| [2018] FWCA 5541 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Port Phillip Sea Pilots Plant Co Pty Ltd
(AG2018/1533)
PORT PHILLIP SEA PILOTS QUEENSCLIFF LAUNCH CREW ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2018
Maritime industry | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT COLMAN | MELBOURNE, 4 SEPTEMBER 2018 |
Application for approval of the Port Phillip Sea Pilots Queenscliff Launch Crew Enterprise Agreement 2018.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Port Phillip Sea Pilots Queenscliff Launch Crew Enterprise Agreement 2018 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Port Phillip Sea Pilots Plant Co Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
[2] The Employer has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. 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.
[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, and on the basis of the material contained in the application and accompanying statutory declaration, 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.
[4] The Agreement was approved on 6 September 2018 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 13 September 2018. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 5 September 2021.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE500020 PR700050>
Annexure A
- AGLC
- Port Phillip Sea Pilots Plant Co Pty Ltd [2018] FWCA 5541
- Case
- [2018] FWCA 5541
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the provisions of the enterprise agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act. The Maritime Union of Australia did not oppose the application but argued that certain provisions, particularly those related to overtime and penalty rates, did not comply with the Act's requirements. The Commission had to determine whether these provisions met the "better off overall test" and whether the agreement was procedurally sound.
The Commission found that the agreement was procedurally valid and that the parties had followed the necessary steps in its creation. Regarding the substantive provisions, the Commission determined that the provisions concerning overtime and penalty rates did indeed meet the "better off overall test". The Commission considered the overall benefits and detriments to the employees and concluded that the agreement was fair and reasonable. Consequently, the Commission approved the application and the enterprise agreement was duly registered.
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.