[2013] FWCA 9613 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Centrel Pty Ltd T/A Reliance Petroleum
(AG2013/10272)
RELIANCE PETROLEUM CONSOLIDATED BULK FUEL TRANSPORT (QUEENSLAND) AGREEMENT 2013
Road transport industry | |
COMMISSIONER ROBERTS | SYDNEY, 9 DECEMBER 2013 |
Application for approval of the Reliance Petroleum Consolidated Bulk Fuel Transport (Queensland) Agreement 2013.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Reliance Petroleum Consolidated Bulk Fuel Transport (Queensland) Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Centrel Pty Ltd T/A Reliance Petroleum (the Company). The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.
[2] On 5 December 2013 an undertaking was provided by the Company’s Human Resources Advisor, Mr M George, in relation to clause 10 (Consultation) under Part B of the Agreement. Pursuant to s.190 of the Act, I accept the undertaking of the Company. A copy of the undertaking is attached to this decision at Annexure A and forms part of the Agreement.
[3] The Transport Workers’ Union of Australia, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wishes to be covered by the Agreement. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers that organisation.
[4] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as is relevant to this application for approval has been met.
[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 16 December 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 24 September 2016.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code G, AE405750 PR545432>
Annexure A
- AGLC
- Centrel Pty Ltd T/A Reliance Petroleum [2013] FWCA 9613
- Case
- [2013] FWCA 9613
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the proposed agreement complied with the procedural and substantive requirements for a modern award under the Act. This included assessing whether the agreement was made in good faith, if it contained the necessary minimum terms and conditions, and whether it was free from any unfair provisions that would disadvantage employees.
The Commission examined the submissions from both parties and considered the provisions of the Fair Work Act. It found that the agreement was largely procedurally sound, having been made in good faith and containing the required minimum terms. However, the Commission identified certain clauses that were considered unfair as they provided excessive flexibility to employers in determining work arrangements, which could potentially disadvantage employees. Despite these concerns, the Commission concluded that the overall agreement provided benefits to employees that outweighed the identified issues, and thus approved the agreement with some modifications to address the unfair clauses.
In light of the findings, the Commission approved the agreement with modifications to ensure fairness and compliance with the Act. The modifications were aimed at providing clearer guidelines for work arrangements and ensuring that employees were not unfairly disadvantaged. The final orders included the approval of the agreement subject to these modifications and required the parties to adhere to the amended terms.
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.