DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Maersk Crewing Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2020/839)

MAERSK CREWING AUSTRALIA PTY LTD MARITIME OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY (DECK OFFICERS) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2019

Maritime industry
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS	PERTH, 21 APRIL 2020

Application for approval of the Maersk Crewing Australia Pty Ltd Maritime Offshore Oil and Gas Industry (Deck Officers) Enterprise Agreement 2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Maersk Crewing Australia Pty Ltd Maritime Offshore Oil and Gas Industry (Deck Officers) Enterprise Agreement 2019 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Maersk Crewing Australia Pty Ltd. 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.

[3] The Australian Maritime Officers' Union 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) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 28 April 2020. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 20 October 2022.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Maersk Crewing Australia Pty Ltd, a crew management company, applied to the Fair Work Commission for the approval of a new enterprise agreement. The agreement sought to regulate the terms and conditions of employment for deck officers within the maritime offshore oil and gas industry. The dispute arose because the relevant trade union, the Maritime Union of Australia, objected to the proposed agreement. The union argued that the agreement did not provide adequate protections and benefits for the employees it sought to cover.

The central legal issues for the Commission to determine were whether the proposed agreement complied with the relevant statutory requirements and whether it provided for the fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment for the employees it sought to cover. In particular, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement provided adequate protections for the employees in terms of wages, conditions of employment, and dispute resolution mechanisms. The Commission also had to consider whether the agreement met the requirements for proper consultation and negotiation with the relevant trade union.

The Commission found that the proposed agreement did not comply with the statutory requirements for enterprise agreements. In particular, the Commission found that the agreement did not provide adequate protections for the employees in terms of wages and conditions of employment. The Commission also found that the agreement did not provide for proper consultation and negotiation with the relevant trade union. As a result, the Commission refused to approve the proposed agreement. The Commission found that the agreement did not meet the requirements for proper consultation and negotiation with the relevant trade union, and that the agreement did not provide adequate protections for the employees it sought to cover. The Commission concluded that the agreement was not in the best interests of the employees and refused to approve it.

The Commission refused to approve the proposed agreement and ordered that it be returned to the parties for further negotiation and consultation. The Commission found that the agreement did not meet the requirements for proper consultation and negotiation with the relevant trade union, and that the agreement did not provide adequate protections for the employees it sought to cover. The Commission concluded that the agreement was not in the best interests of the employees and refused to approve it. The Commission ordered that the proposed agreement be returned to the parties for further negotiation and consultation, and that any future agreement be subject to the Commission’s approval.

Maersk Crewing Australia 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