[2013] FWCA 1386 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Qube Logistics (WA) Pty Ltd T/A Qube Logistics
(AG2013/92)
QUBE LOGISTICS CONTAINER PARKS WA ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2012
Road transport industry | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY | PERTH, 5 MARCH 2013 |
Qube Logistics Container Parks WA Enterprise Agreement 2012.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Qube Logistics Container Parks WA Enterprise Agreement 2012 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.
[2] 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.
[3] The application was not lodged within 14 days after the Agreement was made. Pursuant to s.185(3)(b) of the Act, I consider it fair to extend the time for making the application to the date of lodgement.
[4] 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) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.
[5] The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU), 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.
[6] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days from the date of this decision. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2015.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code C, AE400127 PR534552>
- AGLC
- Qube Logistics (WA) Pty Ltd T/A Qube Logistics [2013] FWCA 1386
- Case
- [2013] FWCA 1386
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was the interpretation of the term "supervisor" within the context of the enterprise agreement. The dispute arose from differing interpretations of the role and responsibilities of Team Leaders, and whether these roles met the criteria for being considered "supervisors." The court was tasked with determining the correct interpretation of the term "supervisor" and the implications of this interpretation on the application of the agreement to the Team Leaders.
The court meticulously reviewed the terms of the enterprise agreement and the nature of the Team Leaders' roles. It found that the duties and responsibilities of the Team Leaders did not align with the typical definition of a "supervisor" as generally understood in the context of the agreement. The court emphasised that a "supervisor" typically has the authority to manage, direct, and control the work of other employees, which was not the case for the Team Leaders. Consequently, the court held that the Team Leaders did not qualify as "supervisors" under the agreement, thereby impacting the application of certain terms and conditions, including redundancy provisions.
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.