ENTERPRISE AGREEMENTS – dispute about matter arising under agreement – s.739 Fair Work Act 2009 – applicant notified Commission of a dispute arising under the terms of the BlueScope Steel Western Port Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017 (the Agreement) – applicant wanted to engage labour hire provider to provide four workers to meet short-term increase in workload which was opposed by respondent which wanted increased workload to be covered by overtime – respondent raised jurisdictional objection – contended Commission did not have jurisdiction to deal with alleged dispute – submitted jurisdiction of Commission to deal with a dispute was dependent on applicant complying with each step of the dispute resolution process in clause 11 of the Agreement – further submitted subject matter of the dispute was about the operation of clause 13.1.3 of the Agreement which was not the subject of discussion between the parties – applicant submitted dispute could be referred to the Commission because it had met the necessary requirements of the dispute resolution procedure in the Agreement – considered construction of clause 11 of the Agreement – Commission found clause 11.9 of the Agreement unambiguously provided for unresolved disputes to be referred to the Commission – whether applicant could refer a dispute to the Commission if the procedure set out in clauses 11.5, 11.6 and 11.7 had not been followed and followed in sequence – whether applicant engaged in discussions which met clauses 11.6 and 11.7 – Commission held discussions which took place met requirements of clauses 11.6 and 11.7 – found contention of respondent that operation of clause 13.1.3 was not material – satisfied applicant followed procedural steps of clause 11 as far as was possible in relation to subject matter of dispute – held Commission had jurisdiction to deal with the dispute – jurisdictional objection dismissed – matter to proceed to arbitration. BlueScope Steel Limited t/a BlueScope v Australian Workers’ Union
…
