Civeo Pty Ltd

Case [2016] FWCA 2148


[2016] FWCA 2148

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s 185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement
Civeo Pty Ltd
(AG2016/465)

CIVEO QUEENSLAND ACCOMMODATION SERVICES ENTERPRISE

AGREEMENT 2016

Hospitality industry

DEPUTY PRESIDENT SAMS SYDNEY, 8 APRIL 2016

Application for approval of the CIVEO Queensland Accommodation Services Enterprise

Agreement 2016.

[1] This is an application, pursuant to s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the ‘Act’), filed

by Civeo Pty Ltd (the ‘applicant’) which seeks the approval of the Fair Work Commission

(the ‘Commission’) of a single enterprise agreement to be known as the CIVEO Queensland

Accommodation Services Enterprise Agreement 2016 (the ‘Agreement’). The Agreement was

negotiated with the Australian Workers’ Union (the ‘Union’) and is to cover 133 employees

who are employed in the provision of accommodation and associated services on mining sites

in Queensland. For the purposes of s 186(3) of the Act, I am satisfied that the group of

employees to be covered by this Agreement has been fairly chosen.

[2]        The employees were last notified of their representational rights on 16 October 2015,

and voting for the Agreement’s approval took place between 12 and 24 February 2016. The

time limits under s 181(2) of the Act are thereby satisfied. In a ballot, 54 of the 95 employees

who cast a valid vote, agreed to approve the Agreement. The application for approval of the

Agreement was lodged on 7 March 2016, thereby satisfying s 185(3)(a) of the Act.

[3] In the Employer’s Declaration in support of the application (Form F17) Ms L Jolly,

Executive General Manager, HR & HSQE, identified the Hospitality Industry (General)
[2016] FWCA 2148

Award 2010 [MA000009] as the relevant reference instrument for the purposes of the Better

Off Overall Test (the ‘BOOT’). Ms Jolly said that the Agreement does provide for some terms

and conditions that are less beneficial than those under the Award, including the removal of a

number of allowances, the removal of a one day’s job search entitlement in the event of

redundancy, a lack of provision for broken periods of work and including the removal of

penalty rates for work performed on weekends and the removal of some allowances.

However, the Agreement provides for a number of terms and conditions that are more

beneficial than those under the Award, including higher rates of pay, more generous

redundancy entitlements and an enhanced night shift allowance. I am satisfied that the

Agreement passes the BOOT. The Agreement provides for the mandatory flexibility and

consultation terms at clauses 7 and 8 respectively, and a disputes resolution procedure at

clause 9 provides for conciliation and/or mediation by the Commission.

[4]        At a hearing of the application on 4 April 2016, Ms L Jolley and Mr M Brown

appeared for the applicant and Mr P Robertson for the Union. Ms Jolley outlined the main

features of the Agreement and submitted that all of the legislative requirements for approval

of the Agreement have been satisfied and the Agreement should be approved by the

Commission. Ms Jolley explained that rates of pay are between 16-30% higher than those

under the Award. It was noted that the Agreement was intended to be a ‘roll over’ of the

existing terms and conditions; hence, its nominal expiry date at the end of the year. Mr

Robertson supported the submissions of Ms Jolley. The Union had filed a Declaration in

relation to the application (Form 18) supporting the approval of the Agreement and giving

notice that it wishes to be covered by the Agreement (s 183). For the purposes of s 201(2) of

the Act, I note that the Union is to be covered by the Agreement. While I note that United

Voice is named in the Agreement, that Union has corresponded with the Commission

indicating that it does not wish to be covered by the Agreement.

[2016] FWCA 2148

[5]        Having heard the parties’ submissions and upon reviewing the terms of the

preapproval process documentation and the Agreement itself, I am satisfied that all of the

requirements of the Act, in particular ss 180, 186, 187 and 188, in so far as relevant to this

application, have been met. Accordingly, I approve a single enterprise agreement known as

the CIVEO Queensland Accommodation Services Enterprise Agreement 2016. Pursuant to s

54 of the Act, the Agreement shall operate from 11 April 2016 and have a nominal expiry

date of 31 December 2016.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code C, AE418479 PR578750>

Details
AGLC
Civeo Pty Ltd [2016] FWCA 2148
Case
[2016] FWCA 2148
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Civeo Pty Ltd sought approval for the CIVEO Queensland Accommodation Services Enterprise Agreement 2016 under section 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The proposed agreement, negotiated with the Australian Workers’ Union, is intended to cover 133 employees engaged in providing accommodation and associated services at mining sites in Queensland. The application for approval was lodged on 7 March 2016, following a ballot where 54 out of 95 employees who cast a valid vote approved the agreement. The application satisfied all time limits and conditions set out in the Act.

The primary legal issue the court had to decide was whether the proposed agreement met all the requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. This included verifying if the agreement was fairly chosen, the terms and conditions were in line with the Better Off Overall Test (BOOT), and whether the mandatory flexibility and consultation terms, as well as the dispute resolution procedures, were adequately addressed. The court also needed to ensure that all relevant procedural requirements had been fulfilled, including the notification of employees’ representational rights and the timing of the application.

The Deputy President concluded that all requirements of the Act were met. The agreement was fairly chosen, and the Better Off Overall Test was satisfied as the agreement provided for terms and conditions that were more beneficial overall than those under the Hospitality Industry (General) Award 2010. The agreement included higher rates of pay, more generous redundancy entitlements, and an enhanced night shift allowance, despite some less beneficial terms such as the removal of certain allowances and penalty rates. The mandatory flexibility and consultation terms, as well as the dispute resolution procedures, were also adequately addressed. Consequently, the Deputy President approved the agreement, which will operate from 11 April 2016 and have a nominal expiry date of 31 December 2016.

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.