes or other premises for consumption."

Though some recent industry reaction has seen the changes as echoing the work of the Roads Safety Remuneration Tribunal (RSRT), the lawyers see the new determination as being narrower in scope.

"By comparison, the Road Safety Remuneration Orders [RSRO] applied to individual owner drivers and corporations where each of the corporation’s vehicles was mainlydriven by an individual who was a director or majority shareholder of the corporation, or an immediate family member of such a person," they say.

The full CGW advisory can be read here.

You can also follow our updates by joining our LinkedIn group or liking us on Facebook