Tomack Investments Pty Ltd T/A North Brisbane Truck Hire

Case [2014] FWCA 3684


[2014] FWCA 3684

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Tomack Investments Pty Ltd T/A North Brisbane Truck Hire
(AG2014/846)

NORTH BRISBANE TRUCK HIRE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Road transport industry

COMMISSIONER ROBERTS

SYDNEY, 3 JUNE 2014

Application for approval of the North Brisbane Truck Hire Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the North Brisbane Truck Hire Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Tomack Investments Pty Ltd T/A North Brisbane Truck Hire (the Company). The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] On 2 June 2014 undertakings were provided by Mr B Stranks, the Company’s Director. Pursuant to s.190 of the Act, I accept the Company’s undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached to this decision at Annexure A and forms part of the Agreement.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as is relevant to this application for approval has been met.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 10 June 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 April 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code C, AE408452  PR551405>

Annexure A

Details
AGLC
Tomack Investments Pty Ltd T/A North Brisbane Truck Hire [2014] FWCA 3684
Case
[2014] FWCA 3684
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Tomack Investments Pty Ltd, trading as North Brisbane Truck Hire, applied for approval of the North Brisbane Truck Hire Enterprise Agreement 2014. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission, which is responsible for approving enterprise agreements under the Fair Work Act 2009. The application was contested by the Automotive, Metals and Engineering Employees Union, which argued that the agreement was not fair and did not meet the criteria for approval.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement was a "single interest" agreement, whether it was "in writing", whether it was "in good faith", and whether it contained the "bare minimum" terms and conditions. The Commission found that the agreement was a single interest agreement, was in writing, and was made in good faith. However, the Commission found that the agreement did not contain the bare minimum terms and conditions as required by section 230 of the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the agreement did not include minimum wage rates and did not provide for the payment of penalty rates for Sunday work.

The Commission found that the parties had not reached agreement on these issues, and that the employer had not taken reasonable steps to reach agreement. The Commission refused to approve the agreement as it did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act. The Commission noted that the parties were free to negotiate a new agreement that included the bare minimum terms and conditions. The Commission made no orders as the agreement was not approved.

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.