the Applicant v Kalmar Equipment (Australia) Pty Ltd
Citation: [2026] FWC 2886
What happened
the Applicant, employed by Kalmar Equipment (Australia) Pty Ltd as a Site Mechanical Technician Level 2, disputes interpretations of their enterprise agreement with the Maritime Union of Australia. The dispute revolves around overtime rates, public holiday entitlements when working or not working on those days, and whether hours can be averaged across his rostered week off. the Applicant's roster involves alternating day and evening shifts, with two weeks off every eight weeks. Kalmar argues for specific interpretations based on the employee’s roster type, while the Applicant seeks broader application of certain clauses.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission (FWC) is tasked with determining how to interpret the enterprise agreement between the Applicant and Kalmar Equipment. The FWC acknowledges the dispute centres on overtime rates, public holiday entitlements for both working and non-working days, and whether hours can be averaged across his rostered week off. the Commissioner noted that the Applicant's questions boiled down to these three matters. The decision did not provide a final determination but outlined the issues in dispute and the arguments presented by each party. Further consideration is needed to resolve the specific clauses’ application.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure their enterprise agreements are clear and unambiguous regarding overtime rates, public holiday entitlements, and averaging of hours. If different interpretations exist, provide clear guidance to employees to avoid disputes. Reviewing how classifications are used across an agreement is also important to prevent confusion.
What it means for employees
Employees should carefully review their enterprise agreements and seek clarification from their union or employer if they believe the terms are being misinterpreted. Understanding the nuances of clauses related to overtime, public holidays, and averaging can help ensure proper compensation and entitlements.
Want this applied to your situation?
Reading the decision is free. FairWork Mate goes further — it reads the full case library and applies precedents like this one to your specific facts, citing the cases as it reasons. General information, not a guaranteed outcome or legal advice.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2026fwc2886.pdfWant more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The AI advisor answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus — awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts — with a citation to the underlying decision on every answer.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. Full-corpus advisor access is a paid product — Business Solo from $99/mo, 50% off your first 3 months for the first 100 signups.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.
Free forever. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
This summary was drafted from the published decision and reviewed before publishing. It is general information, not legal advice. For your specific situation, speak to the Fair Work Ombudsman (13 13 94) or a qualified lawyer. About these summaries & corrections →