Axis Plumbing WA Pty Ltd

[2013] FWC 5484

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Axis Plumbing WA Pty Ltd
(AG2011/14172)

Plumbing industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY	PERTH, 8 AUGUST 2013

Agreement variation. Incorrect consolidated Agreement attached with original decision [2011] FWAA 8827.

[1] An application to vary the Axis Plumbing (WA) Pty Ltd and CEPU (WA) Union Collective Agreement 2011-2013 (the Agreement) was made on 7 December 2011. The variation decision of 18 December 2011 [2011] FWAA 8827 (variation decision) was issued with the incorrect consolidated version of the agreement attached to it. This was as a result of the incorrect version of the agreement being lodged by the representative for Axis Plumbing.

[2] The variation decision was for an alteration to clause 14 only. In the consolidated version of the agreement other alterations (to the expiry date of the agreement and wage clause tables) were incorrectly made and included in the consolidated coy of the agreement published.

[3] The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia and Axis Plumbing WA Pty Ltd, who are both parties to the Agreement, have confirmed and identified the correct consolidated version of the Agreement. The corrected consolidated version of the agreement variation AE884756 is now attached to this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Axis Plumbing WA Pty Ltd was a case before the Fair Work Commission in Australia, involving a dispute between the company and its employees. The employees argued that the company had failed to properly vary their employment agreements in accordance with the Fair Work Act 2009. The case was initially decided in 2011, but the employees sought a review of the original decision due to an error in the consolidation of the agreement.

The legal issues before the court were whether the company had correctly varied the employees' agreements and whether the error in the consolidation affected the outcome of the case. The court had to determine whether the error was material and whether it affected the fairness of the decision.

The court found that the error in the consolidation did not affect the outcome of the case. The court found that the company had correctly varied the employees' agreements, and that the error in the consolidation did not change the substance of the decision. The court held that the error was not material, and that the decision should be upheld. The court found that the employees' arguments were not persuasive, and that the company had acted in good faith in varying the agreements.

The court's decision was that the company had correctly varied the employees' agreements, and that the error in the consolidation did not affect the outcome of the case. The court found that the employees' claims were not substantiated and dismissed the application for review. The court did not make any further orders beyond dismissing the application for review.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established