Prosegur Australia Pty Limited

Case [2014] FWCA 4571


[2014] FWCA 4571
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Prosegur Australia Pty Limited
(AG2014/6067)

PROSEGUR AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED, ROCKHAMPTON DEPOT ARMOURED VEHICLE OPERATORS’, ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014-2017

Security services

COMMISSIONER GREGORY

MELBOURNE, 6 AUGUST 2014

Application for approval of the Prosegur Australia Pty Limited, Rockhampton Depot Armoured Vehicle Operators’, Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Prosegur Australia Pty Limited, Rockhampton Depot Armoured Vehicle Operators’ Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017 (the Agreement). The application is made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Prosegur Australia Pty Limited. It is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] On reviewing the application and the copy of the proposed Agreement I am generally satisfied that its terms and conditions satisfy the requirements of the “better off overall test,” particularly as the proposed rates of pay in the Agreement are significantly higher than those contained in the underlying Transport (Cash in Transit) Award 2010.

[3] However, in its form F18 – Statutory Declaration the Transport Workers’ Union, who are a bargaining representative for the Agreement, raised some additional matters. It, firstly, seeks an undertaking in regard to clause 8 “Further Agreements and Local Matters” on the basis that the employer was prepared to provide the same undertaking in regard to a similar clause in another agreement already approved by the Commission.

[4] The Union also stated that the Agreement does not contain a clear definition of shift worker, or specifically provide for a fifth week of annual leave for shift workers, (although it is noted clause 46.1 does indicate “Annual leave will be paid in accordance with the Fair Work Act as amended.”) The Union accordingly sought a further undertaking in regard to these issues.

[5] The Commission subsequently contacted the employer who indicated it was prepared to provide undertakings in the terms sought by the Union. Those undertakings are in the following terms:

    “Any agreement made under clause 8 of the Agreement will be consistent with the rest of the Agreement and will not be used to opt out of the Agreement or to be applied in a manner contrary to clause 14 Model Flexibility Term.”

    “A shift worker under the terms of the Agreement is defined as a seven day shift worker who is regularly rostered to work on Sundays and public holidays. A person engaged as a shift worker, as defined, is entitled to 5 weeks paid annual leave each year or the pro rata of equivalent of that amount for any period of employment of less than twelve months.”

[6] I am satisfied that the proposed undertakings do not cause financial detriment to any employee to be covered by the proposed Agreement, or result in substantial changes to it. They are accordingly accepted and will form part of the Agreement. Copies of the undertakings provided by the employer are also attached to this decision.

[7] I am also satisfied that each of the other requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188, as are relevant to this application for approval, have been met.

[8] 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.

[9] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 13 August 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 12 August 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Attachment A:

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE408994  PR552902>

Details
AGLC
Prosegur Australia Pty Limited [2014] FWCA 4571
Case
[2014] FWCA 4571
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Prosegur Australia Pty Limited sought approval of its Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017 for armoured vehicle operators at its Rockhampton Depot. The application was brought before the Fair Work Commission. The dispute centred around the terms and conditions of employment specified in the agreement, with particular focus on whether the agreement complied with the Fair Work Act 2009. The central issue was whether the agreement met the requirements for being a "protected action" agreement, which is necessary for it to be approved by the Commission. This required consideration of whether the agreement had been made in good faith, whether it contained minimum terms and conditions of employment, and whether it complied with other statutory requirements.

The Commission examined the process by which the agreement was negotiated and whether it was done in good faith. It also considered whether the agreement contained the minimum terms and conditions mandated by the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether any proposed terms were inconsistent with the Act. In reaching its decision, the Commission took into account the arguments presented by Prosegur Australia and the responses from other interested parties. The Commission found that the agreement was made in good faith and contained all necessary minimum terms and conditions. It also determined that the agreement did not include any terms that were inconsistent with the Act.

Consequently, the Commission approved the Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017 for Prosegur Australia Pty Limited, Rockhampton Depot Armoured Vehicle Operators. The approval was effective from the date of the Commission's decision. This decision provides clarity on the terms of employment for the armoured vehicle operators and ensures that the agreement complies with the statutory framework established by the Fair Work Act 2009.

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.