United Workers' Union v Serco Australia Pty Limited

[2025] FWC 595

[2025] FWC 595

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

RECOMMENDATION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.739 - Application to deal with a dispute

United Workers' Union
v

Serco Australia Pty Limited.

(C2025/1140)

COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY MELBOURNE, 27 FEBRUARY 2025

Application to deal with a dispute under an enterprise agreement.

Background

[1]      The Applicant has filed an application under s.739 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) with respect to the redundancy provisions contained within clauses 25 & 26 of the Serco Immigration Services Enterprise Agreement 2023 (the Agreement).

[2]      The Respondent’s contract for the provision of Immigration and Detention services to the Department of Home Affairs has not been renewed.  Consequently, the provision of services for the immigration detention centres covered by the Agreement will soon transition to the incoming contractor (Secure Journeys).

[3]      The parties have categorised employees of the Respondent in Western Australia working at Yongah Hill Immigration Detention Centre and the Perth Immigration Detention Centre covered by the Agreement into three groups:

1)Employees of the Respondent who are being redeployed with the Respondent. (Category 1 employees);

2)Employees who have no intention to commence employment with the incoming contractor and have not been redeployed with the Respondent. (Category 2 employees); and

3)Employees who intend to commence employment with the incoming contractor. (Category 3 employees).

[4]      The parties agree that employees within Category 2 are entitled to redundancy under the Agreement. The parties are in dispute on the entitlement to redundancy of Category 3 employees.

[5]      The Respondent is seeking to be satisfied employees in Category 2 meet the requirements of a “bona fide redundancy” for the purposes of the payment of redundancy entitlements.  To this end the Respondent is seeking employees in Category 2 provide an undertaking that they do not intend to commence employment with the incoming contractor and will not commence employment within a period of potential continuity. 

[6]      The Dispute was the subject of a conciliation conference before the Commission on 26 February 2025.

[7]      In the interest of resolving part of the dispute, the parties have agreed to the Commission issuing this recommendation.

[8]      It is understood and accepted that the legal rights of the partes with respect to all other matters subject to this dispute application are preserved.

Recommendation

[9]      Employees of the Respondent employed at the Yongah Hill Immigration Detention Centre or the Perth Immigration Detention Centre who fall within the meaning of Category 2 employees who do not wish to accept an offer of employment with the incoming contractor, are recommended to confirm the following in writing to the Respondent:

1)Confirmation that they have not accepted or entered into any arrangement for employment with the incoming contractor;

2)Confirmation that they wish to be advised by the Respondent of their last day of employment, preferably the transition date of their centre; and

3)In exchange for the Respondent paying to the employee their entitlement to redundancy benefits pursuant to the Agreement and applying the concessional tax treatment for a bona fide redundancy payment, it is the Commission’s recommendation that the employee confirm to the Respondent that they will not enter employment with the incoming contractor for the four month period commencing from their last day of employment with the Respondent.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR784808>