The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia

Case [2022] FWC 134


[2022] FWC 134

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.512—Right of entry

The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia

(RE2021/1203)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 28 JANUARY 2022

Application for a right of entry permit for Thomas Billy Mckissack Green – permit previously issued - permit never received – order revoking missing permit – permit reissued.

  1. The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (APESMA) applied under s.512 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for the issue of a right of entry permit to its official, Mr Thomas Billy Mckissack Green. The Commission subsequently issued Mr Green a right of entry permit which will expire on 16 December 2024.

  1. Mr Green’s permit is one of the 37 missing entry permits referred to in decision [2022] FWC 123. As indicated in that decision, in order for Mr Green to hold a valid entry permit, the missing permit must be revoked and a permit must be reissued. In order to issue a permit to Mr Green, I need to be satisfied that he is a fit and proper person to hold a permit under the Act taking into account the permit qualification matters. The relevant statutory considerations set out in [2022] FWC 123 are adopted here and need not be repeated.

Consideration

  1. In support of its application APESMA filed declarations by Mr Green and Mr Stuart Small, National Secretary (the Declarations).

Permit qualification matters – s.513(1)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f)

  1. According to the Declarations:

·   Mr Green has received appropriate training about the rights and responsibilities of a permit holder by undertaking a course of training on the subject of a federal right of entry conducted on 6 October 2021 (s.513(1)(a) of the Act));[1]

·   Mr Green has never been convicted of an offence against an industrial law (s.513(1)(b) of the Act);[2]

·   Mr Green has never been convicted of an offence against a law of the Commonwealth, State, Territory or a foreign country, involving conduct described in s.513(1)(c) of the Act;[3]

·   Neither Mr Green nor any other person has been ordered to pay a penalty under this Act or any other industrial law in relation to action taken by him (s.513(1)(d) of the Act);[4]

·   Mr Green has not had any entry permit issued under Part 3-4 of the Act or a similar law of the Commonwealth revoked, suspended or had imposed conditions on any such permit (s.513(1)(e) of the Act);[5]

·   Mr Green has not had cancelled, suspended or imposed conditions on any right of entry permit for industrial or occupational health and safety purposes that Mr Green held under a State or Territory industrial law or a State or Territory occupational health and safety law (s.513(1)(f)(i) of the Act);[6] and

·   Mr Green has not been disqualified from exercising or applying for a right of entry permit for industrial or occupational health and safety purposes under a State or Territory industrial law or a State or Territory occupational health and safety law (s.513(1)(f)(ii) of the Act).[7]

  1. I accept that the information disclosed in the Declarations concerning these matters is accurate and correct. These matters weigh in favour of a conclusion that Mr Green is a fit and proper person to hold a right of entry permit.

Permit qualification matters – s.513(1)(g)

  1. There are no other matters of which I am aware that I consider relevant to the determination of whether Mr Green is a fit and proper person to hold an entry permit.

Conclusion

  1. Pursuant to s.603 of the Act, the entry permit formerly issued to Mr Green by decision of the delegate is revoked with effect from the date of this decision. A revocation order is separately issued in PR737825.

  1. Taking in account the permit qualification matters, for the reasons earlier stated I am satisfied that Mr Green is a fit and proper person to hold an entry permit.

  1. A permit will be reissued to Mr Green separately.


DEPUTY PRESIDENT


[1] Form F42, Declaration by proposed permit holder dated 20 October 2021 at (a) and ACTU Certificate of Completion dated 6 October 2021

[2] Ibid at (b)

[3] Ibid at (c)

[4] Ibid at (d)

[5] Ibid at (e)

[6] Ibid at (f)

[7] Ibid at (g)

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR737722>

Details
AGLC
The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia [2022] FWC 134
Case
[2022] FWC 134
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (APESMA) applied to the Fair Work Commission for the issuance of a right of entry permit for Mr. Thomas Billy Mckissack Green. Mr. Green had previously been issued a permit which was not received and was subsequently revoked. The Commission is required to decide whether Mr. Green is a fit and proper person to hold a permit under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The Commission considered the declaration by Mr. Green and Mr. Stuart Small, National Secretary of APESMA, which outlined that Mr. Green had received appropriate training, had no convictions against industrial or criminal laws, and had no penalties imposed under any industrial law. Additionally, Mr. Green had no permit revocations, suspensions, or conditions imposed on any permit under any law. The Commission accepted the information provided in the declarations as accurate and correct. These matters supported the conclusion that Mr. Green is a fit and proper person to hold a right of entry permit.

The Deputy President was satisfied that Mr. Green is a fit and proper person to hold a permit, taking into account the permit qualification matters. The entry permit formerly issued to Mr. Green was revoked, and a new permit will be issued to Mr. Green separately.

The Commission revoked the previous entry permit issued to Mr. Green and will reissue a new permit to him separately.

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.