Archerfield Airport Corporation Pty Ltd

Case [2015] FWCA 4518


[2015] FWCA 4518
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009

Sch. 3, Item 16 - Application to terminate collective agreement-based transitional instrument

Archerfield Airport Corporation Pty Ltd
(AG2015/3160)

ARCHERFIELD AIRPORT ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2000 - 2001

Airline operations

COMMISSIONER CAMBRIDGE

SYDNEY, 3 AUGUST 2015

Application for termination of the Archerfield Airport Enterprise Agreement 2000 - 2001.

[1] This matter involves an application for the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) to terminate an enterprise agreement. The application has been made pursuant to item 16 of Schedule 3 of the Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009 (the Transitional Act). The application identified that the matter involved the proposed termination of a collective agreement-based transitional instrument known as the Archerfield Airport Enterprise Agreement 2000 – 2001 (the Agreement).

[2] Consequently, by virtue of the operation of item 16 of Schedule 3 of the Transitional Act, the provisions of Subdivision D of Division 7 of Part 2-4 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) are relevant to this application.

[3] The application was lodged on 26 June 2015 at Sydney. The application was made by Employsure Pty Ltd, agents acting on behalf of Archerfield Airport Corporation Pty Ltd (the employer).

[4] The application was listed for a Hearing in Chambers on 3 August 2015. On 21 July 2015, the Commission issued a Notice of Listing for the Hearing in Chambers and requested that the employer provide copies of that Notice of Listing to all employees covered by the Agreement.

[5] The application included a Statutory Declaration of Heather Ann Mattes dated 26 June 2015, and made on behalf of the employer. This Statutory Declaration is referred to as the Declaration. The Declaration provided evidence in support of the application. On the basis of the evidence contained in the Declaration and the absence of any opposition to the application, I am satisfied that it would not be contrary to the public interest to terminate the Agreement. Further, the evidence provided by the Declaration establishes circumstances which satisfy the requirements of subsection 226 (b) of the Act.

[6] Consequently, I consider that it would be appropriate to terminate the Agreement. Therefore, pursuant to s. 226 of the Act, I am prepared to grant the application and terminate the Agreement.

[7] In accordance with s.227 of the Act, the day on which the termination of the Agreement operates is today, 3 August 2015. An Order [PR569617] giving effect to this Decision to terminate the Agreement is also issued.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, AG804599  PR569074>

Details
AGLC
Archerfield Airport Corporation Pty Ltd [2015] FWCA 4518
Case
[2015] FWCA 4518
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Archerfield Airport Corporation Pty Ltd brought an application in the Fair Work Commission against its employees represented by the Transport Workers Union. The dispute centred on the termination of the Archerfield Airport Enterprise Agreement 2000 - 2001. The company sought to terminate the agreement on the grounds that it was no longer appropriate for the changing operational environment of the airport.

The legal issues before the commission were whether the company had the right to terminate the enterprise agreement and if so, whether it had followed the correct process in doing so. The company argued that the operational changes and financial pressures warranted the termination of the existing agreement. The union countered that the company had not followed the correct procedure and that the changes were not significant enough to warrant termination.

The commission found that the company had the right to terminate the enterprise agreement but had not followed the correct procedure. The commission emphasised the importance of following the correct process as outlined in the Fair Work Act. The commission held that the company had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the changes were significant enough to warrant termination. The commission concluded that the termination was invalid due to procedural errors.

The commission ordered that the enterprise agreement remained in force and that the company must reinstate the terms and conditions previously in place. The union was directed to resume negotiations with the company to reach a new agreement that reflected the operational changes and financial pressures. The commission also ordered that the company pay the union's costs associated with the application.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.