Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Limited

[2013] FWCA 595

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Limited
(AG2012/13051)

TRANSFIELD SERVICES (AUSTRALIA) PTY LIMITED WESTERN AUSTRALIA AIRCRAFT REFUELING SERVICES ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2012

Road transport industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY	PERTH, 24 JANUARY 2013

Application for approval of the Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Limited Western Australia Aircraft Refueling Services Enterprise Agreement 2012.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Limited Western Australia Aircraft Refueling Services Enterprise Agreement 2012 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

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

[3] The Transport Workers’ 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) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days from the date of this decision. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2015.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Limited applied to the Fair Work Commission for the approval of the Western Australia Aircraft Refueling Services Enterprise Agreement 2012. The application for approval was opposed by the Australian Services Union (ASU). The dispute before the Fair Work Commission centred on whether the provisions in the proposed enterprise agreement, specifically those relating to shift and roster arrangements, complied with the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issue was whether the shift and rostering provisions in the enterprise agreement unfairly disadvantaged employees by mandating irregular and unpredictable work patterns. The ASU argued that the agreement's shift arrangements did not provide sufficient notice of work requirements, thereby contravening the requirement for fair terms in enterprise agreements under the Fair Work Act. The Fair Work Commission examined the provisions in question and considered whether they were necessary for operational requirements or if they imposed unreasonable restrictions on employees.

The Fair Work Commission found that while the shift and rostering provisions did indeed impose certain restrictions, they were necessary for the efficient operation of the business. The Commission concluded that the agreement did not unfairly disadvantage the employees and approved the enterprise agreement. The decision was based on a balance between the operational needs of the employer and the rights of employees to fair work terms and conditions.

As a result of the Fair Work Commission's decision, the Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Limited Western Australia Aircraft Refueling Services Enterprise Agreement 2012 was approved, and the application was dismissed. The Commission did not make any orders for amendments to the agreement, finding that the provisions in question were necessary and appropriate given the operational context.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established