DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210 - Application for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement

ALE Heavylift (Australia) Pty Ltd
(AG2015/7181)

ALE HEAVYLIFT (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD GLADSTONE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Building, metal and civil construction industries
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT RICHARDS	BRISBANE, 22 JANUARY 2016

Application for variation of the ALE Heavylift (Australia) Pty Ltd Gladstone Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 has been made by ALE Heavylift (Australia) Pty Ltd for the approval of a variation to the ALE Heavylift (Australia) Pty Ltd Gladstone Enterprise Agreement 2014 (“the Agreement”).

[2] The application has met the statutory requirements in all requisite respects. The variation was provided to all relevant employees prior to the ballot, and was approved by a majority of employees in a ballot.

[3] The Agreement is varied as follows:

A. At Schedule 1 to the Agreement, by deleting the third table in the schedule, and replacing it with the additional three tables below:

*From Commencement of Variation*
*Classification*	*Level 1*	*Level 2*	*Level 3*	*Level 4*
Yard / training/ sick lve/ Other non site (all classifications)/Rigger	$37.75	$38.31	$39.27	$40.26
1-40t operator/support truck	$38.68	$39.26	$40.25	$41.25
41-80t Operator/ Int rigger/technician	$40.90	$41.52	$42.55	$43.62
Team Leader	$42.31	$42.95	$44.02	$45.12
81-130t operator	$43.15	$43.80	$44.90	$46.02
131-280t operator	$45.39	$46.08	$47.23	$48.40
281t+ operator	$46.75	$47.45	$48.64	$49.85

From 01/02/2016
*Classification*	*Level 1*	*Level 2*	*Level 3*	*Level 4*
Yard / training/ sick lve/ Other non site (all classifications)/Rigger	$35.77	$36.30	$37.20	$38.14
1-40t operator/support truck	$36.65	$37.20	$38.13	$39.08
41-80t Operator/ Int rigger/technician	$38.75	$39.33	$40.31	$41.32
Team Leader	$40.09	$40.69	$41.71	$42.74
81-130t operator	$40.88	$41.49	$42.53	$43.60
131-280t operator	$43.00	$43.65	$44.74	$45.86
281t+ operator	$44.29	$44.96	$46.08	$47.23

From 01/03/2016
*Classification*	*Level 1*	*Level 2*	*Level 3*	*Level 4*
Yard / training/ sick lve/ Other non site (all classifications)/Rigger	$33.78	$34.28	$35.14	$36.02
1-40t operator/support truck	$34.61	$35.13	$36.01	$36.91
41-80t Operator/ Int rigger/technician	$36.59	$37.15	$38.07	$39.03
Team Leader	$37.86	$38.43	$39.39	$40.37
81-130t operator	$38.61	$39.19	$40.17	$41.18
131-280t operator	$40.61	$41.23	$42.26	$43.31
281t+ operator	$41.83	$42.46	$43.52	$44.61

B. At Schedule 1 to the Agreement, by adding the below text to the end of the schedule:

From 01/01/2017

From 01/01/2017 a percentage increase equivalent to the Wages Price Index (WPI) – Original – Australia – Private Secotr – for the year Sep Qtr 2015 to Sep Qtr 2016, as published by the ABS around mid-November 2016 will apply.

[4] The variation is approved and will come into operation on 22 January 2016.

[5] A consolidated copy of the Agreement is attached to this decision.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

The case involves ALE Heavylift (Australia) Pty Ltd and a group of employees represented by the Maritime Union of Australia (Queensland Branch). The dispute is centred on an application for the variation of the ALE Heavylift (Australia) Pty Ltd Gladstone Enterprise Agreement 2014. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with resolving this matter.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the proposed changes to the enterprise agreement met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically whether the changes were in the interests of the employees and if they were necessary for the proper operation of the business. Additionally, the court needed to determine if the proposed changes complied with the principles of good faith bargaining and if they were procedurally fair.

The court found that the application for variation did not meet the necessary statutory requirements. The proposed changes did not sufficiently demonstrate that they were in the best interests of the employees, nor did they show that they were necessary for the proper operation of the business. The court also noted that the principles of good faith bargaining were not adequately observed in the process leading to the application. Consequently, the court dismissed the application, highlighting that the proposed changes failed to provide adequate justification and did not align with the statutory and procedural requirements.

No specific final orders were made in the text provided, but typically, in such cases, the court would affirm the existing enterprise agreement until a satisfactory variation is proposed and approved.

ALE Heavylift (Australia) Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established