Carr v ILSC (Brisbane) Pty Ltd and Anor and Pathik v ILSC (Brisbane) Pty Ltd and Anor

The applicants, Ms Carr and Mr Pathik, were casual teachers employed by ILSC (Brisbane) Pty Ltd. They brought proceedings against their employer, alleging underpayment of their hourly rate of pay under the *Educational Services (Post-Secondary Education) Award 2010* (the Award). The dispute centred on whether certain hours worked by the applicants were "required" by the employer, which would entitle them to a higher rate of pay under the Award.

The primary legal issue before the Court was the interpretation of clause 14.3 of the Award, which stipulated that casual teachers were entitled to an hourly rate of pay that was 25% higher than the ordinary hourly rate for time "required" by the employer. The Court was required to determine what constituted "required" time in the context of casual teaching employment and whether the hours for which the applicants claimed a higher rate fell within that definition.

Judge Cameron reasoned that the term "required" in clause 14.3 of the Award referred to time that the employer mandated or directed the casual teacher to perform. This included not only direct teaching hours but also other duties that the employer specifically instructed the casual teacher to undertake. The Court found that the applicants had not established that the additional hours they claimed were "required" by the employer in the sense contemplated by the Award. Therefore, the applicants were not entitled to the higher casual loading for those hours.