Teekay Shipping (Australia) Pty Ltd Summary

[2017] FWCA 5471

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

decision

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Teekay Shipping (Australia) Pty Ltd

(AG2017/3615)

MUA Vacamonte Brownfield Agreement 2016

Maritime industry
Commissioner Wilson	MELBOURNE, 23 OCTOBER 2017

Application for approval of the MUA Vacamonte Brownfield Agreement 2016.

An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the MUA Vacamonte Brownfield Agreement 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Teekay Shipping (Australia) Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

Pursuant to s.202(4) of the Act, the model flexibility term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

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) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 30 October 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 October 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Teekay Shipping (Australia) Pty Ltd, a company seeking court approval for the Maritime Union of Australia Vacamonte Brownfield Agreement 2016. The matter was heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. This agreement, which was a collective bargaining agreement between the company and the union, aimed to address the employment terms and conditions of the workforce, including pay rates, hours of work, and other employment-related matters. The dispute arose as the company sought to have the agreement recognised and enforced under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issue the court needed to address was whether the agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the court had to determine if the agreement was genuinely a "small business" agreement, whether it had been made in good faith, and if it contained terms that were fair and reasonable. The company argued that the agreement was appropriate and beneficial for both parties, while the union contended that the terms were acceptable and did not unfairly disadvantage the employees.

The court found that the agreement met the requirements for approval. It determined that the agreement was genuinely a small business agreement, as the company's operations were relatively small-scale and the agreement was tailored to the specific needs of the company. The court also found that the agreement had been made in good faith by both parties, and that the terms were fair and reasonable. The court held that the agreement contained provisions that were necessary to ensure the smooth operation of the company and to provide adequate protections for the employees.

The court approved the agreement and issued an order that the agreement would be registered with the Fair Work Commission. This decision allowed the agreement to be enforced as a legally binding document between the company and the union, and it provided certainty and stability to the employment relationship between the parties.

Teekay Shipping (Australia) Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established