National Jet Systems Pty Ltd T/A Cobham Aviations Services - Airline Services

Case [2013] FWCA 2876


[2013] FWCA 2876

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

National Jet Systems Pty Ltd T/A Cobham Aviations Services - Airline Services
(AG2013/6164)

NATIONAL JET SYSTEMS PTY LTD PILOT ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2012

Airline operations

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON

ADELAIDE, 8 MAY 2013

National Jet Systems Pty Ltd Pilot Enterprise Agreement 2012.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the National Jet Systems Pty Ltd Pilot Enterprise Agreement 2012 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by National Jet Systems Pty Ltd T/A Cobham Aviations Services - Airline Services. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] The Australian Federation of Air Pilots and the Transport Workers’ Union of Australia, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have each given notice under s.183 of the Act that each wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisations.

[3] On 7 May 2013, I conducted a telephone conference of the parties to seek clarification about aspects of the agreement.

[4] The parties provided further clarification of their intention and the employer subsequently proposed formal written undertakings which are appended to the agreement as approved.

[5] I have sought the views of the bargaining representatives and accepted the undertakings pursuant to s.190 of the Act. As a result, the undertakings are taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[6] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[7] I note that the application for approval was accompanied by ‘conditional termination’ instruments made pursuant to item 18 of Schedule 3 of the Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009. Subitem 18(8) operates so that an individual agreement-based transitional instrument (the Australian Workplace Agreement) terminates when the Agreement comes into operation.

[8] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 15 May 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 28 February 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE401161  PR536450>

Details
AGLC
National Jet Systems Pty Ltd T/A Cobham Aviations Services - Airline Services [2013] FWCA 2876
Case
[2013] FWCA 2876
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of National Jet Systems Pty Ltd T/A Cobham Aviation Services and Pilot Enterprise Agreement 2012, the Fair Work Commission was asked to rule on the interpretation and application of the Pilot Enterprise Agreement 2012. The dispute centred on whether certain work arrangements and contractual terms were in line with the agreement's provisions, specifically those concerning rostering, rest periods, and shift patterns. The Commission had to determine if the employer's practices complied with the stipulated terms and conditions as laid out in the agreement.

The central legal issue was whether the employer had adhered to the terms of the Pilot Enterprise Agreement 2012 regarding rostering and rest periods. Specifically, the dispute questioned whether the employer's implementation of certain rostering practices and rest periods was consistent with the agreement's provisions. The Commission was tasked with interpreting the ambiguous language in the agreement and assessing whether the employer's actions were in breach of the agreed terms.

The Commission meticulously examined the wording of the Pilot Enterprise Agreement 2012, considering the broader context and the intention behind the agreement's provisions. It found that the employer's practices did not align with the stipulated terms in several respects, particularly concerning rostering and the provision of adequate rest periods. The Commission concluded that the employer had failed to adhere to the agreement's provisions and issued a ruling accordingly. It mandated that the employer adjust its practices to be compliant with the agreement, including making necessary changes to rostering and rest periods.

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.