DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Unitrans Asia Pacific Pty Ltd T/A Unitrans Asia Pacific
(AG2017/1230)

UNITRANS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016 - 2019

Storage services
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 23 MAY 2017

Application for approval of the Unitrans Enterprise Agreement 2016-2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Unitrans Enterprise Agreement 2016-2019 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Unitrans Asia Pacific Pty Ltd T/A Unitrans Asia Pacific. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association 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.

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

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter involved Unitrans Asia Pacific Pty Ltd, trading as Unitrans Asia Pacific, and the Transport Workers Union of Australia. The union sought approval of the Unitrans Enterprise Agreement 2016-2019, which was to be registered under the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute was brought before the Fair Work Commission, a federal workplace relations tribunal in Australia. The union argued that the agreement, which set out terms and conditions of employment for its members, should be approved and registered as it complied with the statutory requirements for good faith bargaining and did not contain any provisions that were contrary to public interest.

The legal issues at hand were whether the agreement met the criteria for approval and registration under the Fair Work Act and if it adhered to the principles of good faith bargaining and did not include any provisions that were against the public interest. The union contended that the agreement was the result of genuine negotiations between the parties and did not contain any terms that would be detrimental to employees or the public. Unitrans Asia Pacific, on the other hand, raised concerns about certain provisions in the agreement that they believed could potentially impact their operational efficiency and financial viability.

The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement was indeed the product of good faith negotiations between the parties, and it did not contain any provisions that were contrary to the public interest. The Commission was satisfied that the union had met its burden of proving that the agreement met the necessary criteria for approval and registration. The Court held that the agreement was fair and reasonable, and it did not contain any terms that would be detrimental to the employees or the public. The Commission approved and registered the Unitrans Enterprise Agreement 2016-2019, as sought by the Transport Workers Union of Australia. The decision reinforced the importance of good faith bargaining and the need for agreements to be fair and reasonable for both parties involved.

Unitrans Asia Pacific Pty Ltd T/A Unitrans Asia Pacific

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established