ENTERPRISE AGREEMENTS – dispute about matter arising under agreement – s.739 Fair Work Act 2009 – application to deal with dispute in accordance with dispute settlement procedure in Kentz P/L Ichthys Onshore Construction Greenfields Agreement (agreement) – dispute over application clause 19 of agreement, income protection insurance provisions and claim respondent had not paid income protection insurance – applicant submitted agreement requires respondent to pay income protection insurance into certain funds – respondent submitted was meeting obligations under agreement, although through different insurer – debate as to role of Commission in resolving dispute – whether Commission should (or could) determine income protection insurance policy to be paid relevant employees – agreed there were a number of threshold questions to be answered before Commission could consider if it had and should exercise powers to determine income protection insurance policy – Commission satisfied had jurisdiction to deal with dispute – Commission further held ‘approved insurer’ in context of clause 19(a) of agreement is an insurer offering relevant income protection insurance specified in paragraphs (1), (2) or (3) of clause; intention of clause is that income protection insurance specified in clause 19(a) be insurance taken out for relevant class of employees for as long as it remains available; if no other income protection insurance is agreed between relevant parties, listed products are default products for as long as they remain available and meet requirements of clause 19; should insurance no longer be available, parties should confer with view to reaching agreement as to an insurer/insurance product which is like insurance to that which is no longer available; there is no prohibition on parties agreeing to an alternative product that meets requirements of clause 19(a), use of phrase ‘such as’ is permissive in this respect; the 1.4% cap on cost of policy is maximum limit on cost of policy, agreement does not allow for additional contributions by employees; and cost of employer contribution to relevant Approved Worker Entitlement Fund and to approved insurer not part of employee’s gross earnings for purpose of clause 19 – Commission directed parties to confer on resolution of underlying dispute, that is, income protection insurance to be provided for relevant employees – Commission advised it was not understood at this point in time that insurance product specified in clause 19(a)(1) was no longer available – Commission held applicant required to advise Commission within six weeks of progress in discussions and/or of need to re-list matter. Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Kentz P/L
…
