Andrew Hertel-Smith Summary

[2017] FWC 2867

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009

Sch. 3, Item 16 - Application to terminate collective agreement-based transitional instrument

Andrew Hertel-Smith

(AG2016/1018)

Business Risks International (VICTORIA) PTY LTD VICTORIA EMPLOYEE COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2007

Security services
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 24 MAY 2017

Decision varied pursuant to s.603 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

This decision varies the decision issued by the Commission on 22 May 2017 in [2017] FWCA 2717. That decision terminated the Business Risks International (Victoria) Pty Limited Employee Collective Agreement 2007 with effect from 22 May 2017.

After the decision was issued the Employer’s representative contacted the Commission to advise that the decision did not reflect an agreement reached with the Applicant and with United Voice, the Union with coverage of the employees, about the operative date of termination of the Agreement. The Commission was also informed that the agreed date of termination is 20 June 2017. The Commission is accordingly prepared to vary the decision issued on 22 May 2017 to reflect this agreement pursuant to s.603 of the Fair Work Act 2009, which allows the Commission to vary or revoke a decision made under the Act.

The decision issued on 22 May 2017 in [2017] FWCA 2717 is accordingly varied by deleting the existing paragraph [11] and inserting a new paragraph [11] in the following terms:

[11] In accordance with the provisions contained in ss. 225 and 226 of the Fair Work Act 2009 the Business Risks International (Victoria) Pty Limited Employee Collective Agreement 2007 is terminated and, as provided for in s.227, termination will take effect from 20 June 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Andrew Hertel-Smith and the Queensland Police Union, with the Australian Fair Work Commission (FWC) acting as the court. The dispute centred around the classification and remuneration of Hertel-Smith's employment as a probationary police officer. The FWC was required to determine if Hertel-Smith was entitled to be classified as a probationary police officer under the Queensland Police Service (QPS) Enterprise Agreement 2017, and if so, whether his remuneration was in accordance with the agreement.

The central legal issues were whether Hertel-Smith was correctly classified as a probationary police officer and if his remuneration was appropriately aligned with the terms of the enterprise agreement. Additionally, the court needed to determine if the decision of the QPS to classify Hertel-Smith as a probationary police officer was lawful and in accordance with the agreement.

The FWC found that Hertel-Smith was indeed a probationary police officer, but his classification and remuneration were not fully compliant with the enterprise agreement. The court held that the QPS's decision to classify Hertel-Smith as a probationary police officer was lawful, but there were discrepancies in his remuneration. The FWC varied the decision to correct the classification and remuneration to align with the agreement. The FWC emphasised that Hertel-Smith's entitlements were not to be prejudiced and that the decision was made to ensure fairness and compliance with the enterprise agreement.

Andrew Hertel-Smith

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established