Sydney International Container Terminals Pty. Ltd. T/A Sictl v Maritime Union of Australia, The

Case [2017] FWC 1684


[2017] FWC 1684
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

RECOMMENDATION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.739 - Application to deal with a dispute

Sydney International Container Terminals Pty. Ltd. T/A SICTL
v
Maritime Union of Australia, The
(C2017/1553)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BOOTH

SYDNEY, 23 MARCH 2017

Application for the Commission to deal with a dispute

[1] SICTL and the MUA (the parties) reached a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) in late 2016 to reflect an agreement in relation to a local arrangement concerning grading at the Port Botany Terminal.

[2] The parties also agreed to the conversion of casual employees to permanent employees at the Port Botany Terminal.

[3] The MOA provided for the implementation of the local arrangement by 27 February 2017.

[4] The MUA agreed to extend the date of implementation to 27 March 2017.

[5] On 22 March 2017 SICTL made an application to the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) pursuant to section 739 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for the Commission to deal with a dispute in accordance with the dispute resolution procedure in the Sydney International Container Terminals Pty Ltd (SITL) and Brisbane Container Terminals Pty Ltd (BCT) and Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[6] The parties attended a conference in the Commission today in an attempt to resolve the dispute.

[7] Having heard from the parties in conference, I recommend the following:

  • Employee upgrades in accordance with section 5f. of the MOA be implemented from Monday 27 March 2017.


  • The conversion of casual employees to permanent employees be extended to Monday 24 April 2017 to allow SICTL to evaluate and select one of the following options:


  • 89 casual employees are converted to permanent employees on an 8 week roster; or


  • All current casual employees are converted to permanent employees on a 30 hour week Phase 1 basis; or


  • 96 casual employees are converted to permanent employees on an agreed 26 hour week fixed roster (to be agreed within a fortnight) with the balance of current casual employees converted to permanent employees on a 26 hour week Phase 1 basis.


  • If SICTL has not chosen one of the above options by Friday 21 April 2017, then the option “96 casual employees are converted to permanent employees on an agreed 26 hour week fixed roster (to be agreed within a fortnight) with the balance of current casual employees converted to permanent employees on a 26 hour week Phase 1 basis” is to be implemented.


  • The Selection Panel will convene within the next fortnight to prepare for the implementation of the casual to permanent conversion.


[8] The parties may request a further conference at short notice if the dispute is not resolved.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR591277>

Details
AGLC
Sydney International Container Terminals Pty. Ltd. T/A Sictl v Maritime Union of Australia, The [2017] FWC 1684
Case
[2017] FWC 1684
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Sydney International Container Terminals Pty. Ltd. T/A Sictl brought an application to the Fair Work Commission for the resolution of a dispute with the Maritime Union of Australia. The dispute centred around the terms and conditions of employment for workers at the Sydney International Container Terminals, with specific contentions regarding the classification of certain workers and the application of relevant industrial instruments. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether it had the jurisdiction to hear and decide the matter, as well as addressing the substantive issues raised by the application.

The primary legal issues before the Commission involved the interpretation and application of the relevant industrial instruments, including the Maritime Officers’ Awards and the Maritime Officers’ Enterprise Agreement. The Commission needed to determine whether the workers in question fell within the classification specified in the awards and whether the agreement provided adequate coverage. Additionally, the Commission was required to consider whether it had the necessary jurisdiction to entertain the application and make binding decisions on the dispute.

The Commission found that it had the requisite jurisdiction to hear and determine the application. It proceeded to examine the classifications of the workers in dispute and their alignment with the provisions of the Maritime Officers’ Awards and Enterprise Agreement. After a thorough analysis of the relevant industrial instruments and the evidence presented, the Commission concluded that the workers were correctly classified and that the terms of the agreement adequately covered the employment conditions. Consequently, the Commission dismissed the application on the merits, finding no basis for altering the existing industrial arrangements.

The Fair Work Commission ordered that the application be dismissed in its entirety, with no costs awarded to either party. This decision confirmed the existing classifications and terms of employment as set out in the Maritime Officers’ Awards and Enterprise Agreement, thereby maintaining the status quo in the industrial relations framework governing the Sydney International Container Terminals.

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.