The Australian Workers Union (claimant) brought a claim on behalf of one of its members against Chevron Australia Pty Ltd (respondent). The claimant alleged the respondent should have paid a meal allowance claimed by the affected worker for a lunch on 14 December 2023 while the affected worker was in transit from a work site. The claimant argued that this failure breached:

• clause 16.3(d)(1)(C) of the Chevron Wheatstone Downstream Operations Enterprise Agreement 2023 (Agreement); and
• contravened section 50 and section 323 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FWA).

The claimant sought orders for the underpayment, interest on judgment, and a civil penalty.

There were no factual circumstances in dispute, the primary issue to be determined was the meaning of clause 16.3(d)(1)(C) in the Agreement (meal allowance clause). The claimant argued that the clause entitled the affected worker to the meal allowance because he was required to be accommodated overnight during his journey. The respondent contended that the meal allowance clause did not require payment for lunch on 14 December 2023, as the affected worker was not required to be accommodated on that day.

The Industrial Magistrate was required to examine the meaning and purpose of the meal allowance clause within the context of the whole Agreement while applying the principles relevant to construing industrial agreements. After considering both parties’ interpretations, the Industrial Magistrate concluded that the meal allowance clause only entitles an employee to the allowance when the relevant time of the day (breakfast, lunch, or dinner) coincides with the requirement for overnight accommodation. Since the affected worker did not require overnight accommodation at lunchtime on 14 December 2023, he was not entitled to the meal allowance.

As a result, the Court dismissed the claim, ruling that the respondent did not contravene the Agreement by not paying the meal allowance claim. The decision can be read here.