DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Patrick Auto, Bulk & General Ports Pty Ltd T/A Patrick Bulk Port Services
(AG2015/5820)

PATRICK BULK PORT SERVICES NEWCASTLE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Stevedoring industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT BOOTH	SYDNEY, 23 OCTOBER 2015

Application for approval of the Patrick Bulk Port Services Newcastle Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Patrick Bulk Port Services Newcastle Enterprise Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Patrick Bulk Port Services. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] The Agreement does contain a consultation term, however, it is not a consultation term which complies with s.205(1) of the Act. I note that the model consultation term is taken, pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, to be a term of the Agreement.

[3] The Maritime Union of Australia, 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) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] 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.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 30 October 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 April 2017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, Patrick Auto, Bulk & General Ports Pty Ltd, trading as Patrick Bulk Port Services, applied for approval of the Patrick Bulk Port Services Newcastle Enterprise Agreement 2015. The application was made under section 232 of the Fair Work Act 2009, seeking the Commission's determination that the agreement meets the "better off overall test" and "no disbenefit test" as specified in the Act. The application was contested by the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) and the Australian Workers' Union (AWU), who argued that the proposed agreement did not meet these statutory requirements.

The primary legal issues the Commission had to address were whether the proposed enterprise agreement would result in employees being "better off overall" and whether it would cause any employee to be "worse off" compared to their previous conditions of employment. The Commission considered various factors, including wage increases, improved conditions, and the overall financial implications of the agreement on both the employer and the employees. The MUA and AWU contended that the proposed changes did not sufficiently improve the employees' conditions or financial benefits to meet the statutory tests.

After careful consideration of the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, the Commission found that the proposed agreement did indeed meet the better off overall test and the no disbenefit test. The Commission highlighted that the agreement provided for wage increases, improved working conditions, and other benefits that, when considered in their entirety, resulted in employees being better off overall. Additionally, the Commission was satisfied that no employee would be worse off as a result of the agreement. Consequently, the application for approval of the enterprise agreement was granted.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Patrick Bulk Port Services Newcastle Enterprise Agreement 2015. The decision confirmed that the agreement satisfied the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009 and was therefore valid and enforceable. The approval came into effect on the date of the Commission's decision, ensuring that the terms and conditions set out in the agreement would apply to the relevant employees.

Patrick Auto, Bulk & General Ports Pty Ltd T/A Patrick Bulk Port Services

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established