Allied Pinnacle Pty Limited

[2025] FWCA 2675

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Allied Pinnacle Pty Limited

(AG2025/2095)

ALLIED PINNACLE ALTONA SITE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2025-2026

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER MIRABELLA	MELBOURNE, 12 AUGUST 2025

Application for approval of the Allied Pinnacle Altona Site Enterprise Agreement 2025-2026

An application has been made for the approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Allied Pinnacle Altona Site Enterprise Agreement 2025-2026. The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act). It has been made by Allied Pinnacle Pty Limited (the Employer). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

Correspondence was sent to the parties from my Chambers seeking clarification as to whether casual employees may not be better off overall as schedule 2 of the Agreement states that casuals receive 125% of the grade 1 pay rate. As such, it was unclear whether casual employees would be precluded from receiving higher rates for being classified at a higher level. The Employer responded advising that it has not recruited a casual employee and that there is no intention for the employer to do so. I am satisfied for the purpose of s.193A(6), and determine under s.193A(6A), of the Act, that casual employment is not a type of employment that is reasonably foreseeable as that is relevant for the better off overall test. The Employer also submitted that if it were to employ casual employees, it does not otherwise preclude payment of higher rates if they are employed at a higher classification.

I observe the following provisions are likely to be inconsistent with the National Employment Standards (NES):

Clause 23.22 – Compassionate Leave
Clause 23.14 – Additional requirements in respect of Sick Leave
Clause 23.29 – Cultural Leave

The Agreement contains a NES precedence clause in clause 8.2. I am satisfied the more beneficial entitlements of the NES will prevail where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the NES.

The Employer provided written undertakings to address certain BOOT issues. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Schedule 5 of the Agreement. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement. The undertakings are taken to be a term of the Agreement.

Subject to the undertakings referred to above, 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.

The United Workers Union (UWU) 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 UWU.

The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 19 August 2025. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2026.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

In Allied Pinnacle Pty Limited, the applicant sought approval of the Allied Pinnacle Altona Site Enterprise Agreement 2025-2026. The applicant's employees were covered by the Metal and Engineering Industries Award 2010. The applicant argued that the proposed agreement would provide greater flexibility in the workplace and improve productivity and efficiency. The application was opposed by the Electrical Trades Union of Australia.

The primary issue before the court was whether the proposed agreement would have the effect of significantly disadvantaging employees covered by the relevant award. The court had to consider whether the proposed agreement provided employees with benefits equal to, or greater than, the award. The court also had to consider whether the proposed agreement provided for adequate protections for employees.

The court found that the proposed agreement did not significantly disadvantage employees covered by the relevant award. The court found that the proposed agreement provided employees with benefits equal to, or greater than, the award, and that it provided for adequate protections for employees. The court also found that the proposed agreement would provide greater flexibility in the workplace and improve productivity and efficiency. The court approved the proposed agreement.

The court ordered that the Allied Pinnacle Altona Site Enterprise Agreement 2025-2026 be approved, and that it be registered as a registered agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009. The court also ordered that the applicant and the union provide a copy of the agreement to the Fair Work Commission within five business days of the date of the order.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established