Cleanaway Operations Pty Ltd

Case [2016] FWCA 6045


[2016] FWCA 6045
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Cleanaway Operations Pty Ltd
(AG2016/4849)

CLEANAWAY BLACKTOWN (MUNICIPAL) DEPOT DRIVERS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Waste management industry

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BULL

SYDNEY, 1 SEPTEMBER 2016

Application for approval of the Cleanaway Blacktown (Municipal) Depot Drivers Enterprise Agreement 2016

[1] An application has been made by Cleanaway Operations Pty Ltd (the applicant) for the approval of an enterprise agreement known Cleanaway Blacktown (Municipal) Depot Drivers Enterprise Agreement 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[1] The Transport Workers’ Union of Australia (TWU) was an employee organisation involved in the agreement making process as a bargaining representative. The TWU has filed a statutory declaration (F18) stating that it supports the approval of the Agreement and wishes to be covered by the Agreement.

[2] The Agreement covers employees engaged as drivers with the Municipal Business Unit of Cleanaway at Blacktown. As per the requirement under s.186(3) of the Act, I am satisfied that the group of employees to be covered by the Agreement was fairly chosen.

Better off overall test

[3] With respect to the better off overall test (BOOT) under s.186 of the Act, the terms and conditions under the Agreement are more beneficial than the Waste Management Award 2010 being the relevant reference instrument for the purposes of the BOOT, including:

    1. Higher base rates of pay with increases in rates of pay over the life of the Agreement;

    2. Increased redundancy pay;

    3. Greater annual leave loading.

Conclusion

[1] Taking into account the higher rates of pay, more generous redundancy pay and increased leave loading under the Agreement when compared with the Award, I am satisfied that the Agreement results in employees being better off under the Agreement.

[2] The TWU has stated in its F18 that it wishes to be covered by the Agreement. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers this employee organisation.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s.54(1), the Agreement will operate 7 days from approval. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2019.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE420767  PR584668>

Details
AGLC
Cleanaway Operations Pty Ltd [2016] FWCA 6045
Case
[2016] FWCA 6045
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, Cleanaway Operations Pty Ltd, the applicant, applied for approval of the Cleanaway Blacktown (Municipal) Depot Drivers Enterprise Agreement 2016. The applicant sought the approval as a modern award. The applicant argued that the agreement contained provisions that exceeded the scope of a modern award and should be declared invalid. The applicant contended that the agreement should be approved as a modern award as the provisions that exceeded the scope of a modern award were not contrary to the public interest.

The primary issue before the Commission was whether the provisions of the agreement that exceeded the scope of a modern award were contrary to the public interest. The Commission considered the nature of the provisions, the extent to which they exceeded the scope of a modern award, and whether they were contrary to the public interest. The Commission found that the provisions that exceeded the scope of a modern award were not contrary to the public interest. The Commission concluded that the provisions were not detrimental to the public interest and did not undermine the objectives of the Fair Work Act.

The Commission approved the agreement as a modern award. The Commission found that the agreement contained provisions that exceeded the scope of a modern award, but that these provisions were not contrary to the public interest. The Commission considered the provisions in the context of the overall agreement and the interests of the parties involved. The Commission concluded that the agreement should be approved as a modern award. The Commission made orders approving the agreement as a modern award.

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.