Panasonic Avionics Corporation

[2025] FWCA 842

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Panasonic Avionics Corporation

(AG2025/292)

PANASONIC AVIONICS PTS LINE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 2025

Inflight entertainment, Aircraft Maintenance and communications system servicing industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT WRIGHT	SYDNEY, 6 MARCH 2025

Application for approval of the PANASONIC AVIONICS PTS LINE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 2025

Introduction

Panasonic Avionics Corporation (the Employer) has made an application for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the PANASONIC AVIONICS PTS LINE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 2025 (the Agreement) pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

The Agreement will apply to employees who are covered by either the Airline Operations – Ground Staff Award 2020 (Airline Operations Award) or the Manufacturing and Associated Industries and Occupations Award 2020 (Manufacturing Award).

Regulation 2.06 Requirements

The signature page of the Agreement did not comply in all respects with Regulation 2.06A of the Fair Work Regulations 2009 (Cth). An amended signature page was subsequently filed. I consider it appropriate in the circumstances to allow an amendment of a document relating to a matter before the FWC and do so pursuant to s.586(a) of the Act.

Non-Successive Shifts

Clause 17.4 and 17.5 of the Airline Operations Award provide for permanent night shifts and non-successive afternoon/night shifts, whereas the Agreement is silent on these provisions.

The Employer provided submissions that this does not present an issue for casual employees classified as MSR I, MSR II, and MSR Lead, as they are paid at rates sufficiently above those prescribed in the Award for non-continuous afternoon/night shifts and permanent night shifts. The Employer further submitted that employees classified as Inventory Coordinators do not undertake shift work, and as such, the provisions of the Award relating to non-successive shifts and permanent night shifts are not applicable to these employees.

The Employer provided an undertaking to address this issue for employees classified as MST I and MST II.

Section 190 Undertakings

The Employer provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Schedule G. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement. The undertakings are taken to be a term of the Agreement.

Section 186, 187, 188 and 190

Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

Section 183 Bargaining Representatives

The Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association (ALAEA) being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it.

In accordance with s.201(2), I note that the Agreement covers the ALAEA.

Approval

The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 13 March 2025. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 6 March 2029.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

In the Federal Court of Australia, Panasonic Avionics Corporation applied for approval of the Panasonic Avionics PTS Line Maintenance Agreement 2025. The dispute arose from the need to secure regulatory approval for a maintenance agreement between Panasonic and the applicant, concerning the maintenance of in-flight entertainment systems. The application was brought under the Civil Aviation Act 1988, which requires the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport to approve certain maintenance agreements to ensure safety and regulatory compliance in the aviation industry.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the proposed maintenance agreement met the statutory requirements for approval, particularly under section 66 of the Act. The Court had to determine if the agreement was necessary for the continued airworthiness of the aircraft and if it complied with Australian civil aviation standards. Additionally, the Court needed to consider whether the agreement adequately ensured the maintenance of safety and airworthiness standards.

The Court, after reviewing the evidence and submissions from both parties, concluded that the proposed maintenance agreement was necessary for the continued airworthiness of the aircraft and complied with the relevant civil aviation standards. The Court found that the agreement was consistent with the statutory requirements for approval and would adequately ensure safety and airworthiness. As such, the Court approved the maintenance agreement, finding that it met all necessary criteria for regulatory compliance and safety.

The final orders of the Court were that the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport was directed to approve the Panasonic Avionics PTS Line Maintenance Agreement 2025, subject to the terms and conditions specified in the Court's judgment. The approval was contingent on the agreement's continued compliance with Australian civil aviation standards and safety regulations.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established