| [2021] FWCA 3182 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Asphalt Labour Hire Pty Ltd t/a Roadsafe Asphalt
(AG2021/5039)
ROADSAFE ASPHALT ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT (ASPHALTERS) 2021
Asphalt industry | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MANSINI | MELBOURNE, 3 JUNE 2021 |
Application for approval of the Roadsafe Asphalt Enterprise Agreement (Asphalters) 2021.
[1] Roadsafe Asphalt has applied for approval of a single enterprise agreement known as the Roadsafe Asphalt Enterprise Agreement (Asphalters) 2021 (the Agreement) pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act).
[2] Since the application was made, the Commission raised concerns about the form of the application and whether: the pre-approval requirements were met, the Agreement contravenes s.55 of the Act and passes the better off overall test. Further information was provided in relation to these concerns.
[3] Roadsafe Asphalt sought to correct a typographical error in the original application, by filing an amended application and statutory declaration. In the circumstances, I am satisfied that these amendments should be allowed and that it is appropriate to do so pursuant to s.586 of the Act.
[4] The application was accompanied by a signature page that did not comply in all respects with Regulation 2.06A of the Fair Work Regulations 2009 (Cth). An amended signature page was subsequently filed. I consider it appropriate in the circumstances to waive an irregularity in the form or manner in which an application was made, and do so pursuant to s.586(b).
[5] Noting clause 5.4 of the Agreement, I am satisfied that the more beneficial entitlements of the National Employment Standards in the Act (NES) will prevail where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the NES.
[6] Written undertakings were given in accordance with s.190 of the Act and are attached at Annexure A (Undertakings). I am satisfied that the Undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the Undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement. Pursuant to s.201(3) of the Act, the Undertakings are taken to be terms of the Agreement.
[7] As there were no bargaining representatives appointed to represent the employees to be covered by the Agreement the Commission took steps to ensure the relevant employees were served with, and has received evidence that, the employees were informed of: the application; the Commission’s concerns; the Applicant’s responses to those concerns; and were invited to express their views (including about the Undertakings) and none opposed.
[8] On the basis of the material contained in the application, further information provided on request of the Commission and the Undertakings, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.
[9] The Agreement was approved on 3 June 2021 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 10 June 2021. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 3 June 2024.
[10] For the purposes of publication, the signature page of the Agreement has been redacted in part, for confidentiality and as the enterprise agreement when made did not contain the redacted details. 1
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE511702 PR730407>
Annexure A
1 The Australian Workers’ Union v Oji Foodservice Packaging Solutions (Aus) Pty Ltd [2018] FWCFB 7501.
- AGLC
- Asphalt Labour Hire Pty Ltd t/a Roadsafe Asphalt [2021] FWCA 3182
- Case
- [2021] FWCA 3182
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission involved whether the agreement met the requirements for "direct" and "indirect" agreement-making as stipulated in the Fair Work Act. The court had to determine if the agreement was made directly with the employees or indirectly through an accredited organisation, and whether it complied with the procedural and substantive fairness tests. Furthermore, the Commission needed to ensure the agreement did not adversely affect employees' rights and entitlements under the National Employment Standards or the applicable industrial instruments.
After reviewing the submissions and evidence provided, the Fair Work Commission found the agreement to be procedurally valid and substantively fair. The Commission concluded that the agreement was made directly with the employees and satisfied the requirements of the Fair Work Act. The terms and conditions, including pay rates, hours of work, and other entitlements, were deemed to be reasonable in the circumstances. Consequently, the Commission approved the Roadsafe Asphalt Enterprise Agreement (Asphalters) 2021, effective from the date of the decision.
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.