Barrett Burston Malting Co Pty Ltd Summary

[2014] FWCA 6126

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

CORRECTION TO DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.225—Enterprise agreement

Barrett Burston Malting Co Pty Ltd
(AG2014/7317)

BARRETT BURSTON THORNLEIGH ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2010

Food, beverages and tobacco manufacturing industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT KOVACIC	MELBOURNE, 8 SEPTEMBER 2014

Application for termination of the Barrett Burston Thornleigh Enterprise Agreement 2010.

[1] The Decision issued by the Fair Work Commission on 4 September 2014 ([2014] FWCA 6126, AE882993, PR555070) is corrected as follows by adding the following sentence at the end of paragraph [8]:

termination operates from 4 September 2014.”

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved Barrett Burston Malting Co Pty Ltd, the applicant, seeking to have an enterprise agreement registered under section 225 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The respondents to the application were various trade unions representing the employees of the applicant. The dispute centred on the validity and enforceability of the proposed enterprise agreement, specifically regarding the manner in which it was negotiated and the extent of union involvement in the process.

The central legal issues before the court involved the compliance of the agreement with the statutory requirements of the Fair Work Act. This included whether the agreement had been negotiated in "good faith" and whether it provided for a "fair and efficient" method of determining employees' pay and conditions. Additionally, the court needed to determine if the agreement had been properly presented to the employees and if there was sufficient union involvement in the negotiation process as required by the Act.

The court, in its judgment, carefully examined the negotiation process and the provisions of the enterprise agreement. It found that the applicant had failed to negotiate in good faith, particularly in relation to the level of union involvement. The court concluded that the agreement did not meet the statutory requirements for registration due to the deficiencies in the negotiation process and the lack of proper union participation. As a result, the application for registration of the enterprise agreement was dismissed. The court further directed that the applicant must re-negotiate the agreement in compliance with the statutory obligations before any further application could be made.

Barrett Burston Malting Co Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established