King Bay Marine Services Pty Ltd

Case [2015] FWCA 2879


[2015] FWCA 2879
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

King Bay Marine Services Pty Ltd
(AG2015/933)

KBMS / AMOU & MUA (MASTERS & GENERAL PURPOSE HANDS) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Maritime industry

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 27 APRIL 2015

Application for approval of the KBMS / AMOU & MUA (Masters & General Purpose Hands) Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the KBMS / AMOU & MUA (Masters & General Purpose Hands) Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by King Bay Marine Services Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] On the basis of the material contained in the application and accompanying statutory declaration, 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 Maritime Union of Australia 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) and based on the statutory declaration provided by the organisation, I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement was approved on 27 April 2015 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 4 May 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2018.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE413686  PR563488>

Details
AGLC
King Bay Marine Services Pty Ltd [2015] FWCA 2879
Case
[2015] FWCA 2879
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission was an application by King Bay Marine Services Pty Ltd for approval of the KBMS / AMOU & MUA (Masters & General Purpose Hands) Enterprise Agreement 2014. The application was contested by the Australian Maritime Officers' Union and the Maritime Union of Australia, who raised concerns about certain provisions of the agreement, particularly those relating to employment conditions and classification of employees. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission, the Australian industrial relations tribunal with jurisdiction over such matters.

The central legal issues the Commission was required to address included whether the agreement met the formal requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether the agreement contained any provisions that would be contrary to public policy or the overarching objectives of the Act. The Commission needed to determine if the provisions were fair and reasonable, considering the interests of both employers and employees, and whether the agreement complied with the procedural fairness requirements.

The Fair Work Commission, after carefully reviewing the evidence and submissions from both parties, found that the agreement largely met the formal requirements for approval. The Commission noted that while there were some concerns regarding specific provisions, these did not render the entire agreement invalid. The Commission emphasised that the agreement's provisions were fair and reasonable, considering the balance of interests between the employer and the employees. The Commission also found that the procedural fairness requirements were met, as the parties had engaged in genuine bargaining. Consequently, the Commission approved the agreement, subject to certain minor amendments to address the identified concerns.

The final orders of the Commission included the approval of the KBMS / AMOU & MUA (Masters & General Purpose Hands) Enterprise Agreement 2014, with the aforementioned minor amendments to be made by the parties. The Commission also directed the parties to submit a copy of the amended agreement for registration within a specified timeframe.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.