Armstrong World Industries (Australia) Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 9326

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Armstrong World Industries (Australia) Pty Ltd
(AG2013/11408)

ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD THOMASTOWN MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 2013

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER RYAN	MELBOURNE, 26 NOVEMBER 2013

Application for approval of the Armstrong World Industries (Australia) Pty Ltd Thomastown Maintenance Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Armstrong World Industries (Australia) Pty Ltd Thomastown Maintenance Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) and was made by Armstrong World Industries (Australia) Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU), being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. As required by s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54(1), will operate from 3 December 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Armstrong World Industries (Australia) Pty Ltd, the applicant sought approval for a maintenance agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute was heard by the Fair Work Commission, which is responsible for regulating the terms and conditions of employment in Australia. The agreement in question, the Armstrong World Industries (Australia) Pty Ltd Thomastown Maintenance Agreement 2013, was designed to outline the terms and conditions of employment for employees in the maintenance department of the applicant's Thomastown site. The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the proposed agreement provided for the proper treatment of employees, whether it was consistent with the National Employment Standards, and whether it met the requirements for an individual agreement under the Fair Work Act.

The Commission examined the terms of the proposed agreement and found that it provided for the proper treatment of employees, including provisions for hours of work, rates of pay, and leave entitlements. The Commission also found that the agreement was consistent with the National Employment Standards, which include minimum entitlements such as maximum weekly hours of work, paid annual leave, and notice of termination. Additionally, the Commission found that the agreement met the requirements for an individual agreement under the Fair Work Act, as it was certified by an independent bargaining representative and was not contrary to public policy.

Based on these findings, the Commission approved the Armstrong World Industries (Australia) Pty Ltd Thomastown Maintenance Agreement 2013, subject to certain modifications to ensure that it met the requirements of the Fair Work Act. These modifications included changes to the agreement's provisions on shift premiums and allowances, as well as changes to the agreement's dispute resolution procedures. The applicant was required to implement these modifications within a specified timeframe and to provide the Commission with evidence of compliance.

In summary, the Fair Work Commission approved the Armstrong World Industries (Australia) Pty Ltd Thomastown Maintenance Agreement 2013, subject to certain modifications. The Commission found that the agreement provided for the proper treatment of employees, was consistent with the National Employment Standards, and met the requirements for an individual agreement under the Fair Work Act. The applicant was required to implement the modifications within a specified timeframe and to provide evidence of compliance to the Commission.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established