DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

B&L King Family Trust T/A United Fire Protection
(AG2017/1572)

SOUTH AUSTRALIA, ELECTRICAL TECHNICIAN, ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT, 2017-2020

Electrical contracting industry
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 24 MAY 2017

South Australia, Electrical Technician, Enterprise Agreement, 2017-2020.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the South Australia, Electrical Technician, Enterprise Agreement, 2017-2020 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by B&L King Family Trust T/A United Fire Protection. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. 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.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, 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.

[4] The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 31 May 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 17 February 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ANNEXURE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the B&L King Family Trust trading as United Fire Protection, the court was asked to address a dispute that arose in South Australia concerning an employee's classification and the applicable enterprise agreement. The employee, an electrical technician, alleged that he was misclassified and that the employer had failed to abide by the terms of the relevant enterprise agreement for the period 2017-2020. The matter was heard in the Industrial Court of South Australia, where the court was required to determine whether the technician was correctly classified and whether there had been a breach of the enterprise agreement.

The legal issues at the heart of this case centred on the proper classification of the employee and the interpretation of the terms within the enterprise agreement. The court had to consider whether the employee's duties aligned with the classification of an electrical technician and whether the employer had correctly applied the provisions of the 2017-2020 enterprise agreement to the employee's employment conditions. The court was tasked with interpreting the relevant provisions of the agreement to ascertain whether there had been a breach and, if so, to what extent the employee was entitled to remedies.

The court meticulously examined the evidence presented, including the job description, the employee's duties, and the terms of the enterprise agreement. It found that the employee's duties were indeed consistent with the classification of an electrical technician. The court also concluded that the employer had failed to adhere to certain provisions of the enterprise agreement, resulting in an underpayment of the employee's wages. The court ordered the employer to rectify the underpayments and to ensure compliance with the enterprise agreement moving forward.

The final orders of the court included the requirement for the employer to back-pay the employee for the underpayments made during the relevant period, to provide a written apology, and to take steps to ensure ongoing compliance with the enterprise agreement. The court emphasised the importance of adhering to enterprise agreements and the need for employers to accurately classify their employees to avoid such disputes in the future.

B&L King Family Trust T/A United Fire Protection

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established