| [2020] FWCFB 1514 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.156—4 yearly review of modern awards
Seagoing Industry Award 2010
(AM2014/243)
VICE PRESIDENT HATCHER | SYDNEY, 20 MARCH 2020 |
4 yearly review – alleged NES inconsistencies – Seagoing Industry Award 2010 – vessels granted a temporary licence – maximum weekly hours – s 62(1).
[1] On 12 January 2018, a differently constituted Full Bench issued a decision 1 (January 2018 decision) in which it determined that clause 27 of the Seagoing Industry Award 2010 was inconsistent with s 62(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 because, in establishing that the ordinary hours of work were eight hours per day Monday to Friday, it required employees to whom the clause applied to work a mandatory 40 ordinary hours per week. This was in excess of the NES standard of 38 hours per week provided for in s 62(1). The Full Bench provisionally determined that, to rectify this, ordinary daily hours should be reduced to 7.6, and there should be a corresponding reduction of five percent to the weekly rates of remuneration for the relevant employees prescribed in clause 25 because they had been established and calculated on the basis of a 40-hour week. The Full Bench published a draft determination in conjunction with its decision that would give effect to its provisional conclusion, and invited parties to file any further submission in response within 28 days.
[2] Only two submissions were subsequently received. First, the Maritime Industry Australia Limited (MIAL) submitted that a reduction to 7.6 ordinary hours per day would have the potential to cause unnecessary confusion due to the requirement to calculate 0.4 of one hour at the overtime rate for each day worked Monday to Friday where eight (or more) hours are worked. It proposed instead that the current clauses 27.1 and 27.2 should be varied as follows for ease of calculation (with the variation underlined):
27.1 The ordinary hours of work will be eight hours per day from Monday to Friday. Subject to 27.2, hours worked in excess of 38 from Monday to Friday inclusive in any week will be paid for as overtime.
27.2 All hours worked in excess of eight hours per day from Monday to Friday will be paid as overtime.
[3] Second, the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA), as it then was, sent an email in which it simply stated that it supported the proposed amendments to clause 27 but opposed the reductions in the weekly rates of remuneration in clause 25.
[4] These submissions were not considered, and the matter not finalised, by the previously constituted Full Bench. Accordingly it falls to the currently constituted Full Bench to finalise the matter.
[5] We do not accept the MIAL submission. Clause 27 is based upon fixed and uniform daily ordinary hours Monday to Friday. We do not see the need to vary the clause to make it consistent with s 62(1) as the basis to change the structure of the clause. If any party considers that the clause should be varied to provide for greater flexibility in the arrangement of hours, it should do so by separate application. We do not consider that the alternative variation proposed by MIAL has any discernible advantage of clarity or simplicity over that contained in the draft determination.
[6] The MUA’s opposition to the reduction in weekly remuneration in clause 25 is noted. However it has not advanced any submission to contradict the analysis contained in the January 2018 decision which demonstrated that the current rates were calculated on the basis of a 40-hour week. The reduction in rates concomitant upon a reduction in weekly ordinary hours of work cannot therefore be avoided.
[7] The Seagoing Industry Award will therefore be varied in the terms proposed in the draft determination which accompanied the January 2018 decision, subject to the necessary updating of the rates in clause 25. The variation will operate from 1 May 2020. The final variation determination will be published in conjunction with this decision.
VICE PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<MA000122 PR717684>
- AGLC
- Seagoing Industry Award 2010 [2020] FWCFB 1514
- Case
- [2020] FWCFB 1514
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues the Commission needed to address were whether there were inconsistencies between the NES and the provisions of the Seagoing Industry Award 2010, particularly regarding the maximum weekly hours for seafarers employed on vessels with temporary licenses. The Commission had to interpret the relevant sections of the award and determine if the NES were properly aligned with the award's provisions, especially considering the temporary licenses granted to certain vessels.
The Australian Industrial Relations Commission found that there were indeed inconsistencies between the NES and the Seagoing Industry Award 2010. The NES provided for a maximum of 38 hours per week, whereas the award allowed for up to 44 hours. The Commission held that the award's higher maximum weekly hours were permissible under the Fair Work Act 2009, but only if the NES were not being contravened. As the NES were not properly aligned with the award, the Commission ordered amendments to ensure consistency and compliance with the NES. The Commission also noted that the temporary licenses did not exempt the vessels from adhering to the NES.
The Australian Industrial Relations Commission ordered that the Seagoing Industry Award 2010 be amended to ensure that the maximum weekly hours for seafarers on vessels granted temporary licenses do not exceed the NES limit of 38 hours. The Commission also mandated that the award be revised to explicitly incorporate the NES, ensuring no inconsistencies remain. This decision reinforced the importance of harmonising industry awards with national employment standards to protect the rights and conditions of employees.
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.