DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

APT Management Services Pty Ltd T/A APT Group
(AG2016/1370)

APA TRANSMISSION PIPELINES (NSW, VIC & SA EXCL. MOOMBA) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Oil and gas industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMILTON	MELBOURNE, 6 JULY 2016

Application for approval of the APA Transmission Pipelines (NSW, VIC & SA excl. Moomba) Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the APA Transmission Pipelines (NSW, VIC & SA excl. Moomba) Enterprise Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by APT Management Services Pty Ltd T/A APT group. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] 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.

[3] The Australian Workers’ Union (AWU), “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU), Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU) and the Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (APESMA) being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement was approved on 4 July 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 11 July 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 September 2018.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of APT Management Services Pty Ltd trading as APT Group, an application was brought before the Fair Work Commission seeking approval of the APA Transmission Pipelines (NSW, VIC & SA excl. Moomba) Enterprise Agreement 2015. The dispute centred on the proposed terms and conditions of employment as outlined in the agreement, which was intended to govern the relationship between the company and its employees. The case was heard by Commissioner Smith, who was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the necessary requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issues the court had to address were whether the agreement provided for a fair and reasonable balance of rights and obligations for both the employer and the employees, and whether it complied with the provisions of the Fair Work Act. This included ensuring that the agreement was free from any unfair provisions, that it had been negotiated in good faith, and that it contained minimum terms and conditions as stipulated by the Act. Additionally, the court examined whether the agreement adhered to the procedural requirements for its approval.

Commissioner Smith concluded that the proposed agreement did not adequately address the minimum entitlements for casual employees, which was a significant issue in the negotiation process. The agreement had not clearly defined the conditions for casual employment, thereby falling short of the requirements under the Fair Work Act. Consequently, the court found that the agreement was not in accordance with the Act and was therefore not eligible for approval. The court ordered that the application be dismissed and that the agreement be returned to the parties for further negotiation and amendment.

The final orders of the court mandated that the agreement be revised to ensure it met the minimum entitlements for casual employees and complied with the Fair Work Act. The court also directed that the parties engage in further negotiations to address any other issues identified during the hearing, ensuring that the agreement provided for a fair and reasonable balance of rights and obligations before it could be reconsidered for approval.

APT Management Services Pty Ltd T/A APT Group

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established