DECISION

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

Prosegur Australia Pty Limited
(AG2015/2179)

PROSEGUR AUSTRALIA, LANE COVE CASH PROCESSING ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014-2015

Clerical industry
COMMISSIONER CARGILL	SYDNEY, 23 MARCH 2015

Application for approval of the Prosegur Australia, Lane Cove Cash Processing Enterprise Agreement 2014-2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Prosegur Australia, Lane Cove Cash Processing Enterprise Agreement 2014-2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by the Prosegur Australia Pty Limited. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The New South Wales Local Government, Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines and Utilities Union 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.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 30 March 2015. The nominal expiry date is 21 December 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Prosegur Australia Pty Limited applied for approval of the Prosegur Australia, Lane Cove Cash Processing Enterprise Agreement 2014-2015 before the Fair Work Commission. The agreement in question pertained to the employment conditions of cash processing employees at Prosegur's Lane Cove facility. The application was contested by the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees' Association, which raised concerns about the fairness and adequacy of the proposed terms.

The primary legal issue before the commission was whether the proposed agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. This required the commission to assess whether the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions, and whether it was certified by an independent certifier as meeting the "better off overall test". The association argued that the agreement did not meet these criteria, particularly in relation to the proposed conditions for casual employees.

The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement did not meet the "better off overall test" for casual employees, as the proposed conditions were not more favourable than the applicable award or registered agreement. The commission also noted that the agreement did not adequately address the concerns raised by the association regarding the treatment of casual employees. Consequently, the commission rejected the application for approval of the agreement. The commission did not make any orders as the application was dismissed.

Prosegur Australia Pty Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established