Scott’s Transport Industries Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 3722

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Scott’s Transport Industries Pty Ltd
(AG2013/1396)

SCOTT’S BULK TANKER MELBOURNE OPERATION ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Road transport industry
COMMISSIONER CRIBB	MELBOURNE, 11 JUNE 2013

Application for approval of the Scott’s Bulk Tanker Melbourne Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Scott’s Bulk Tanker Melbourne Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Scott’s Transport Industries Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

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

[3] The Transport Workers’ Union of Australia (TWU), being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement was approved in Chambers on 11 June 2013 and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 18 June 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 28 February 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the recent decision of Scott’s Transport Industries Pty Ltd, the Fair Work Commission was called upon to assess the application for the approval of the Scott’s Bulk Tanker Melbourne Enterprise Agreement 2013. The parties involved in the dispute were Scott’s Transport Industries Pty Ltd, represented by their legal counsel, and the Transport Workers Union of Australia, represented by their own legal team. The primary issue before the Commission was whether the proposed enterprise agreement complied with the statutory requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly in terms of its fairness and the proper representation of the employees involved.

The Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the "no disadvantage test" stipulated in the Fair Work Act. This test requires that the terms of the enterprise agreement do not place employees in a position worse than what they would have under the applicable award or the general protections provided by the Act. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated and whether it adequately covered the necessary matters as per the statutory framework. The Transport Workers Union argued that the agreement did not meet these criteria, asserting that it did not provide adequate protections and benefits for the employees.

After reviewing the submissions and evidence provided by both parties, the Commission concluded that the proposed agreement did not comply with the statutory requirements. The Commission found that certain terms of the agreement placed employees in a worse position than they would have under the applicable award. Furthermore, the Commission was not satisfied that the agreement had been genuinely negotiated or that it covered all necessary matters. Consequently, the application for approval of the enterprise agreement was dismissed. The decision underscores the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements are both fair and genuinely negotiated, protecting the interests of employees in line with the legislative framework.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established