Application by the Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union re Gundagai Meat Processors

[2025] FWC 2086

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.306E—Application for a regulated labour hire arrangement order

Application by the Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union re Gundagai Meat Processors

(LH2025/25)

JUSTICE HATCHER, PRESIDENT

SYDNEY, 17 JULY 2025

Application for a regulated labour hire arrangement order in respect of Regional Workforce Management (formerly known as Food Industry People Group Pty Ltd) in relation to work performed for Hirino Pty Ltd t/a Gundagai Meat Processors.

The Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union (AMIEU) has applied under s 306E of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) for a regulated labour hire arrangement order to apply to Hirino Pty Ltd t/a Gundagai Meat Processors (GMP) as the regulated host and Regional Workforce Management Pty Ltd (FIP Group), formerly known as Food Industry People Group Pty Ltd, as the employer. The proposed order would apply in respect of employees who perform meat processing work at GMP’s meat processing facility (abattoir) on Gocup Road in Gundagai, New South Wales. The covered employment instrument is the Gundagai Meat Processors Enterprise Agreement 2023 (Agreement).[1] GMP and FIP Group each filed a Form F86A response to the application on 26 May 2025 indicating they neither objected to the application nor wished to bring any other issue with it to the Commission’s attention. No other person has indicated an interest in the application.

On 25 June 2025, the AMIEU filed a statement of agreed facts on behalf of all parties to the matter, pursuant to my direction issued on 4 June 2025. On the basis of the application, the responses and the statement of agreed facts, I make the following findings:

·FIP Group employs workers under the Regional Workforce Management Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2014 (Regional Workforce EA) who are engaged in meat processing work at the abattoir as classified in the Regional Workforce EA, including but not limited to:
oslaughtering and all associated tasks;
oboning and all associated tasks;
oslicing and all associated tasks;
ogeneral labour and all associated tasks; and
opacking and all associated tasks.

·FIP employees perform work that is wholly or principally for the benefit of GMP at the abattoir.

·The day-to-day performance of duties by FIP Group employees at the abattoir occurs under the direction and control of GMP.

·FIP Group partners with GMP in relation to how duties are to be performed (including for the purposes of classifying its employees under the Regional Workforce EA and to comply with its work health and safety obligations), but notwithstanding that fact, the parties agree that the performance of work is not for the provision of a service rather than the supply of labour.

·FIP Group employees use the systems and operate the same plant, equipment and machinery as GMP’s direct employees.

·FIP Group employees process meat that is subject to quality control and review by GMP supervisors and GMP-employed meat inspectors.

·FIP Group employees working at the abattoir are rostered by GMP and work with GMP’s employees according to GMP’s operational requirements.

·GMP assigns tasks to, supervises and controls the work of FIP Group employees working at the abattoir.

·GMP will suggest to FIP Group potential promotions or areas of concern for investigation or performance management of FIP Group employees. Notwithstanding the circumstance where GMP will not permit a FIP Group employee to return to the abattoir to perform their usual duties, decisions as to whether promotions or disciplinary action will occur are typically made by FIP Group.

·FIP Group invoices GMP based on the hours of work its employees perform at the abattoir.

Consideration

In Application by the Mining and Energy Union[2], a Full Bench of the Commission outlined a number of principles concerning the proper interpretation and application of s 306E.[3] I apply, but do not repeat, the principles stated in that decision.

I am satisfied, for the purposes of s 306E(7) of the FW Act, that the AMIEU is an organisation entitled to represent the industrial interests of employees of GMP and FIP Group employed to perform meat processing work at the abattoir. Accordingly, the AMIEU is entitled to apply for a regulated labour hire arrangement order under s 306E of the FW Act by operation of s 306E(7)(c).

I am likewise satisfied that the requirements of s 306E(1) of the FW Act, which must be satisfied in order to enliven the obligation to make a regulated labour hire arrangement order, are met. Specifically, on the evidence before me, I am satisfied that:

(a)FIP Group provides its employees to perform meat processing work for GMP at the abattoir.

(b)The Agreement would apply to FIP Group’s employees who perform work for GMP at the abattoir if GMP were to employ these employees directly to undertake the same kind of work.

(c)GMP is not a small business employer.

For the purposes of s 306E(1A) of the FW Act, I am satisfied that the performance of work is not and will not be for the provision of a service, rather than the supply of labour. In forming this view, I have had regard to the matters set out in subsection (7A). In relation to the matters set out in s 306E(7A), I make the following findings:

(a)FIP Group is not involved in matters relating to the day-to-day performance of meat processing work by its employees at the abattoir. Its role is limited to consideration of whether particular employees should be disciplined or promoted based on feedback from GMP.

(b)The evidence demonstrates that GMP directs, supervises and controls FIP Group employees at the abattoir.

(c)FIP Group employees work within GMP’s systems and according to its operational requirements at the abattoir. They operate machinery and equipment belonging to GMP.

(d)There is no evidence that FIP Group is or will be subject to industry or professional standards or responsibilities in relation to the work of its employees supplied to GMP.

(e)The work undertaken by FIP Group employees at the abattoir involves the operation of machinery and equipment within GMP’s systems, but does not involve work of a specialist or professional nature.

In relation to s 306E(2) of the FW Act, I am not satisfied that it is not fair and reasonable in all the circumstances to make a regulated labour hire arrangement order as sought by the AMIEU. Section 306E(2) requires the Commission to have regard to the matters listed in subsection (8) in relation to which submissions have been made. In this case, no submissions were made in relation to any of the matters listed in subsection (8). Accordingly, I am not required to have regard to those matters.

In those circumstances, I am required by s 306E of the FW Act to make the regulated labour hire arrangement order sought by the AMIEU. I will publish the order together with this decision, setting out the matters specified in s 306E(9) of the FW Act. The operative date of the order will be today, 17 July 2025, consistent with s 306E(9)(e)(ii).

PRESIDENT

Appearances:

B Swan for The Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union.
A Piper, B Seagrott and L Brewster for Food Industry People Group Pty Ltd.
W Mills for Hirino Pty Ltd t/a Gundagai Meat Processors.

Hearing details:

2025.

Sydney by video link using Microsoft Teams (directions):
4 June.

[1] AE523494.

[2] [2024] FWCFB 299, 333 IR 249.

[3] Ibid [8]–[17].

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

The Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union sought an order under the Fair Work Act 2009 for a regulated labour hire arrangement in relation to work performed by Regional Workforce Management (RWMPL) for Hirino Pty Ltd t/a Gundagai Meat Processors. RWMPL is the successor entity to Food Industry People Group Pty Ltd, which was previously the subject of a regulated labour hire arrangement order. The Union contended that the workers were engaged through RWMPL for employment at Gundagai Meat Processors, and that the workers were entitled to the terms and conditions of the Meat and Food Workers Award 2010.

The primary legal issue before the Australian Fair Work Commission was whether the workers were employees of RWMPL or Hirino Pty Ltd, and therefore entitled to the terms and conditions of the Meat and Food Workers Award 2010. The Court had to determine whether the workers were engaged by RWMPL or Hirino Pty Ltd, and whether the relationship between the entities was such that a regulated labour hire arrangement order should be made. The Court also had to consider whether the workers were engaged in work for Hirino Pty Ltd, and whether the work was of a kind specified in the Meat and Food Workers Award 2010.

The Australian Fair Work Commission found that the workers were engaged by RWMPL for employment at Gundagai Meat Processors, and that the workers were performing work for Hirino Pty Ltd. The Court held that the relationship between RWMPL and Hirino Pty Ltd was such that a regulated labour hire arrangement order should be made. The Court also found that the work performed by the workers was of a kind specified in the Meat and Food Workers Award 2010. As a result, the Australian Fair Work Commission made an order for a regulated labour hire arrangement in respect of RWMPL in relation to work performed for Hirino Pty Ltd t/a Gundagai Meat Processors. The workers were entitled to the terms and conditions of the Meat and Food Workers Award 2010, including minimum wages and conditions.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established