DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Atlas Copco Australia Pty Limited
(AG2015/331)

ATLAS COPCO AUSTRALIA PTY. LIMITED (ROY HILL) COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2015

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 6 MARCH 2015

Application for approval of the Atlas Copco Australia Pty. Limited (Roy Hill) Collective Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Atlas Copco Australia Pty. Limited (Roy Hill) Collective 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 Atlas Copco Australia Pty Limited. 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] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] The Agreement was approved on 6 March 2015 and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 13 March 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 July 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Atlas Copco Australia Pty Limited, a company involved in the mining and construction sectors, was party to a collective agreement which was to be registered by the Fair Work Commission. The agreement in question was the Atlas Copco Australia Pty. Limited (Roy Hill) Collective Agreement 2015, and the matter before the Fair Work Commission was an application for its approval. The dispute primarily revolved around whether the agreement met the necessary criteria for registration under the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically focusing on whether it was made in the course of a genuine enterprise bargaining process and whether it complied with the provisions of the Act.

The central legal issues that the Fair Work Commission had to resolve were whether the collective agreement was indeed the result of genuine enterprise bargaining and if it complied with the requisite standards under the Fair Work Act. The Commission needed to assess whether the agreement was made in good faith, whether it contained the necessary terms and conditions, and if it adhered to the procedural and substantive requirements set forth in the Act. Furthermore, the Commission had to consider if the agreement provided adequate protections for employees and whether it was consistent with the broader objectives of the Act.

Upon reviewing the evidence and arguments presented, the Fair Work Commission found that the Atlas Copco Australia Pty. Limited (Roy Hill) Collective Agreement 2015 met the criteria for registration. The Commission was satisfied that the agreement was the product of genuine enterprise bargaining, as it had been negotiated in good faith between the employer and the employees' representatives. The Commission also found that the agreement contained the necessary terms and conditions and complied with the procedural and substantive requirements of the Fair Work Act. The Commission concluded that the agreement was consistent with the objectives of the Act and provided adequate protections for the employees. Therefore, the application for approval of the collective agreement was successful.

The Fair Work Commission approved the registration of the Atlas Copco Australia Pty. Limited (Roy Hill) Collective Agreement 2015, effective from the date of the decision. This approval meant that the agreement would now be a legally binding document between the employer and the employees, and would govern the terms and conditions of employment for the employees covered by the agreement. The decision was significant as it provided clarity and certainty for both the employer and the employees, and ensured that the agreement was consistent with the principles of the Fair Work Act.

Atlas Copco Australia Pty Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established