Sydney Metro Security Services Pty Ltd

[2018] FWC 6528

[2018] FWC 6528

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Sydney Metro Security Services Pty Ltd
(AG2017/716)

COMMISSIONER GREGORY MELBOURNE, 23 OCTOBER 2018

Application for approval of the Sydney Metro Security Services Enterprise Agreement 2017.

[1] On 8 March 2017 Sydney Metro Security Services Pty Ltd made application under s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (“the Act”) for approval of the Sydney Metro Security Services Enterprise Agreement 2017. The application was accompanied by a Form F17 Employer’s Statutory Declaration made by the Managing Director of Sydney Metro Security Services Pty Ltd, Mr Assem Sari. It indicated that the Agreement intended to cover two employees.

[2] The proposed Agreement also contained what are often described as “loaded rates,” with a single rate being proposed for all hours worked in place of the base rates and additional penalty rate entitlements that apply in the underlying Security Services Industry Award 2010.

[3] The Commission subsequently raised a number of issues concerning the application and after various exchanges the matter was set down for hearing. However, the President of the Commission had also previously referred five applications for approval of enterprise agreements to a Full Bench of the Commission for further consideration. Each of those proposed Agreements provided for “loaded” or higher rates of pay which were intended to incorporate, in whole or part, the penalty rates and other monetary benefits for which separate provisions are generally made in the applicable Modern Award. Those proceedings became known as the “Loaded Rates Agreements” matter. Three of the proposed Agreements that were referred to the Full Bench by the President involved businesses operating in the security industry.

[4] The Full Bench handed down its decision on 28 June 2018. It found that the three Agreements involving the security industry were not able to be approved. Its conclusions at pages 49 and 50 of the decision are of particular relevance in this context. The Full Bench had particular concerns about the provisions in the Agreements relating to casual employment, and was not satisfied that these could be dealt with by way of the provision of further undertakings. The Full Bench also set out a series of principles to be applied generally in regard to the consideration of applications involving enterprise agreements which contain loaded rates. These are set out at pages 43 and 44 of the decision.

[5] As a consequence of the Full Bench decision the Commission wrote to the Applicant’s representative on 21 August 2018 indicating that it was now difficult to conclude that the proposed Agreement could be approved, and the Applicant might therefore wish to consider withdrawing the application. However, it was also indicated that if the Applicant still intended to pursue the matter it would be set down for hearing to enable any further evidence and submissions to be provided in support of the application.

[6] The Commission was subsequently advised by the Applicant’s representative that it no longer acted on behalf of the Applicant, and on 30 August 2018 the Commission accordingly sent an email to the Applicant in similar terms to the correspondence dated 21 August 2018. No response has been received to that correspondence.

[7] On 26 September 2018 the Commission again wrote to the Applicant in similar terms. That correspondence concluded by stating:

“However, in the light of the previous correspondence referred to above if no response has been received to this letter from you by close of business on Friday, 5 October 2018 then it will be assumed that you do not intend to pursue the matter and the application will be dismissed.”

[8] No response has been received to that correspondence as at the date of this decision. Section 587 of the Act provides the Commission with broad powers to dismiss an application. Given the circumstances referred to above I consider it now appropriate to dismiss the present application on the basis that it has no reasonable prospects of success. The application is accordingly dismissed.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR701665>