DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

SeaRoad Logistics Pty Ltd
(AG2016/1615)

SEAROAD LOGISTICS (WORKSHOP) FAIR WORK AGREEMENT 2015-2018

Vehicle industry
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 3 AUGUST 2016

Application for approval of the SeaRoad Logistics (Workshop) Fair Work Agreement 2015-2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the SeaRoad Logistics (Workshop) Fair Work Agreement 2015-2018 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by SeaRoad Logistics Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[4] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[5] The Agreement was approved on 3 August 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 10 August 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 September 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

SeaRoad Logistics Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the SeaRoad Logistics (Workshop) Fair Work Agreement 2015-2018. The applicant, SeaRoad Logistics, sought to have the agreement approved as a safety net agreement. The agreement contained various terms and conditions of employment for employees who were engaged in the workshop operations of SeaRoad Logistics. The dispute was heard by the Fair Work Commission, a specialist tribunal in Australia with jurisdiction to make decisions on matters related to employment and workplace relations.

The legal issues that the Commission was required to decide included whether the agreement met the requirements for approval as a safety net agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement provided for minimum terms and conditions of employment, whether it was consistent with the relevant national workplace determinations, and whether it provided for the protection of employees' rights and entitlements. The Commission also had to consider whether the agreement was made in good faith and whether it was consistent with the objects of the Fair Work Act.

The Commission found that the agreement met the requirements for approval as a safety net agreement. The agreement provided for minimum terms and conditions of employment, including minimum wages, leave entitlements, and other benefits. The Commission also found that the agreement was consistent with the relevant national workplace determinations and provided for the protection of employees' rights and entitlements. The Commission was satisfied that the agreement was made in good faith and was consistent with the objects of the Fair Work Act. The Commission approved the agreement as a safety net agreement.

The Fair Work Commission approved the SeaRoad Logistics (Workshop) Fair Work Agreement 2015-2018 as a safety net agreement. The Commission found that the agreement met the requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act and provided for minimum terms and conditions of employment, consistent with the relevant national workplace determinations and the objects of the Act. The agreement provides for the protection of employees' rights and entitlements and was made in good faith.

SeaRoad Logistics Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established