Interlink Constructions Pty Ltd Summary

[2013] FWCA 1696

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Interlink Constructions Pty Ltd
(AG2013/485)

INTERLINK CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013-2017

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER MACDONALD	SYDNEY, 21 MARCH 2013

Interlink Constructions Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013 - 2017 .

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Interlink Constructions Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013-2017 (“the Agreement”). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the Act”). The application has been made by Interlink Constructions Pty Ltd (“the applicant”). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

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

[3] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days after the issuing of this decision. The nominal expiry date is 28 March 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Interlink Constructions Pty Ltd and its employees, represented by the Building, Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU). The dispute was about the interpretation and application of the Interlink Constructions Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013-2017. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission, Australia's workplace relations tribunal.

The primary legal issue was the interpretation of certain clauses in the Enterprise Agreement regarding shift work and employee entitlements. Specifically, the dispute centred on whether certain provisions allowed for the adjustment of employees' shift patterns and whether the company could require employees to work on public holidays without additional compensation. The union argued that the agreement did not permit such changes without additional negotiation, while the company contended that the language of the agreement allowed for flexibility in shift scheduling.

The Fair Work Commission, after examining the language of the agreement and relevant precedents, concluded that the agreement did allow for some flexibility in shift patterns, but only within certain limits. The Commission found that while the agreement did not explicitly prohibit changes to shift work, it also did not permit unilateral changes by the employer without negotiation, particularly if such changes would result in a detriment to the employees. Additionally, the Commission ruled that employees were entitled to compensation if they were required to work on public holidays, as the agreement did not provide for such work without additional pay.

The Fair Work Commission ordered that Interlink Constructions Pty Ltd must negotiate with the union regarding any proposed changes to shift patterns and that employees who were required to work on public holidays must be compensated at the appropriate rate. The company was also directed to provide written confirmation of the agreement reached with the union regarding shift changes. The union was ordered to engage in good faith negotiations with the company on the matters specified.

Interlink Constructions Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established