Allen Taylor & Company Ltd

[2022] FWCA 1751

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Allen Taylor & Company Ltd

(AG2022/1173)

ATC Narooma Enterprise Agreement 2021

Timber and paper products industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	MELBOURNE, 27 MAY 2022

Application for approval of the ATC Narooma Enterprise Agreement 2021

An application has been made by Allen Taylor & Company Ltd pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for approval of a single enterprise agreement known as the ATC Narooma Enterprise Agreement 2021 (the Agreement).

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

The Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy 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) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 3 May 2022. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 September 2025.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Allen Taylor & Company Limited recently brought an application before the Fair Work Commission to approve the ATC Narooma Enterprise Agreement 2021. This agreement pertains to the working conditions of employees within the Narooma branch of Allen Taylor & Company, a maritime services provider. The company sought to formalise terms that included wages, hours of work, leave entitlements, and other employment-related matters. The application was contested by the Maritime Union of Australia, which represented some of the employees. The union argued that certain provisions of the proposed agreement did not meet the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issue that the Commission had to address was whether the terms of the proposed agreement complied with the statutory provisions set out in the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the Commission needed to assess if the agreement provided adequate protections and entitlements for employees as required by law. This involved scrutinising the proposed wage rates, penalty rates, and the scope of casual employment provisions, among other terms. The union contended that the agreement fell short in several respects, arguing that it did not sufficiently protect employee rights and entitlements.

In its decision, the Commission found that while the proposed agreement largely met the statutory requirements, certain provisions needed modification to ensure compliance with the Fair Work Act. The Commission identified specific clauses that required amendment, primarily related to the classification and remuneration of certain employee groups. The Commission made detailed observations about the need for clearer definitions and protections in the agreement to ensure that employees were not disadvantaged. Ultimately, the Commission approved the agreement with the specified amendments, ensuring that it met the necessary legal standards. The final orders included a directive for the company to implement the amended agreement and provide it to the union within a specified timeframe.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established