| [2024] FWCFB 259 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.604 - Appeal of decisions
Australian Workers' Union
v
Moag Pty Ltd
(C2024/1323)
| DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK | MELBOURNE, 15 MAY 2024 |
Appeal against decision [2023] FWCA 65 of Deputy President Dobson at Brisbane on 9 January 2023 in matter number AG2022/5280
The Australian Workers’ Union (AWU or union) has lodged an appeal, for which permission is required, from a decision of Deputy President Dobson on 9 January 2023 to approve an enterprise agreement known as the MOAG Enterprise Agreement 2022 (Agreement) under s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). The AWU contends that it is a person aggrieved for the purposes of s 604 and has standing to appeal the decision because it has members who are now employed by the respondent, Moag Pty Ltd (Moag or company), under the Agreement. It submits that permission to appeal should be granted in the public interest or otherwise and that the decision should be quashed. Its primary contentions are that the Deputy President erred in concluding that the Agreement passed the ‘better off overall test’ (BOOT) because she failed to apply the test against all of the relevant awards, and because the Agreement was not genuinely agreed to by employees. Pursuant to the Fair Work Commission Rules 2024, an appeal under s 604 must be brought within 21 days after the date of the decision that is appealed. The AWU submits that the Commission should extend time and seeks to adduce fresh evidence in the appeal in the form of a witness statement of its organiser, Ross Kumeroa.
The background to this matter can be briefly summarised as follows. Moag is an entity within the Monadelphous group which provides maintenance contracting services. In October 2022, it issued a notice of employee representational rights (NERR) to employees in respect of a proposed enterprise agreement. Between October and December 2022, Moag met with the relevant employees and provided them with documents which compared the proposed agreement with the existing enterprise agreement, the MOAG Enterprise Agreement 2017 (2017 Agreement), and with the Building and Construction General On-site Award 2020 (Building Award). No unions were involved in bargaining for the Agreement. Moag’s F17 declaration in support of its application under s 185 stated that on 13 December 2022, the four employees covered by the Agreement voted in favour of approving the Agreement. An application for approval of the Agreement was made on 15 December 2022 and on 9 January 2023 the Deputy President approved the Agreement subject to undertakings. The AWU did not become aware of the Agreement until mid-February 2024, at which time it obtained the approval materials from the Commission’s file. The appeal was filed shortly thereafter, on 4 March 2024.
We are satisfied that the AWU is a person aggrieved for the purpose of s 604 on the basis that it has members who are employed under the terms of the Agreement whose interests are…
Continue reading Australian Workers' Union v Moag Pty Ltd
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Australian Workers' Union v Moag Pty Ltd [2024] FWCFB 259
- Case
- [2024] FWCFB 259
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Fair Work Commission ruled that the AWU was a person aggrieved and had standing to appeal but declined to grant an extension of time. The Commission found that while the Electrical, Electronic and Communications Contracting Award 2020 (Electrical Award), and the Manufacturing and Associated Industries and Occupations Award 2020 (Manufacturing Award) were relevant for BOOT purposes, this error was inconsequential because employees were better off under the Agreement. The Commission also rejected the AWU’s argument that the agreement was not genuinely agreed to by employees, finding that the small voting cohort was representative and had a stake in the agreement. The appeal was dismissed, and permission to appeal was refused.
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.