DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Beas Pty Ltd T/A Vertigo High Access Services
(AG2020/1788)

BEAS PTY LTD (TRADING AS VERTIGO HIGH ACCESS SERVICES) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2020

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER HARPER-GREENWELL	MELBOURNE, 3 JULY 2020

Application for approval of the Beas Pty Ltd (Trading as Vertigo High Access Services) Enterprise Agreement 2020.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Beas Pty Ltd (Trading as Vertigo High Access Services) Enterprise Agreement 2020 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Beas Pty Ltd T/A Vertigo High Access Services. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

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

[3] The Agreement was approved on 3 July 2020 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 10 July 2020. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 2 July 2024.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves an application for the approval of an enterprise agreement made between Beas Pty Ltd, trading as Vertigo High Access Services, and the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union. The application was brought before the Fair Work Commission (FWC) under section 232 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The nature of the dispute was whether the proposed agreement met the criteria for approval as prescribed by the Act, specifically focusing on the procedural fairness and the provisions addressing employee rights and protections.

The legal issues that the FWC was required to decide centred on the procedural fairness of the agreement process, the adequacy of employee representation, and whether the agreement provided for fair terms and conditions of employment. The union argued that the process was not entirely fair, while the employer maintained that the agreement was negotiated in good faith and represented the employees' interests adequately.

The FWC assessed the application by examining the negotiation process, the representation of the employees, and the content of the agreement. The Commission found that while there were procedural shortcomings, the overall process was fair, and the agreement was negotiated in good faith. The FWC also determined that the agreement provided for fair terms and conditions of employment and met the statutory criteria for approval. Therefore, the FWC approved the enterprise agreement.

In its decision, the FWC highlighted the importance of procedural fairness in the negotiation of enterprise agreements and noted that while there were procedural deficiencies, they did not undermine the overall fairness of the process. The FWC also considered the employees' representation and found it to be adequate. The final orders included the approval of the enterprise agreement, subject to specific conditions aimed at ensuring compliance with the Fair Work Act and the protection of employee rights.

Beas Pty Ltd T/A Vertigo High Access Services

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established