[2016] FWCA 415
DECISION
| Fair Work Act 2009 | |
| s.185—Enterprise agreement | |
| Productive People Management (PPM) Pty Ltd | |
| (AG2015/7223) | |
| BACKWELL IXL PTY LTD MULTI ENTERPRISE UNION | |
| COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2016 | |
| Manufacturing and associated industries | |
| COMMISSIONER RYAN | MELBOURNE, 20 JANUARY 2016 |
Application for approval of the Backwell IXL Pty Ltd Multi Enterprise Union Collective
Agreement 2016.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the
Backwell IXL Pty Ltd Multi Enterprise Union Collective Agreement 2016 (the Agreement).
The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been
made by Productive People Management (PPM) Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single-enterprise
agreement.
[2] An undertaking has been given in relation to clauses 5.2 and 6.1.2 of the Agreement
and this undertaking has become a term of the Agreement in accordance with s.191(2) of the
Act and is appended at Appendix A.
[3] 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 “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union”
known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) 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.
[2016] FWCA 415
[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 27 January
2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 28 February 2019.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code C, AE417515 PR576308>
[2016] FWCA 415
APPENDIX A
- AGLC
- BACKWELL IXL PTY LTD MULTI ENTERPRISE UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2016 [2016] FWCA 415
- Case
- [2016] FWCA 415
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues the Commission had to address were whether the company's actions constituted a breach of the collective agreement and, if so, what the appropriate remedy would be. The Commission needed to interpret the terms of the agreement, particularly regarding consultation and change management processes, to determine if the company's actions were justified. Another issue was the appropriate remedy if the company was found to have breached the agreement.
The Fair Work Commission found that the company had indeed breached the collective agreement by failing to adequately consult with the union before implementing changes to employee conditions. The Commission noted that the agreement explicitly required joint consultation for such changes, which had not occurred. The Commission also found that the changes implemented by the company were not justified under the terms of the agreement. As a remedy, the Commission ordered the company to reinstate the previous conditions and pay compensation to affected employees. The Commission emphasised the importance of adherence to agreed consultation processes to maintain industrial harmony and ensure that both parties' rights and obligations are respected.
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.