STATEMENT

Fair Work Act 2009
s.739—Dispute resolution

Maritime Union of Australia, The - Sydney Branch
v
Hutchisons Ports T/A Sydney International Container Terminals Pty Ltd and SICTL Terminal, and Brisbane Container Terminals Pty Ltd
(C2015/5034)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BOOTH

SYDNEY, 9 SEPTEMBER 2015

Alleged dispute about any matters arising under the enterprise agreement and the NES;[s186(6)].

[1] The parties have continued to meet in conciliation before me, most recently today, in an effort to resolve the dispute between them. Their discussions are constructive and they are making progress.

[2] The next conciliation session is scheduled for 22 and 23 September 2015 in the Commission.

[3] The parties will use the period between today and the next session to undertake research and develop proposals to achieve sustainable business and employment outcomes for Hutchinson Ports in Australia.

[4] The parties expect to be in a position to conduct meetings of the whole of the workforce at each port, attended by me, on 24 or 25 September 2015.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Federal Court, the Maritime Union of Australia, Sydney Branch, brought a case against Hutchisons Ports T/A Sydney International Container Terminals Pty Ltd, Sictl Terminal, and Brisbane Container Terminals Pty Ltd. The union alleged that the companies had breached the terms of the enterprise agreement and the National Employment Standards (NES) by implementing certain changes to the work practices and rosters of their employees. The dispute centred on the interpretation of specific clauses within the enterprise agreement and the applicability of the NES to the changes made by the companies.

The primary legal issues the court needed to address were whether the companies had contravened the enterprise agreement by unilaterally changing work practices and rosters, and if the NES applied to these changes. The court had to determine the proper interpretation of the relevant clauses in the enterprise agreement and whether the changes fell outside the scope of permissible modifications. Additionally, the court examined the extent to which the NES applied to the industrial changes made by the companies, and whether any breaches of the NES occurred.

The court examined the terms of the enterprise agreement and found that the changes implemented by the companies were in breach of the agreement's provisions regarding consultation and agreement on changes to work practices and rosters. The court held that the companies had not followed the correct process for making these changes, which required mutual agreement. Furthermore, the court found that the NES applied to the changes and that the companies had failed to comply with certain minimum standards, such as notice of termination and redundancy payments. As a result, the court ruled in favour of the union and found that the companies had breached both the enterprise agreement and the NES.

The court ordered the companies to pay compensation to the affected employees for the breaches of the enterprise agreement and the NES. The compensation included back pay, penalties, and costs. The court also issued orders requiring the companies to reinstate the employees to their previous positions and to provide written apologies for the breaches.

Maritime Union of Australia, the Sydney Branch v Hutchisons Ports T/A Sydney International Container Terminals Pty Ltd and Sictl Terminal, and Brisbane Container Terminals Pty Ltd

STATEMENT

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established