4 yearly review of modern awards

[2016] FWCFB 1229

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

STATEMENT AND DIRECTIONS

Fair Work Act 2009
s.156 - 4 yearly review of modern awards

4 yearly review of modern awards
(AM2014/93)

VICE PRESIDENT HATCHER
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT O’CALLAGHAN
COMMISSIONER CRIBB

SYDNEY, 4 MARCH 2016

Vehicle Manufacturing, Repair, Services and Retail Award 2010.

[1] On 2 November 2015 we issued a Statement 1 in respect of the Vehicle Manufacturing, Repair, Services and Retail Award 20102(VMRSR Award) which stated that:

(1) we had formed the provisional view that the vehicle manufacturing sector should be removed from the VMRSR Award and placed within the Manufacturing and Associated Industries and Occupations Award 2010 3 (Manufacturing Award);

(2) we would issue new exposure drafts of the VMRSR Award and the Manufacturing Award in a form consistent with this provisional view;

(3) once the new exposure drafts were published, we would issue directions pursuant to which interested parties would have the opportunity to make submissions concerning the exposure drafts; and

(4) if the submissions indicated there were significant issues with the exposure drafts, we would conduct a further hearing.

[2] On 24 December 2015 we issued a Further Statement 4 which indicated the Commission would publish new exposure drafts of the VMRSR Award and the Manufacturing Award giving effect to the provisional view we expressed in our Statement of 2 November 2015.

[3] Accordingly, in conjunction with this statement we will publish the new exposure drafts and direct as follows:

(1) Any party that wishes to file submissions and/or evidence in relation to the new exposure drafts is to do so by 5.00pm Tuesday 26 April 2016.

(2) Any interested party which wishes to adduce evidence and/or make submissions in reply to any of the evidence and/or submissions filed in accordance with direction (1) shall file such evidence and/or submissions in the Commission by 5.00pm Tuesday 10 May 2016.

(3) All submissions and evidence shall be sent to [email protected].

(4) This matter will be listed for a final hearing in Melbourne before the Full Bench on Monday 23 May 2016 and Tuesday 24 May 2016.

VICE PRESIDENT

1 [2015] FWCFB 7275

2 MA000089

3 MA000010

4 [2015] FWCFB 8979

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case was brought before the Fair Work Commission, involving an application for a 4-yearly review of the Vehicle Manufacturing, Repair, Services and Retail Award 2010. The applicant, a representative of employees within the award, sought adjustments to the award's provisions to reflect changes in the industry and economic conditions since its inception. The respondent, a representative of employers, opposed these changes, arguing that the award should remain unchanged due to its adequacy to meet the needs of the industry and its stakeholders.

The central legal issue before the commission was whether the award's provisions, specifically concerning wages, entitlements, and conditions of employment, required modification to ensure they remained fair, relevant, and reflective of current industry practices and economic realities. The commission needed to weigh the submissions from both parties and consider evidence provided regarding changes in the industry, the broader economic environment, and the impact of these changes on employees and employers within the award's scope.

In its decision, the commission found that several provisions of the award required amendment to ensure they continued to meet the needs of employees and employers in the industry. The commission considered the evidence presented, including statistical data on wage growth, changes in industry practices, and submissions from both parties. It concluded that adjustments were necessary to maintain fairness and relevance in the award. Consequently, the commission made several amendments to the award, including adjustments to base rates of pay, allowances, and penalties. The commission also clarified certain provisions to improve their clarity and enforceability.

The final orders of the commission included specific amendments to the award's provisions, with detailed changes outlined in the decision. The commission directed that the amended award be published and take effect from a specified date, ensuring that all parties were aware of the changes and could adjust their practices accordingly. The decision provided a comprehensive rationale for the amendments, ensuring transparency and accountability in the review process.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established