DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited
(AG2019/1547)

DHL SUPPLY CHAIN (AUSTRALIA) PTY. LTD & NATIONAL UNION OF WORKERS, PARKWEST AGREEMENT – VICTORIA, 2018

Storage services
DEPUTY PRESIDENT SAUNDERS	NEWCASTLE, 6 JUNE 2019

Application for approval of the DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty. Ltd & National Union of Workers, Parkwest Agreement - Victoria, 2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty. Ltd & National Union of Workers, Parkwest Agreement - Victoria, 2018 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

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

[3] The National Union of Workers being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 13 June 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2021.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited, applied to the Fair Work Commission for the approval of the DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty. Ltd & National Union of Workers, Parkwest Agreement - Victoria, 2018. The respondent, the National Union of Workers, did not oppose the application but submitted a number of observations concerning the application and the agreement. The Commission was required to determine whether the agreement should be approved under section 234 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The key legal issue was whether the agreement was a "direct replacement" of a previous agreement. If it was, then it required the approval of the Commission, as opposed to merely being registered. The Commission noted that the previous agreement had expired, but the agreement in question did not cover the same period. The Commission concluded that the agreement was not a direct replacement of the previous agreement and, therefore, did not require approval. Instead, it was required to be registered. The Commission also noted that the agreement did not have any provisions that would be contrary to the objectives of the Fair Work Act, and it complied with the relevant legislative requirements.

The Fair Work Commission approved the application and determined that the agreement should be registered. The Commission found that the agreement was not a direct replacement of the previous agreement and did not require its approval. The Commission also found that the agreement complied with the relevant legislative requirements and did not have any provisions that would be contrary to the objectives of the Fair Work Act. The agreement was registered on 30 April 2019.

DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established