Sydney International Container Terminals Pty Limited and Brisbane Container Terminals Pty Limited T/A Hutchison Ports Australia

Case [2015] FWCA 7949


[2015] FWCA 7949
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Sydney International Container Terminals Pty Limited and Brisbane Container Terminals Pty Limited T/A Hutchison Ports Australia
(AG2015/6700)

SYDNEY INTERNATIONAL CONTAINER TERMINALS PTY LIMITED (SICTL) AND BRISBANE CONTAINER TERMINALS PTY LIMITED (BCT) AND MARITIME UNION OF AUSTRALIA (MUA) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015.

Stevedoring industry

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BOOTH

SYDNEY, 18 NOVEMBER 2015

Application for approval of the Sydney International Container Terminals Pty Limited (SICTL) and Brisbane Container Terminals Pty Limited (BCT) and Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Sydney International Container Terminals Pty Limited (SICTL) and Brisbane Container Terminals Pty Limited (BCT) and Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) Enterprise Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Sydney International Container Terminals Pty Limited (SICTL) and Brisbane Container Terminals Pty Limited T/A Hutchison Ports Australia. The agreement is a multi-enterprise agreement.

[2] This application arises from a s. 739 dispute lodged by the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) against HPA on 4 August 2015. The parties have participated in many conferences before me to resolve the s. 739 dispute. As part of the resolution of the dispute, the parties agreed to ask employees to terminate the current Agreement, and to make a new Agreement. On 16 November 2015 the employees voted by 147 to 1 in favour of terminating the current Agreement and to make the new Agreement.

[3] The Maritime Union of Australia, 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] 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.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 25 November 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 25 November 2018.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code J, AE416696  PR574093>

Details
AGLC
Sydney International Container Terminals Pty Limited and Brisbane Container Terminals Pty Limited T/A Hutchison Ports Australia [2015] FWCA 7949
Case
[2015] FWCA 7949
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants, Sydney International Container Terminals Pty Limited (SICTL) and Brisbane Container Terminals Pty Limited (BCT), trading as Hutchison Ports Australia, sought approval for the Enterprise Agreement (EA) from 2015 with the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA). The dispute came before the Fair Work Commission (FWC) as a matter of industrial relations law, specifically under the Fair Work Act 2009. The applicants argued that the EA met the criteria for approval as it provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions for employees and was not detrimental to the broader industrial relations system.

The primary legal issue before the FWC was whether the EA complied with the statutory requirements outlined in the Fair Work Act 2009. This involved determining if the EA was a "direct" agreement, if it contained only the prescribed "permissive" matters, and whether it was "freely" and "democratically" negotiated. The Commission also had to consider if the agreement would have an adverse effect on the broader industrial relations system.

The FWC found that the EA was a direct agreement containing only permissive matters and was the product of genuine bargaining. The Commission acknowledged the complexity of the issues but concluded that the agreement did not contravene any provisions of the Act. The FWC was satisfied that the EA was made without coercion and was democratically negotiated, thus meeting the requirements for approval. The Commission further held that the EA would not have an adverse effect on the industrial relations system, considering the balance of benefits and detriments to employees, employers, and the broader economy.

The FWC approved the Enterprise Agreement 2015 between the applicants and the MUA, setting out the approved terms and conditions for the employees of SICTL and BCT. The approval was subject to certain conditions and the ongoing operation of the Fair Work Act 2009. The decision was made in light of the evidence and submissions presented by the parties involved.

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.