| Summary |
DISPUTE - Dispute over interpretation of employment agreement (EA") - Applicant claimed underpaid over three separate periods - Applicant sought declaration that entitled, under various sequential EA’s, to sums claimed - Respondent claimed no entitlements, as claimed, payable - Applicant began employment on individual employment agreement with specified hourly rate - When collective employment agreement (“CEA”) negotiated applicant became party to CEA but negotiated more favourable hourly rate as an additional term - Respondent claimed additional term in place as applicant not received pay rise in several years - When second and third CEAs negotiated new additional term not renegotiated - Authority found variation in favour of applicant at ratification of first CEA to compensate for rate falling behind that of other employees - Found that as variation to first CEA, additional term had currency of parent document and required re-negotiation if to form part of subsequent CEAs - Additional term not renegotiated and evidence showed no intention for additional term to be carried over - Application dismissed" |