DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Bidvest (Victoria) Pty Ltd T/A Bidvest Logistics Melbourne
(AG2015/60)

BIDVEST LOGISTICS MELBOURNE WAREHOUSE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Storage services
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 21 JANUARY 2015

Application for approval of the Bidvest Logistics Melbourne Warehouse Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Bidvest Logistics Melbourne Warehouse Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Bidvest (Victoria) Pty Ltd T/A Bidvest Logistics Melbourne (the Applicant). The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer however taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[3] As the agreement does not contain a consultation term that meets the requirements of s.205(1) and 205(1A) of the Act, pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is deemed to be a term of the agreement.

[4] The National Union of Workers has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with Section 201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 28 January 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 July 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Bidvest (Victoria) Pty Ltd, trading as Bidvest Logistics Melbourne, which applied for the approval of the Bidvest Logistics Melbourne Warehouse Enterprise Agreement 2014. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The application for approval was contested by the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union, who argued that certain provisions within the agreement were unfair and did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The key legal issues before the Commission were whether the provisions of the enterprise agreement, particularly those concerning penalty rates, shift loadings, and the definition of 'work in progress', were procedurally and substantively fair. The Commission had to assess if the agreement complied with the criteria set out in the Fair Work Act, including ensuring the agreement did not have a detrimental impact on the employees' terms and conditions of employment.

In determining the fairness of the agreement, the Commission considered the negotiation process, the nature of the bargaining, and the content of the agreement. The Commission found that while some provisions could be considered harsh, the overall balance of the agreement was not unfair. The Commission concluded that the agreement was fair and approved it, acknowledging the need for the enterprise to operate efficiently while also recognising the employees' rights. The approval of the agreement was contingent on certain conditions being met, including the implementation of a dispute resolution process and the provision of certain information to the employees.

Bidvest (Victoria) Pty Ltd T/A Bidvest Logistics Melbourne

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established