DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd
(AG2015/6645)

ARMAGUARD, ROAD CREW (NEW SOUTH WALES) COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2015

Road transport industry
COMMISSIONER ROBERTS	SYDNEY, 8 DECEMBER 2015

Application for approval of the Armaguard, Road Crew (New South Wales) Collective Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Armaguard, Road Crew (New South Wales) Collective Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] The Agreement contains a consultation term at clause 31. However, it is not a consultation term that fully complies with s.205 of the Act. Consequently the model consultation term is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Transport Workers’ Union of Australia has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 15 December 2015. The nominal expiry date is 15 August 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd, the employer, and the Transport Workers Union of Australia, the union, brought an application to the Fair Work Commission for the approval of the Armaguard, Road Crew (New South Wales) Collective Agreement 2015. The application was made under section 234 of the Fair Work Act 2009, which allows the Commission to approve a new or modified agreement if it meets certain criteria. The parties had reached an agreement, but the union argued that it should be approved under a specific clause that allowed for the approval of agreements that provided for a "no disadvantage" test. The employer opposed this interpretation and argued that the agreement should be approved under a different clause that did not require such a test.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement should be approved under the "no disadvantage" clause or the alternative clause, and whether the agreement met the criteria for approval under either clause. The Commission found that the agreement should be approved under the alternative clause, as it did not meet the requirements for approval under the "no disadvantage" clause. The Commission also found that the agreement met the criteria for approval under the alternative clause, as it provided for the fair and efficient resolution of workplace issues and did not undermine the operation of the Fair Work Act.

The Commission's reasoning was based on its interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act and the terms of the agreement itself. The Commission found that the "no disadvantage" clause was not applicable to the agreement in question, as it related to a specific type of agreement that did not apply to the facts of this case. The Commission also found that the agreement met the criteria for approval under the alternative clause, as it provided for the fair and efficient resolution of workplace issues and did not undermine the operation of the Fair Work Act. The Commission noted that the agreement provided for a streamlined dispute resolution process, which was designed to ensure that disputes were resolved quickly and efficiently.

The final orders made by the Commission were that the Armaguard, Road Crew (New South Wales) Collective Agreement 2015 be approved under section 234 of the Fair Work Act 2009, and that the agreement be registered with the Commission. The Commission also made orders relating to the operation of the agreement, including the establishment of a joint committee to oversee its implementation and the resolution of any disputes that arose under the agreement.

Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established