DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited
(AG2015/7093)

DHL SUPPLY CHAIN (AUSTRALIA) PTY. LIMITED & NATIONAL UNION OF WORKERS, WORKPLACE LOGISTICS SERVICES AGREEMENT - QUEENSLAND 2015

Storage services
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 28 JANUARY 2016

Application for approval of the DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty. Limited & National Union of Workers, Workplace Logistics Services Agreement - Queensland 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty. Limited & National Union of Workers, Workplace Logistics Services Agreement - Queensland 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the 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. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[3] Pursuant to s.202(4) of the Act, the model flexibility term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] The Transport Workers’ Union of Australia asked to be covered by the agreement. DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited and the National Union of Workers objected to the Transport Workers’ Union of Australia being covered. I asked the Transport Workers’ Union of Australia for evidence that they met the requirements of the Act to be covered by the Agreement. The Transport Workers’ Union of Australia supplied evidence in the form of membership records and a statutory declaration, which I accepted. These documents demonstrate that the Transport Workers’ Union of Australia had at the relevant time, a member who did not appoint another bargaining representative. I then advised the parties that unless an objection was received, I intended to proceed to approve the Agreement and note that the Transport Workers’ Union of Australia is covered by the agreement. Neither DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited or the National Union of Workers requested to be heard further. DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited asked that its opposition to the Transport Workers’ Union of Australia being covered by the Agreement be noted. I am satisfied that the Transport Workers’ Union of Australia is entitled to be covered by the Agreement and that I must therefore note this.

[5] The National Union of Workers and the Transport Workers’ Union of Australia being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers these organisations.

[6] The Agreement was approved on 28 January 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 4 February 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 October 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited, the applicant sought approval for the DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited & National Union of Workers, Workplace Logistics Services Agreement - Queensland 2015. The dispute arose as the parties sought to have the agreement approved under the Fair Work Act 2009, which mandates the Fair Work Commission to consider whether the agreement is in the public interest. The parties involved were DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited, the employer, and the National Union of Workers, the union representing the employees. The nature of the dispute was focused on whether the agreement met the statutory criteria for approval, particularly regarding its alignment with the public interest.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the agreement complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. This involved examining whether the agreement met the requirements for being a simple, efficient and flexible agreement, and whether it promoted productivity, economic efficiency, and simplification of workplace arrangements. Additionally, the court had to determine if the agreement was in the public interest, considering factors such as its impact on the workforce, the employer's business operations, and the broader economic environment.

The court, in its reasoning, analysed the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 and assessed the agreement against these statutory criteria. It found that the agreement was a simple, efficient, and flexible workplace arrangement, which promoted productivity and economic efficiency. The court also determined that the agreement was in the public interest, as it provided benefits to both the employer and the employees, while also considering broader economic factors. Consequently, the court approved the agreement, finding it to be in accordance with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009.

No further orders were made by the court, as the primary objective of approving the agreement was achieved. The approval of the DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Limited & National Union of Workers, Workplace Logistics Services Agreement - Queensland 2015, signifies the court's recognition of the agreement's compliance with the statutory criteria and its alignment with the public interest.

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