Shaw Contracting Pty Ltd

Case [2016] FWCA 992


[2016] FWCA 992

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement
Shaw Contracting Pty Ltd T/A Shaw Contracting
(AG2016/2195)

SHAW CONTRACTING PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Tasmania

COMMISSIONER LEE MELBOURNE, 24 FEBRUARY 2016

Application for variation of the Shaw Contracting Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1]        An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Shaw Contracting Pty

Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made by Shaw

Contracting Pty Ltd T/A Shaw Contracting (the Applicant) pursuant to section 210 of the Fair

Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2]        The application seeks approval of a variation to Schedule 6 clause 2 of the Agreement

detailed as follows:

 Schedule 6 clause 2(a) seeks to vary ordinary hours of work from an average of 40

hours per week, made up of 38 hours plus 2 reasonable additional hours, to 50 hours

per week which comprises of 12 reasonable additional hours.

 Schedule 6 clause 2(b) (previously clause 2 (a)) now outlines that the company must

not require or request an employee to work additional hours if they are unreasonable

having regard to sub clauses (i) – (vi). The clause is further varied with the addition

of sub clause (vi) which requires the company to have regard to any other matter

referred to in section 62 of the Act.

 The words ‘Any hours in excess of 40 hours per week will be reasonable in

accordance with the NES’ are deleted and the words ‘Subject to clause 2(j)’ are

inserted at the beginning of the Schedule 6 clause 2 (c).

 Schedule 6 clause 2(d) (previously clause 2(c)) is varied to insert the words ‘subject

to clause 2(j)’ at the beginning of the clause.

 Schedule 6 clause 2(f) (previously clause 2(e)) is varied by deleting the words

‘clause 2(c)’ and inserting the words ‘clause 2(d)’.

[2016] FWCA 992

 Schedule 6 clause 2(g) (previously clause 2(f)) is varied by deleting the words

‘clause 2(g)’ and inserting the words ‘clause 2(h)’.

 Schedule 6 Clause 2 (i) seeks to vary the Agreement through the insertion of the

clause which provides as follows:

“For service to meet the changing demands within the marketplace and provide

coverage, if special circumstances arise, after consultation, between the

Workplace Consultative Committee and management, variations can be made

to the ordinary hours of work for specific projects of processes. Any work

performed during 6.00pm and 6.00am Monday and Friday will attract a flat

shift loading of 50% of the Employee’s Base Hourly Rate, for all hours that the

Employee is engaged on those shifts.”

[3]        I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 of the Act as are relevant

to this application for approval have been met.

[4]        The variation is approved and the consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is

attached to this decision.

[5]        In accordance with s.216 of the Act, the variation operates from 24 February 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, AE401651 PR577068>

Details
AGLC
Shaw Contracting Pty Ltd [2016] FWCA 992
Case
[2016] FWCA 992
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Shaw Contracting Pty Ltd, the applicant sought approval for a variation to the Shaw Contracting Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made under section 210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The proposed variation primarily sought to increase the ordinary hours of work from an average of 40 hours per week to 50 hours per week and to include additional provisions concerning the circumstances under which additional hours could be requested and the conditions for shift loadings.

The court was required to determine whether the application met the statutory requirements for approval under section 210 and section 211 of the Act. The central legal issue was whether the proposed changes were in compliance with the Fair Work Act and whether they appropriately balanced the interests of both the employer and the employees.

The Commissioner found that the application met all relevant requirements of the Act. The Commissioner was satisfied that the application process was correctly followed, and that the proposed changes were in line with the legislative framework. The Commissioner approved the variation, noting that it would help meet the changing demands within the marketplace and provide coverage. The variation was set to operate from 24 February 2016, in accordance with section 216 of the Act. The approved variation was attached to the decision as a consolidated version of the Agreement.

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.