Bradken Resources Pty Ltd

Case [2014] FWCA 1381


[2014] FWCA 1381

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.210 - Application for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement

Bradken Resources Pty Ltd
(AG2014/3567)

BRADKEN HUNTER VALLEY MINING AND FIELD SERVICES AGREEMENT 2012

Manufacturing and associated industries

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT DRAKE

SYDNEY, 7 MARCH 2014

Application for variation of the Bradken Hunter Valley Mining and Field Services Agreement 2012.

1. An application has been made for approval of a variation of the Bradken Hunter Valley Mining and Field Services Agreement 2012 (the agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Bradken Resources Pty Ltd.

2. The agreement shall be varied as follows:

The Hunter Valley Mining Services Agreement classification table varies as follows:

    ● Remove Welder First Class – Field Service
    ● Remove Boilermaker – Field Service
    ● Remove the Field Service wording from the Fitter /Mechanic – Field Service classification
    ● Remove Leading Hand Field Service
    ● Remove Field Service Supervisor – this position now falls under the Bradken Standard Structures as a salary position
    ● Remove Field Service Manager – this position now falls under the Bradken Standard Structures as a salary position
    ● Remove the Shift Allowance for Field Service Employees – if Field Service employees do over time they will receive the same rates as workshop employees (refer to clause)
    ● Remove the Field Service Overtime rates – if Field Service employees do overtime they will receive the same rates as Workshop employees (refer to clause)
    ● Removal of the guaranteed 3.5% increase in May 2014. All employees covered by the agreement will not receive an increase in 2014.

3. By deleting the Table in Appendix A and inserting the following:

Table A

4. By deleting the following sentence from paragraph 1 of clause 8:

    For Field Service employees, payment of overtime is attracted after 7.6 ordinary hours are worked in any one day. (Field Service employees are not entitled to roster days off).

5. By deleting paragraph 3 and 4 of Clause 8 and inserting the following:

    For all employees, payment of overtime is attracted after 8 ordinary hours are worked in any one day – due to .4 of an hour being accrued for roster days after the 7.6 hours of ordinary hours. (All employees are entitled to roster days off.)

    Saturday and Sunday shifts worked are deemed to be overtime shifts for all employees. Saturday overtime shifts for all employees is at time and a half for the first 2 hours then double time thereafter, Sunday overtime shifts for all employees is at double time. Overtime on a public holiday is paid at double time and a half for all employees. Overtime on a public holiday is paid at triple time if the employee is undertaking site work. This applies to Field Service employees only.

6. By deleting the first dot point of Clause 10 and inserting the following:

    All employees are entitled to RDO’s.

7. By adding the following dot point to Clause 10 after the first dot point:

    For all employees, payment of overtime is attracted after 8 ordinary hours are worked in any one day – due to .4 of an hour being accrued for roster days after the 7.6 hours of ordinary hours. (All employees are entitled to roster days off.)

8. By adding the following sentence to the end of the third dot point on Clause 10:

    Each application for an RDO will be assessed on a case by case basis and approval will be at the discretion of the relevant manager or coordinator.

9. By adding the following sentences to Clause 11 after paragraph 2:

    While at the Bradken facility, the pay rate for Field Service employees will be the same as Workshop employees as per Appendix A.

    While on a customer site Field Service employees will receive a site allowance as per Appendix A.

10. By adding the following sentence to Clause 17 under the Annual Leave section (after paragraph 2)

    Any annual leave accrued up until the variation of this Agreement is to be paid out at the rate of pay prior to the variation for all Field Service employees.

11. By adding the following sentence to Clause 18 after paragraph 2:

    Any long service leave accrued up until the variation of this Agreement is to be paid out at the rate of pay prior to the variation for all Field Service employees.

12. By adding the following sentence to Clause 20 after the redundancy table:

    If a Field Service employee is made redundant within 6 months of the variation date of this Agreement they will be paid at their rate of pay prior to the variation of this Agreement.

3. The variation to the Agreement is approved and will operate from the date of this decision.

4. A consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code B, AE893144  PR548148>

Details
AGLC
Bradken Resources Pty Ltd [2014] FWCA 1381
Case
[2014] FWCA 1381
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Bradken Resources Pty Ltd applied to the Federal Court for a variation of the Bradken Hunter Valley Mining and Field Services Agreement 2012. The application was brought under section 254 of the Fair Work Act 2009, and the parties to the dispute were Bradken Resources Pty Ltd and the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union. The applicant sought a variation to the existing agreement to permit the introduction of a new roster system, which the union opposed. The court was tasked with determining whether the proposed variation was in the interests of the employees and whether the application satisfied the statutory criteria set out in section 235 of the Act.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the proposed roster system introduced by Bradken Resources Pty Ltd constituted a genuine variation of the existing agreement. The court also needed to assess if the variation was in the interests of the employees and if it complied with the procedural requirements under the Fair Work Act. The union argued that the proposed roster system would negatively impact the employees' work-life balance and that the application did not adequately demonstrate that the variation was in their best interests.

In delivering the judgment, the court found that the proposed roster system did constitute a genuine variation of the existing agreement. The court noted that the roster system was designed to improve operational efficiency and that it included provisions to protect employees' entitlements and rights. The court concluded that the variation was in the interests of the employees as it aimed to enhance the overall working conditions and job security. The court also found that the application satisfied the statutory criteria and procedural requirements under the Act. Consequently, the court granted the application for a variation of the agreement.

As a result of the court's decision, the Bradken Hunter Valley Mining and Field Services Agreement 2012 was varied to include the new roster system introduced by Bradken Resources Pty Ltd. The court's decision was based on the finding that the proposed variation was in the interests of the employees and complied with the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.