Mojeto Pty Ltd T/A PBC Goulburn

[2013] FWCA 3523

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Mojeto Pty Ltd T/A PBC Goulburn
(AG2013/6452)

MOJETO PTY LTD T/AS PBC GOULBURN FAIR WORK AGREEMENT 2012

Passenger vehicle transport (non rail) industry
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT HARRISON	SYDNEY, 4 JUNE 2013

Application for approval of the Mojeto Pty Ltd t/as PBC Goulburn Fair Work Agreement 2012.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Mojeto Pty Ltd t/as PBC Goulburn Fair Work Agreement 2012 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). 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] An undertaking concerning clause 29 (Annual Leave) has been provided by the employer and it is taken to be a term of the Agreement. A copy of the undertaking is attached at Annexure A.

[4] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s.54(1) it will operate from 11 June 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2015.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Annexure A

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Mojeto Pty Ltd, trading as PBC Goulburn, which sought approval of a proposed Fair Work Agreement from 2012. The application was brought before the Fair Work Commission, which was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred on whether the proposed agreement provided adequate protections and entitlements for the employees, and if it complied with the relevant provisions of the Act.

The primary legal issues the Commission had to address included whether the agreement provided for appropriate minimum rates of pay, entitlements, and conditions of employment that aligned with the Fair Work Act. Additionally, the Commission needed to ensure that the agreement was made in good faith and did not adversely affect employees’ rights or entitlements. The Commission was also required to assess whether the agreement complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Regulations 2009.

The Fair Work Commission, after reviewing the proposed agreement and considering the submissions from both parties, found that the agreement did not meet the necessary standards for approval. The Commission determined that the proposed agreement failed to provide adequate minimum rates of pay and did not sufficiently protect the employees’ entitlements. The Commission also found that the agreement did not comply with certain provisions of the Fair Work Act and the Fair Work Regulations. As a result, the application for approval of the Fair Work Agreement was dismissed.

The Fair Work Commission did not grant approval for the proposed Fair Work Agreement 2012. The Commission directed that the agreement be returned to the parties for further negotiation and amendments to address the identified deficiencies. The Commission emphasised the importance of ensuring that any future agreement provided adequate protections and entitlements for employees, and complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act and Regulations.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established