Prixcar Services Pty Ltd

Case [2016] FWCA 6769


[2016] FWCA 6769
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Prixcar Services Pty Ltd
(AG2016/4782)

PRIXCAR TRANSPORT SERVICES PTY LTD AND TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AUSTRALIA FAIR WORK AGREEMENT 2016-2019

Road transport industry

COMMISSIONER GREGORY

MELBOURNE, 21 SEPTEMBER 2016

Application for approval of the PrixCar Transport Services Pty Ltd and Transport Workers Union of Australia Fair Work Agreement 2016-2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the PrixCar Transport Services Pty Ltd and Transport Workers Union of Australia Fair Work Agreement 2016-2019 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Prixcar Services Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant 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] The rates of pay referred to in the undertakings have been provided to and considered by the Commission. The rates will be kept confidential, as requested by the parties, on the Commission’s file.

[4] 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.

[5] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[6] The Transport Workers’ 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) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[7] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 28 September 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code J, AE421232  PR585613>

ANNEXURE A

Details
AGLC
Prixcar Services Pty Ltd [2016] FWCA 6769
Case
[2016] FWCA 6769
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Prixcar Services Pty Ltd, sought approval of a Fair Work Agreement with the Transport Workers Union of Australia. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission, which was required to consider whether the agreement was in the best interests of the employees and complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred on whether the proposed agreement met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act and whether it was in the best interests of the employees covered by the agreement.

The key legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement provided for terms and conditions that were fair and reasonable, and whether it complied with the statutory provisions regarding minimum standards. The applicant argued that the agreement met all statutory requirements and was in the best interests of the employees. The Commission considered the arguments presented by both parties, and examined the terms of the agreement in detail. It was important to ensure that the agreement provided for adequate protections for employees and that it complied with the statutory minimum standards.

The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement did not meet the statutory requirements in several respects, and was therefore not in the best interests of the employees. The Commission noted that the agreement did not provide for adequate protections for employees in relation to working time and leave entitlements, and did not comply with the statutory minimum standards in these areas. The Commission also found that the agreement did not provide for adequate protections in relation to termination of employment. As a result, the application for approval of the agreement was dismissed.

The Fair Work Commission made no orders approving the agreement, as it did not meet the statutory requirements and was not in the best interests of the employees. The Commission emphasised the importance of ensuring that agreements provide for adequate protections for employees and comply with the statutory minimum standards. The decision highlights the need for careful consideration of the terms of any proposed agreement, and the importance of ensuring that agreements meet the statutory requirements and are in the best interests of the employees.

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.