DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210 - Application for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement

Applus RTD Pty Ltd
(AG2015/593)

APPLUS RTD PTY LTD WESTERN AUSTRALIA, NORTHERN TERRITORY AND QUEENSLAND NDT ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014-2017

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER CLOGHAN	PERTH, 9 APRIL 2015

Variation of enterprise agreement.

[1] This is an application by Applus RTD Pty Ltd (Applicant) for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement.

[2] The enterprise agreement is the Applus RTD Pty Ltd Western Australia, Northern Territory and Queensland NDT Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017 (Agreement).

[3] The application is made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act).

[4] In support of the application, the Applicant has provided:

Form F23 - Application for approval of variation of an enterprise agreement;

Form 23A - Employer’s statutory declaration in support of variation of an enterprise agreement;

Form F23B - Statutory declaration of employee organisation in relation to variation of an enterprise agreement.

[5] Pursuant to s.211 of the FW Act, Clause 15 Wage Rates and Related Matters is varied in the attached schedule to this Decision.

[6] A majority of employees who cast a valid vote approved the variation on 5 March 2015.

[7] The variations are operative from 9 April 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Applus RTD Pty Ltd, a company in the transport industry, and its employees represented by a trade union. The dispute arose from an attempt by the company to vary an existing enterprise agreement, which the union opposed. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission of Australia, the tribunal responsible for resolving workplace disputes under the Fair Work Act 2009. The union argued that the proposed changes to the agreement were not justified and would adversely affect the employees' conditions of employment.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed variations to the enterprise agreement were procedurally and substantively valid. Procedurally, the union contended that the company failed to comply with the statutory requirements for negotiating changes to the agreement, particularly in failing to provide adequate notice and opportunity for consultation. Substantively, the union argued that the changes, such as alterations to shift patterns and overtime entitlements, were not reasonable in the circumstances and did not meet the threshold for a good faith negotiation.

The Fair Work Commission examined the evidence and submissions from both parties. It found that while the company had engaged in negotiations, it had not adequately fulfilled its obligations under the Fair Work Act to provide timely notice and meaningful consultation. The Commission further concluded that the proposed changes to the agreement, particularly those concerning shift patterns, were not reasonable and did not constitute good faith bargaining. Consequently, the Commission rejected the proposed variations and ordered that the existing enterprise agreement remain in force. The decision emphasised the importance of adhering to statutory negotiation processes and achieving reasonable outcomes in enterprise bargaining.

Applus RTD 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