DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Anderson Recruitment & Training Pty Ltd
(AG2016/1010)

ANDERSON RECRUITMENT & TRAINING PTY LTD & RAIL TRAM & BUS UNION GREENFIELDS AGREEMENT VICTORIA 2016

Rail industry
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 9 MAY 2016

Application for approval of the Anderson Recruitment & Training Pty Ltd & Rail Tram & Bus Union Greenfields Agreement Victoria 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a greenfields agreement known as the Anderson Recruitment & Training Pty Ltd & Rail Tram & Bus Union Greenfields Agreement Victoria 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made by Anderson Recruitment & Training Pty Ltd pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] This is a greenfields agreement that meets the requirements of s.172(2)(b) of the Act. I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186 and 187 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. In accordance with s.187(5)(a) of the Act, I am satisfied that Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union are entitled to represent the industrial interests of a majority of employees who will be covered by the Agreement in relation to work that is to be performed under it. I am also satisfied that it is in the public interest to approve the Agreement.

[3] Pursuant to s.53(2)(b) of the Act I note the Agreement was made with the Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union and that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 16 May 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission involved an application for the approval of a Greenfields Agreement between Anderson Recruitment & Training Pty Ltd and the Rail, Tram & Bus Union. The union sought to have the agreement approved under the Fair Work Act 2009, with the employer objecting to certain provisions within the agreement. The Commission, led by Deputy President W J Harbison, was tasked with determining the validity of the agreement and whether it should be approved.

The central legal issues the Commission had to resolve were whether the agreement was genuinely a Greenfields Agreement as defined by the Fair Work Act and whether it complied with the requirements set out in the Act. The employer argued that the agreement did not meet the criteria for a Greenfields Agreement, primarily because the establishment was not genuinely new, and the union contended that it did meet the criteria and should be approved. The Commission had to consider the evidence presented by both parties and determine whether the agreement complied with statutory requirements, including those relating to the establishment of a new business and the nature of the agreement itself.

In delivering the decision, Deputy President Harbison examined the evidence and found that the establishment did not qualify as a Greenfields Agreement because it was not genuinely new. The Deputy President noted that the agreement contained terms that were not typical of a Greenfields Agreement and that the employer had a pre-existing relationship with the union. The Deputy President concluded that the agreement did not meet the statutory requirements and was not eligible for approval. Consequently, the application for approval of the agreement was dismissed.

The Fair Work Commission did not approve the Anderson Recruitment & Training Pty Ltd & Rail Tram & Bus Union Greenfields Agreement Victoria 2016, finding it did not meet the statutory criteria for a Greenfields Agreement. The employer's objections were upheld, and the agreement was not approved.

Anderson Recruitment & Training Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established