ENTERPRISE AGREEMENTS – dispute about matter arising under agreement – s.739 Fair Work Act 2009 – application to deal with a dispute under Glen Cameron Nominees P/L NSW EBA 2015-2019 – dispute concerned interpretation of meal break provisions in Agreement and their application to shift workers – whether employees working afternoon or night shift are entitled to a paid meal break under Agreement – clause 2 of Agreement relied on ‘where a clause of this Agreement is inconsistent with a clause of the Award in part or in whole, the clause in this Agreement shall prevail to the complete exclusion of the Award clause’ – clause 18 of Agreement states an employee is allowed a 30 minute unpaid meal break – clause 24 of Award states all shiftworkers will be entitled to a 20 minute paid meal break – TWU sought determination stating that provisions of clause 24 of Award applied to employees of respondent performing shift work and covered by Agreement – TWU submitted shift worker provisions in Award must be relied upon as Agreement makes no specific reference to shift work – respondent submitted Agreement is silent on providing for a paid meal break for shift work so no such entitlement applies – submitted that an inconsistency was created as meal break provisions contained at clause 18 of Agreement so clause 2 applied – acknowledged that Agreement does not make specific reference to engagement of employees as shift workers – stated they applied shift penalties to shift workers as prescribed under the Award – Golden Cockerel cited – Kucks cited noting a narrow or pedantic approach to interpretation of awards should be avoided – Commission referred to s.109 of Constitution and High Court approaches to inconsistencies – Commission held as a matter of legal interpretation, specific provisions will ordinarily override those which are general in nature – stated that Award made separate provision for shift workers and their various entitlements and Agreement was silent – found it artificial to rely on general meal break provision under Agreement as being inconsistent with specific meal break provisions under Award – found respondent’s interpretation was a narrow or pedantic approach to interpretation – determination as sought by TWU to be issued. Transport Workers’ Union of Australia v Glen Cameron Nominees P/L t/a Glen Cameron Trucking
…
