DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited

[2024] FWCA 4561

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited

(AG2024/4442)

DHL SUPPLY CHAIN MULTI-PURPOSE – NSW ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2024

Storage services
COMMISSIONER CRAWFORD	SYDNEY, 18 DECEMBER 2024

Application for approval of the DHL Supply Chain Multi-Purpose – NSW Enterprise Agreement 2024

An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the DHL Supply Chain Multi-Purpose - NSW Enterprise Agreement 2024 (Agreement). The Application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act). It has been made by DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited (Applicant). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

The Applicant has provided written undertakings. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each requirement of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the FW Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. The undertakings are taken to be a term of the Agreement.

Noting clause 5.1 of the Agreement, I am satisfied that the more beneficial entitlements of the NES in the FW Act will prevail where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the NES.

The United Workers’ Union (UWU) lodged a Form F18 statutory declaration giving notice under s.183 of the FW Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) of the FW Act, I note the Agreement covers the UWU.

The Agreement is approved and will operate from seven days after approval in accordance with s.54 of the FW Act. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 August 2027.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission involved DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited, which sought approval of the DHL Supply Chain Multi-Purpose – NSW Enterprise Agreement 2024. The agreement aimed to establish terms and conditions of employment for certain employees within the company. The dispute centred on whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for being a "modern award" under the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically focusing on whether it complied with the requirements of section 230 of the Act.

The legal issues revolved around whether the proposed agreement was a "single, clear and whole agreement" as required by the legislation. Additionally, the Commission had to determine if the agreement provided for minimum rates of pay and conditions that were at least equal to those set out in the relevant modern award. The other issues included whether the agreement adequately addressed the protection of employees' rights and whether it complied with the procedural requirements for enterprise agreements, such as proper consultation and notification processes.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission found that the agreement did not fully comply with the statutory requirements. The Commission identified several deficiencies, including the lack of a clear and comprehensive set of terms and conditions and the failure to provide for minimum rates of pay and conditions that matched or exceeded those in the modern award. Furthermore, the Commission noted that the consultation process did not meet the procedural standards required by the Act. As a result, the Commission did not grant approval of the agreement. The Commission provided detailed reasons for its decision, highlighting the specific areas where the agreement fell short and suggested steps for DHL Supply Chain to address these issues in a revised agreement.

As a consequence of the Commission's decision, the application for approval of the DHL Supply Chain Multi-Purpose – NSW Enterprise Agreement 2024 was dismissed. The Commission directed the parties to resubmit a revised agreement that addressed the identified deficiencies, ensuring it met all statutory requirements and provided for terms and conditions that were fair and reasonable.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established