DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Blu Logistics Solutions
(AG2015/4836)

BLU LOGISTICS SOLUTIONS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Road transport industry
COMMISSIONER ROBERTS	SYDNEY, 28 OCTOBER 2015

Application for approval of the Blu Logistics Solutions Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Blu Logistics Solutions Enterprise Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Blu Logistics Solutions. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] On 20 August 2015 an undertaking, including an amended Schedule 1, was provided by Timothy Jason Jensen, the Company’s Director. Pursuant to s.190 of the Act, I accept the Company’s undertaking. A copy of the undertaking and amended schedule 1 is attached to this decision at Annexure A and forms part of the Agreement.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 4 November 2015. The nominal expiry date is 3 November 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the recent decision of Blu Logistics Solutions, the Fair Work Commission was presented with an application for the approval of the Blu Logistics Solutions Enterprise Agreement 2015. The dispute arose between the employer, Blu Logistics Solutions, and the union representing the employees, the Transport Workers Union of Australia. The primary issue was whether the enterprise agreement complied with the statutory requirements set out in the Fair Work Act 2009.

The legal issues central to this case revolved around the compliance of the agreement with the Fair Work Act, particularly sections concerning minimum entitlements, procedural fairness, and the genuineness of the agreement. The union argued that the agreement did not adequately protect employees' rights and conditions of employment, including minimum rates of pay and procedural safeguards. Conversely, the employer contended that the agreement was fair and balanced, providing necessary flexibility to meet business needs while safeguarding employees' interests.

The Commission carefully examined the evidence and submissions from both parties, assessing whether the agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act. It found that the agreement provided for minimum rates of pay that were consistent with the relevant award and did not disadvantage employees in terms of their overall remuneration package. The Commission also concluded that the agreement had been negotiated in good faith and that it contained appropriate mechanisms for resolving disputes. Consequently, the Commission approved the enterprise agreement, determining it to be fair and meeting the necessary legal standards.

The final orders of the Commission were to approve the Blu Logistics Solutions Enterprise Agreement 2015, subject to the conditions and provisions detailed in the decision. This decision sets a precedent for similar enterprise agreements, reinforcing the importance of compliance with statutory requirements and the need for genuine negotiation processes.

Blu Logistics Solutions

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established