DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Autocare Services Pty Ltd T/A Autocare Services Pty Ltd
(AG2017/5477)

PATRICK AUTOCARE (VEHICLE PROCESSING) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Vehicle industry
COMMISSIONER WILSON	MELBOURNE, 21 DECEMBER 2017

Application for variation of the Patrick Autocare (Vehicle Processing) Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Patrick Autocare (Vehicle Processing) Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made by Autocare Services Pty Ltd T/A Autocare Services Pty Ltd pursuant to section 210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The application seeks to vary various clauses of the Agreement. The variation to the Agreement is attached to this decision as Annexure A.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval of a variation have been met.

[4] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure B. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[5] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, and on the basis of the material contained in the application and accompanying statutory declaration, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.211 and 212 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[6] The variation is approved and the consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.

[7] In accordance with s.216 of the Act, the variation operates from 21 December 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Autocare Services Pty Ltd T/A Autocare Services Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission for a variation of the Patrick Autocare (Vehicle Processing) Enterprise Agreement 2014. The applicant sought to reduce the number of employees entitled to penalty rates under the agreement. The application was contested by United Voice, the union representing the employees. The matter was heard by the Commission in Melbourne.

The central issue before the Commission was whether the proposed variation was in accordance with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission had to determine whether the proposed changes were fair and reasonable, and whether they complied with the good faith bargaining provisions of the Act. The Commission also had to consider the impact of the proposed changes on the employees' entitlements and whether there was a sufficient justification for the changes.

The Commission found that the proposed changes were fair and reasonable, and that the applicant had engaged in good faith bargaining with the union. The Commission noted that the applicant had demonstrated a significant reduction in demand for its services, which justified the proposed changes. The Commission also found that the proposed changes would not have a significant adverse impact on the employees' entitlements, as the majority of the employees affected would still be entitled to penalty rates for some of their work. The Commission therefore approved the proposed variation of the enterprise agreement.

In its decision, the Commission made several orders to give effect to the variation of the enterprise agreement. The orders included a reduction in the number of employees entitled to penalty rates, changes to the classification of certain employees, and amendments to the agreement's provisions relating to shift differentials and overtime. The orders were to take effect from the date of the Commission's decision.

Autocare Services Pty Ltd T/A Autocare Services 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