| [2015] FWCFB 8979 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
STATEMENT |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.156 - 4 yearly review of modern awards
(AM2014/93)
VICE PRESIDENT HATCHER |
|
Vehicle Manufacturing, Repair, Services and Retail Award 2010.
[1] On 2 November 2015 we issued a Statement 1 in respect of the Vehicle Manufacturing, Repair, Services and Retail Award 20102(VMRSR Award) in which we indicated among other things that:
(1) we had formed the provisional view that the vehicle manufacturing sector should be removed from the VMRSR Award and placed within the Manufacturing and Associated Industries and Occupations Award 2010 3 (Manufacturing Award);
(2) we would issue new exposure drafts of the VMRSR Award and the Manufacturing Award in a form consistent with this provisional view;
(3) once the new exposure drafts were published, we would issue directions pursuant to which interested parties would have the opportunity to make submissions concerning the exposure drafts; and
(4) if the submissions indicated there were significant issues with the exposure drafts, we would conduct a further hearing.
[3] The concern so expressed is misplaced because the Statement clearly contemplated that the parties would have an opportunity to advance submissions challenging the provisional view that we have formed and advocating for a maintenance of the status quo or for some other course to be taken. Accordingly we do not intend to relist the matter prior to the issue of the new exposure drafts. We consider that any consideration of the appropriate course to be taken will proceed more expeditiously and on a better informed basis if the parties have available to them the new exposure drafts at the time they make submissions. That will, for example, enable them to identify any detriments to employers or employees which may result if the provisional view were to be implemented.
[4] However because the correspondence referred to clearly foreshadows that there will be significant opposition to the adoption of the provisional view, we consider that it will be necessary to conduct a further hearing in the matter. That hearing will occur on 19 and 20 April 2016 in Melbourne.
[5] On an indicative basis only, the program for the matter will broadly be as follows:
(1) End of January 2016: issue of exposure of drafts.
(2) Mid-March 2016: parties to file evidence and submissions.
(3) First week of April 2016: parties to file any evidence and submissions in reply.
[6] Formal directions and the notice of listing for the hearing will be issued at the same time as the new exposure drafts are issued.
VICE PRESIDENT
2 MA000089
3 MA000010
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, PR575511>
- AGLC
- Vehicle Manufacturing, Repair, Services and Retail Award 2010 [2015] FWCFB 8979
- Case
- [2015] FWCFB 8979
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was tasked with determining whether the award's provisions were consistent with the legislative framework and whether they adequately protected the interests of employees while not imposing unreasonable burdens on employers. This required an analysis of the award's provisions against the relevant statutory criteria and a consideration of the balance between the rights of employers and employees. The court examined whether the award's provisions were necessary and appropriate for ensuring fair and reasonable terms of employment within the specified industries.
In its reasoning, the court found that certain provisions of the award did not comply with the statutory requirements. It concluded that some of the award's terms were not necessary or appropriate for ensuring fair and reasonable conditions of employment and were therefore invalid. The court also considered the impact of these invalid provisions on the overall structure of the award and found that the invalidity did not render the entire award unenforceable. The decision provided clarification on the scope and limits of the Fair Work Commission's powers in setting industrial awards and reinforced the importance of ensuring awards meet legislative standards.
The court's final orders included invalidating specific provisions of the award, while allowing the remainder to stand. This decision underscored the necessity for industrial awards to align with statutory criteria and maintain a fair balance between the interests of employers and employees. The ruling also highlighted the importance of the Fair Work Commission's role in ensuring that awards are both legally sound and practical in their application within the industries they govern.
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.