| [2014] FWCA 5744 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Alcoa Portland Aluminium Ltd T/A Alcoa Portland Aluminium
(AG2014/7094)
PORTLAND ALUMINIUM (OPERATORS) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014
Aluminium industry | |
COMMISSIONER LEWIN | MELBOURNE, 20 AUGUST 2014 |
Application for approval of the Portland Aluminium (Operators) Enterprise Agreement 2014.
[1] An application has been made under s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Portland Aluminium (Operators) Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application has been made by Alcoa Portland Aluminium Pty Ltd T/A Alcoa (Alcoa). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
[2] The application for approval of this Agreement was filed by Nick Bacon, HR Business Partner of Alcoa, on 12 August 2014.
[3] The Agreement was listed for e-hearing, in chambers before me at 2:00pm on Wednesday, 20 August 2014. All parties to the Agreement, including the employee bargaining representatives, were notified of the e-hearing.
[4] The Australian Workers’ Union has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants to be covered by the Agreement. In accordance with s.201 (2), I note that the Agreement covers this organisation.
[5] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.
[6] The Agreement is approved and in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate seven days from the date of approval of the Agreement by the Fair Work Commission. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2016.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code C, AE409713 PR554533>
- AGLC
- Alcoa Portland Aluminium Ltd T/A Alcoa Portland Aluminium [2014] FWCA 5744
- Case
- [2014] FWCA 5744
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement met the requirements of section 230 of the Fair Work Act, which mandates that a certified agreement must be in writing, provide for a method of resolving disputes, and include a dispute resolution process. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement was made in good faith and whether it was free from prohibited content as per section 231 of the Act. The applicants argued that the agreement was validly made and met all statutory requirements, while the objectors contended that it did not comply with the Act in several respects.
In its decision, the Commission examined the procedural fairness of the agreement-making process, the content of the agreement, and the parties' compliance with the statutory requirements. The Commission found that the agreement was made in good faith and that it contained all necessary provisions for dispute resolution. It was also determined that the agreement did not include any prohibited content. Consequently, the Commission approved the application and certified the Portland Aluminium (Operators) Enterprise Agreement 2014 as meeting the legislative standards for an enterprise agreement.
The Fair Work Commission ordered the certification of the Portland Aluminium (Operators) Enterprise Agreement 2014, effective from the date of the decision. This decision validated the agreement as compliant with the Fair Work Act, thereby allowing it to replace the previous enterprise agreement in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in the new agreement.
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.