Adbri Masonary Pty Ltd

Case [2019] FWCA 2520


[2019] FWCA 2520
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Adbri Masonary Pty Ltd
(AG2018/5998)

ADBRI MASONRY & THE AUSTRALIAN WORKERS UNION OF EMPLOYEES QUEENSLAND STAPYLTON SITE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2018

Manufacturing and associated industries

DEPUTY PRESIDENT SAUNDERS

NEWCASTLE, 12 APRIL 2019

Application for approval of the Adbri Masonry Pty Ltd & The Australian Workers Union of Employees Queensland Stapylton Site Enterprise Agreement 2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Adbri Masonry Pty Ltd & The Australian Workers Union of Employees Queensland Stapylton Site Enterprise Agreement 2018 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by Adbri Masonary Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Employer has provided written undertakings (the Undertakings). A copy of the Undertakings is attached in Annexure A to this decision. I am satisfied that the effect of accepting the Undertakings is not likely to:

(a) cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement; or

(b) result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] The views of each person who the Fair Work Commission knows is a bargaining representative for the Agreement have been sought in relation to the Undertakings.

[4] Pursuant to subsection 190(3) of the Act, I accept the Undertakings.

[5] Subject to the Undertakings, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[6] The Australian Workers’ Union being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[7] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 19 April 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2021.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE502899  PR706888>

Annexure A

Details
AGLC
Adbri Masonary Pty Ltd [2019] FWCA 2520
Case
[2019] FWCA 2520
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Adbri Masonry Pty Ltd recently applied to the Fair Work Commission for the approval of the Adbri Masonry Pty Ltd & The Australian Workers Union of Employees Queensland Stapylton Site Enterprise Agreement 2018. The application was made by the employer, Adbri Masonry Pty Ltd, under section 232 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Australian Workers Union of Employees, representing the employees, opposed the application, contending that certain provisions of the agreement were not fair or appropriate. The dispute centred on the fairness of specific clauses concerning wages, conditions of employment, and dispute resolution mechanisms within the proposed enterprise agreement.

The legal issues the court had to address were whether the proposed enterprise agreement met the statutory requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the agreement contained provisions that were not fair and appropriate in all respects, as mandated by section 233 of the Act. This involved scrutinising the content of the agreement to ensure that it did not disadvantage employees in terms of pay, conditions, or dispute resolution processes. The court also had to consider whether the agreement had been fairly negotiated and whether it complied with other relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act.

In delivering its decision, the Fair Work Commission found that while most provisions of the agreement were fair and appropriate, certain clauses relating to wage progression and dispute resolution mechanisms were not suitable. The Commission identified that the wage progression clause was not aligned with industry benchmarks and could potentially disadvantage employees. Similarly, the dispute resolution mechanisms were deemed inadequate, as they did not provide sufficient avenues for employee representation. Consequently, the Commission refused to approve the agreement in its current form but granted conditional approval, subject to the negotiation and inclusion of more equitable terms. The final orders included a requirement for the parties to resubmit the agreement within a specified timeframe, with the specific changes necessary to meet the statutory requirements for approval.

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.