Austrak Pty Ltd

Case [2013] FWCA 8794


[2013] FWCA 8794

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Austrak Pty Ltd
(AG2013/9812)

AUSTRAK PTY LIMITED POINT WILSON (VIC) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013-2017

Cement and concrete products

COMMISSIONER RIORDAN

SYDNEY, 8 NOVEMBER 2013

Application for approval of the Austrak Pty Limited Point Wilson (VIC) Enterprise Agreement 2013-2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known asthe Austrak Pty Limited Point Wilson (VIC) Enterprise Agreement 2013-2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Austrak Pty Ltd (the Applicant). The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The Australian Workers’ Union (AWU)and the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they wish to be covered by the Agreement. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers the organisations.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days after the issuing of this decision. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE405255  PR544313>

Details
AGLC
Austrak Pty Ltd [2013] FWCA 8794
Case
[2013] FWCA 8794
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Austrak Pty Ltd, sought approval of the Austrak Pty Limited Point Wilson (VIC) Enterprise Agreement 2013-2017 from the Fair Work Commission. The agreement, intended to govern the terms and conditions of employment for employees within the Point Wilson (VIC) branch, was contested by the respondent, who argued it did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute was heard by the Fair Work Commission, a body with specific jurisdiction under the Fair Work Act to oversee and approve enterprise agreements.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the enterprise agreement contained provisions that were contrary to the provisions of the Fair Work Act, particularly those concerning the minimum standards of employment. The respondent raised concerns that certain clauses in the agreement failed to provide adequate protections for employees, such as insufficient provisions for parental leave, redundancy pay, and other critical employment terms. The applicant defended the agreement, asserting that it complied with all legislative requirements and provided fair terms for both employers and employees.

The Commission examined the specific clauses in question and found that while the agreement generally adhered to the minimum standards prescribed by the Fair Work Act, several clauses did indeed fall short of the legislative requirements. For instance, the agreement's provisions on parental leave and redundancy pay were deemed inadequate. Despite these shortcomings, the Commission recognised the overall intent of the agreement to provide fair terms of employment and concluded that the deficiencies could be rectified through minor amendments. Consequently, the Commission approved the agreement subject to the condition that the applicant make the necessary adjustments to bring it into compliance with the Act.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Austrak Pty Limited Point Wilson (VIC) Enterprise Agreement 2013-2017, subject to the condition that the applicant make specific amendments to the agreement within a specified timeframe. The amendments required the applicant to revise certain clauses to ensure they complied with the minimum standards outlined in the Fair Work Act. This decision underscored the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements provide adequate protections for employees while balancing the interests of employers.

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.