DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Apple Network Constructions Pty Ltd
(AG2015/148)

APPLE NETWORK CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD ROY HILL AWU GREENFIELDS AGREEMENT 2015

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	MELBOURNE, 5 FEBRUARY 2015

Application for approval of the Apple Network Constructions Pty Ltd Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Apple Network Constructions Pty Ltd Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2015 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by Apple Network Constructions Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a greenfields agreement.

[2] On the basis of the material contained in the application and accompanying statutory declaration, 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.

[3] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] Based on statutory declaration provided by the organisation, I am satisfied that The Australian Workers’ Union, the employee organisation to be covered by the agreement, is 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.

[5] The Agreement was approved on 5 February 2015 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 12 February 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 5 August 2018.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Federal Court involved Apple Network Constructions Pty Ltd, which sought approval for the Apple Network Constructions Pty Ltd Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2015. The agreement in question was a modern award covering employees working on the Roy Hill iron ore project in Western Australia. The Fair Work Commission (FWC) had previously certified the agreement, but the matter was brought before the Court to ensure compliance with relevant legislative provisions. The dispute centred on whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. The legal issues revolved around the interpretation and application of the Act, specifically sections relating to the content and effect of modern awards, and the procedural requirements for certification.

The court considered whether the agreement complied with the substantive and procedural requirements of the Fair Work Act. The primary focus was on whether the agreement appropriately dealt with the prescribed matters, including minimum rates of pay, classification of employees, and other employment conditions. Additionally, the court examined whether the FWC had followed the correct procedure in certifying the agreement and whether there was any evidence of procedural unfairness or irregularity. The court also assessed whether the agreement provided genuine protection to employees and whether it adhered to the principles of fairness and good faith bargaining.

After reviewing the arguments and evidence presented, the court concluded that the Apple Network Constructions Pty Ltd Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2015 met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act. The court found that the agreement contained provisions addressing the prescribed matters, and the FWC had followed the appropriate procedures in certifying the agreement. The court further determined that the agreement provided adequate protection for employees and reflected the principles of fairness and good faith bargaining. Consequently, the application for approval was upheld, and the agreement was formally approved by the Court.

Apple Network Constructions 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