| [2024] FWCA 4377 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement
Abbe Corrugated Pty Ltd T/A Abbe Corrugated Pty Ltd
(AG2024/4137)
ABBE CORRUGATED PTY LTD AGREEMENT 2024
| Graphic Arts | |
| COMMISSIONER PERICA | MELBOURNE, 9 DECEMBER 2024 |
Abbe Corrugated Pty Ltd Agreement 2024
An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Abbe Corrugated Pty Ltd Agreement 2024 (the Agreement). The application is made under section 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
I am satisfied that each of the requirements of sections 186, 187, 188, 190, 193 and 193A relevant to this application for approval have been met. The Agreement does not cover all the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in sections 186(3) and (3A), I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.
Pursuant to s 205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.
The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union being a bargaining representative for the Agreement has given notice under section 183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. I therefore note the Agreement covers the organisation under section 201(2) of the Act.
The Agreement is approved today 9 December 2024. It will operate from 16 December 2024 as required by section 54 of the Act. The nominal expiry date is 30 June 2027.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE527137 PR782211>
- AGLC
- Abbe Corrugated Pty Ltd T/A Abbe Corrugated Pty Ltd [2024] FWCA 4377
- Case
- [2024] FWCA 4377
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission were primarily concerned with the interpretation of specific clauses within the agreement and whether these were being correctly applied. The crux of the dispute lay in the interpretation of the leave provisions, particularly annual leave and sick leave entitlements. The company argued that certain employees were accruing leave at a rate that was inconsistent with the terms of the agreement, while the employees claimed that the company's practices were unfair and contrary to the spirit of the agreement.
In its decision, the Commission meticulously examined the language of the agreement and considered relevant precedents. The Commission found that the company's interpretation of the leave provisions was not aligned with the plain language of the agreement. The Commission held that the employees were entitled to accrue leave at the rates specified in the agreement, and the company's practices were therefore unlawful. The Commission made clear that any variation to the terms of the agreement must be agreed upon by both parties and properly documented, a process which had not been followed in this case. The Commission ordered the company to rectify its practices and compensate the affected employees for any leave entitlements that had been improperly calculated.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.