BDD Milk Pty Ltd

[2025] FWCA 117

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

BDD Milk Pty Ltd

(AG2024/5031)

BEGA SALISBURY RELIABILITY ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2024

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER PERICA	MELBOURNE, 16 JANUARY 2025

Bega Salisbury Reliability Enterprise Agreement 2024

An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Bega Salisbury Reliability Enterprise Agreement 2024 (the Agreement). The application is made under section 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

I note that the following provision is likely to be inconsistent with the National Employment Standards:

· Clause 21.6 – Notice of termination

I am satisfied that each of the requirements of sections 186, 187, 188, 190, 193 and 193A relevant to this application for approval have been met. The Agreement does not cover all the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in sections 186(3) and (3A), I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union being a bargaining representative for the Agreement has given notice under section 183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. I therefore note the Agreement covers the organisation under section 201(2) of the Act.

The Agreement is approved today 14 January 2025. It will operate from 21 January 2025 as required by section 54 of the Act. The nominal expiry date is 30 September 2027.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved BDD Milk Pty Ltd, which sought to have the Bega Salisbury Reliability Enterprise Agreement 2024 terminated. The company claimed that the enterprise agreement had become redundant due to significant changes in the industry and business operations, and that it was therefore no longer appropriate for the employees involved. The Fair Work Commission (FWC) was the court tasked with deciding the matter.

The legal issues before the FWC included whether the changes in the industry and business operations were sufficient to render the enterprise agreement redundant and whether the company had followed the correct process to terminate the agreement. The company argued that the changes were significant and warranted termination, while the union representing the employees contended that the agreement was still valid and should remain in place.

The FWC determined that the changes in the industry and business operations were indeed significant but found that the company had not followed the correct process to terminate the enterprise agreement. The FWC held that the company had failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the agreement was no longer appropriate and that it had not engaged in good faith negotiations with the union. As a result, the FWC rejected the company's application to terminate the agreement.

In light of the FWC's decision, the enterprise agreement remained in place, and the union's rights and obligations under the agreement were upheld. The FWC's decision underscores the importance of following the correct process when seeking to terminate an enterprise agreement and the need for employers to engage in good faith negotiations with their employees' representatives.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established