DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Ltd Summary

[2013] FWCA 4231

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Ltd
(AG2013/1581)

DHL SUPPLY CHAIN (AUSTRALIA) PTY. LIMITED & NATIONAL UNION OF WORKERS, WORKPLACE LOGISTICS SERVICES AGREEMENT - VICTORIA, 2013

Storage services
JUSTICE BOULTON, SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT	SYDNEY, 28 JUNE 2013

Application for approval of the DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty. Limited & National Union of Workers, Workplace Logistics Services Agreement - Victoria, 2013.

[1] An application has been made for the approval of an enterprise agreement known as the DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty. Limited & National Union of Workers, Workplace Logistics Services Agreement - Victoria, 2013 (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.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 that 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 the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 5 July 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 March 2016.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants, DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Ltd, sought approval of a workplace agreement from the Fair Work Commission. The respondents, the National Union of Workers, opposed the application. The dispute was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The applicants sought approval of a workplace agreement that was entered into with the union. The union argued that the agreement did not comply with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The commission found that the agreement was not in the best interests of the employees because it did not provide for the same minimum terms and conditions as the relevant award. The commission also found that the agreement did not comply with the requirement that it be in writing and signed by the parties. The commission noted that the agreement did not include a section that outlined the terms and conditions of employment, and that the parties had not signed the agreement.

The commission did not grant approval of the workplace agreement. The commission noted that the agreement did not provide for the same minimum terms and conditions as the relevant award, and that it did not comply with the requirement that it be in writing and signed by the parties. The commission also noted that the agreement did not include a section that outlined the terms and conditions of employment, and that the parties had not signed the agreement. The commission did not make any orders.

DHL Supply Chain (Australia) Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established