Mr Nick Tsiftelidis v Crown Melbourne Limited

[2014] FWC 2155

[2014] FWC 2155

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

RECOMMENDATION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.739 - Application to deal with a dispute

Mr Nick Tsiftelidis
v
Crown Melbourne Limited
(C2014/3372)

COMMISSIONER ROE MELBOURNE, 1 APRIL 2014

Alleged dispute concerning entitlements.

1. This matter was the subject of conciliation conference at the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) on 31 March 2014. I was satisfied and the parties accepted that:

a. The relevant steps in the disputes settlement procedure of the Agreement (Crown Melbourne Limited Enterprise Agreement 2013) have been properly followed by the parties in this case.

b. The dispute is a matter which falls within the scope of the relevant disputes settlement procedure of the Agreement.

c. The dispute should be finally resolved through the Commission issuing a Recommendation and both parties have agreed to abide by that Recommendation as the full and final resolution to the dispute.

2. Based upon the above the parties have accepted my Recommendation as follows:

a. The Commission accepts that the Applicant is sincerely of the view that Clause 3.4 of the Agreement provides that the first aid allowance increase applicable as a result of the approval of the Agreement should be back paid to the first full pay period on or after 1 July 2013.

b. Notwithstanding the Applicant’s legitimate concern the Commission is of the view that the plain words of the Agreement make it clear that it is only “the increase in wages and allowance for 2013 provided for in clause 7 (salaries)” which are subject to backdating. Clause 7 does contain salaries and allowances but the provisions in respect to first aid allowance are in a different clause. That separate clause makes no provision for backdating. The phrase in Clause 3.4 “and employees will be paid back-payments where necessary” is simply referring to the requirement for the employer to make operational the obligation in Clause 3.4 for the increases in Clause 7 to be backdated. It simply spells out the consequences of the earlier part of that clause and it does not expand the operation of that clause in any way.

c. The dispute is therefore fully and finally resolved by my finding that Clause 3.4 does not operate to backdate any increase in first aid allowance under the Agreement.

d. The Applicant should not suffer loss of pay due to attendance at the proceedings in the Tribunal on 31 March 2014. However, he should not be paid for the balance of the shift unless he returns to work for the balance of the shift.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR549192>