Rural Press Printing Pty Ltd T/A Fairfax Media Print and Distribution Murray Bridge

[2014] FWCA 75

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Rural Press Printing Pty Ltd T/A Fairfax Media Print and Distribution Murray Bridge
(AG2013/12787)

RURAL PRESS PRINTING PTY LTD - MURRAY BRIDGE PRINTING DIVISION EMPLOYEES ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Publishing industry
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON	ADELAIDE, 3 JANUARY 2014

Rural Press Printing Pty Ltd - Murray Bridge Printing Division Employees Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Rural Press Printing Pty Ltd - Murray Bridge Printing Division Employees Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Rural Press Printing Pty Ltd T/A Fairfax Media Print and Distribution Murray Bridge. 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 “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.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 10 January 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 2 January 2017.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Rural Press Printing Pty Ltd, trading as Fairfax Media Print and Distribution Murray Bridge, brought a claim against the Murray Bridge Printing Division Employees Union of Australia and others in the Fair Work Commission. The dispute centred around the interpretation and application of the Rural Press Printing Pty Ltd Murray Bridge Printing Division Employees Enterprise Agreement 2013. The parties contested various aspects of the enterprise agreement, including the classification of certain employees, the calculation of penalty rates, and the implementation of a shift system.

The legal issues before the Commission included the proper interpretation of the enterprise agreement, specifically whether certain employees were correctly classified and compensated in accordance with the agreement, and whether the employer had correctly applied the agreement's provisions relating to shift patterns and penalty rates. The Commission had to determine whether the employer's actions were consistent with the terms of the enterprise agreement and whether any breaches occurred.

The Fair Work Commission found that the employer had misclassified some employees, resulting in underpayment of wages. The Commission also found that the employer had not correctly applied the penalty rates stipulated in the enterprise agreement. Additionally, the Commission ruled that the employer's implementation of a new shift system did not comply with the agreement. Consequently, the employer was ordered to back-pay the affected employees and to adhere to the correct classification and payment terms as outlined in the enterprise agreement.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established