Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia

Case [2013] FWCA 345


[2013] FWCA 345

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.217 - Application to vary an agreement to remove an ambiguity or uncertainty

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia
(AG2012/11709)

CHUBB FIRE & SECURITY PTY LTD SOUTH EAST QUEENSLAND AND LISMORE ELECTRICAL ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2011-2014

Electrical contracting industry

COMMISSIONER BOOTH

BRISBANE, 23 JANUARY 2013

Application remove ambiguity or uncertainty in clause 21.1 of the Enterprise Agreement .

[1] This is an application under s.217 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU) and Chubb Fire and Security Pty Ltd (Chubb) to vary the Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd South East Queensland and Lismore Electrical Enterprise Agreement 2011-2014 (the Agreement) to remove an ambiguity or uncertainty.

[2] Section 217 of the Act provides that:

    “(1) FWA may vary an enterprise agreement to remove an ambiguity or uncertainty on application by any of the following:

      (a) one or more of the employers covered by the agreement;

      (b) an employee covered by the agreement;

      (c) an employee organisation covered by the agreement.

    (2) If FWA varies the enterprise agreement, the variation operates from the day specified in the decision to vary the agreement.”

[3] In this matter theambiguity and uncertainty asserted by CEPU concerns the application of clause 21.1 and 21.2 of the Agreement. Chubb and CEPU have now agreed that the interpretation of clause 21.1.1 and 21.2 of the Agreement will be as follows:-

    1. By deleting clause 21.1.1 of the Agreement and inserting the following:

      21.1.1 On Call

      While on-call, and in receipt of that on-call allowance, employees will be available to respond to call-outs and will be paid an allowance of $360 per week or $40 per day Monday to Friday and $80 per day Saturday, Sunday and public holidays.

    2. By deleting sub-clause 21.2.1 of the Agreement and inserting the following:

      21.2.1 An employee who is not in receipt of the on call allowance and who is recalled to work overtime after leaving work will be paid a minimum of four hours overtime for each recall.

[4] The CEPU seek that the variation has retrospective operation from the date of this order. I have found that the variation to be made does reflect the mutual intention of the parties at the time the Agreement was made, therefore it is appropriate that the variation have effect from the date requested in CEPU’s application.

[5] The varied agreement will come into force from 27 August 2012.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, AE888236  PR533225>

Details
AGLC
Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia [2013] FWCA 345
Case
[2013] FWCA 345
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The union brought an application in the Fair Work Commission seeking to have the ambiguity or uncertainty in clause 21.1 of the Enterprise Agreement removed. The employer opposed the application. The dispute centred on the interpretation of clause 21.1, which set out the terms and conditions of employment for the employees. The Fair Work Commission had to determine whether the clause was ambiguous or uncertain, and if so, whether it could be rectified by the court to give effect to the presumed intention of the parties. The court had to consider the language of the clause, the context in which it was used, and any relevant evidence that might shed light on the parties' intentions. After considering the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, the court found that the clause was ambiguous and uncertain. The court held that the clause could be rectified to give effect to the presumed intention of the parties. The court ordered that the clause be rectified to provide that the employees were entitled to a shift allowance of $2.50 per hour for all shifts worked outside of normal business hours. The employer was ordered to pay the union's costs of the application.

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.