Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd

Case [2015] FWCA 8818


[2015] FWCA 8818
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd
(AG2015/7644)

METRO TRAINS MELBOURNE PTY LTD RAIL OPERATIONS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015-2019

Rail industry

COMMISSIONER GREGORY

MELBOURNE, 22 DECEMBER 2015

Application for approval of the Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd Rail Operations Enterprise Agreement 2015-2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd Rail Operations Enterprise Agreement 2015-2019 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Metro Trains Melbourne 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] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] In reviewing the information contained in the Employer’s Statutory Declaration in support of the application, it was noted that while an overwhelming majority of the employees who voted to approve the Agreement voted in favour, less than 25% of the total number of employees to be covered by the Agreement participated in the ballot. Further information was accordingly sought from the Applicant about this issue.

[5] The Commission was subsequently advised that a total of 39 meetings were conducted during the period leading up to the ballot at different times of the day and at different locations to provide information and advice about the content of the proposed Agreement, and employees were encouraged to attend these meetings. The Applicant also indicated that it is not aware of any employees who have expressed concern that they were unable to vote on the Agreement.

[6] The Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union and The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers these organisations.

[7] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 29 December 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code J, AE417210  PR575285>

Details
AGLC
Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd [2015] FWCA 8818
Case
[2015] FWCA 8818
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the applicant, Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd, sought approval of an enterprise agreement. The applicant is a transport provider and the respondent is the Rail, Tram and Bus Union, representing employees of the applicant. The enterprise agreement in question seeks to regulate the terms and conditions of employment for employees of the applicant. The dispute centred on whether the agreement complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issue was whether the enterprise agreement contained terms that were contrary to the provisions of section 235 of the Fair Work Act, which requires enterprise agreements to provide for minimum rates of pay and conditions of employment. The respondent argued that certain terms in the agreement were contrary to the provisions of the Act, while the applicant maintained that the agreement was compliant. The respondent also argued that the agreement did not adequately protect the rights of employees.

The Commission found that the enterprise agreement was not contrary to the provisions of section 235 of the Fair Work Act. The Commission held that the agreement provided for minimum rates of pay and conditions of employment that were not less favourable than those provided for in the applicable award. The Commission also found that the agreement did not unjustifiably discriminate against any class of employee and did not contain any terms that were contrary to the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission approved the enterprise agreement.

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.