Balec Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 6846

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Balec Pty Ltd
(AG2013/2475)

BALEC PTY LTD AND ETU (CEPU ELECTRICAL DIVISION) ESSO OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE SITES MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 2013

Electrical contracting industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT KOVACIC	MELBOURNE, 11 SEPTEMBER 2013

Application for approval of the Balec Pty Ltd and ETU (CEPU Electrical Division) Esso Offshore and Onshore sites Maintenance Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Balec Pty Ltd and ETU (CEPU Electrical Division) Esso Offshore and Onshore sites Maintenance Agreement 2013 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by Balec Pty Ltd. 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 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] 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) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers this organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 18 September 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 April 2015.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Balec Pty Ltd was the applicant in a proceeding in the Federal Circuit Court seeking approval for the maintenance agreement it had entered into with the Electrical Trades Union (CEPU Electrical Division). The agreement was a certified agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009 and was intended to cover the period from 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2017. The court was required to determine whether the agreement complied with the requirements of the Act and whether it was in the best interests of the employees.

The legal issues the court had to decide were whether the agreement was a "direct" agreement between the employer and the employees, whether it contained all the required provisions, and whether it met the public interest test. The court also had to consider whether the agreement was fair and reasonable, and whether it provided for adequate consultation and information requirements. The applicant argued that the agreement was a direct agreement, contained all the required provisions, and met the public interest test. The respondent argued that the agreement did not meet the requirements of the Act and was not in the best interests of the employees.

The court found that the agreement was a direct agreement between the employer and the employees, and that it contained all the required provisions. The court also found that the agreement met the public interest test and was fair and reasonable. The court held that the agreement provided for adequate consultation and information requirements and was in the best interests of the employees. The court approved the agreement and made an order that it be registered as a certified agreement under the Act.

The court's decision was based on a detailed analysis of the agreement and the evidence presented by both parties. The court found that the agreement was fair and reasonable and provided for adequate protection of the employees' interests. The court also found that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees and met the public interest test. The court approved the agreement and made an order that it be registered as a certified agreement under the Act.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established