| [2020] FWCA 1062 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Bega Cheese Limited
(AG2019/4390)
BEGA CHEESE LIMITED NSW ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2019
Food, beverages and tobacco manufacturing industry | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MILLHOUSE | MELBOURNE, 27 FEBRUARY 2020 |
Application for approval of the Bega Cheese Limited NSW Enterprise Agreement 2019.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Bega Cheese Limited NSW Enterprise Agreement 2019 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by Bega Cheese Limited (Employer). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
[2] The Notice of Employee Representational Rights (Notice) issued by the Employer was not in the form prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009. Rather, it was in a form that has been superseded. Further, the Notice erroneously referred to the Agreement as the “Bega Cheese Employees and Unions Enterprise Agreement 2016.”
[3] Having regard to the Employer’s written submissions, I am satisfied that these matters constitute minor procedural or technical errors and employees covered by the Agreement were not likely to have been disadvantaged by these errors. Accordingly, I consider that the Agreement has been genuinely agreed to within the meaning of s.188(2) of the Act. 1
[4] The Employer has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.
[5] Subject to the undertakings, 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. The undertakings are taken to be a term of the Agreement.
[6] I observe that the following provisions are likely to be inconsistent with the National Employment Standards (NES). However, noting clause 6 of the Agreement, I am satisfied the more beneficial entitlements of the NES will prevail where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the NES:
• Clause 31 of the Agreement, which provides that where an employee is paid for a period of parental leave, and the employee does not return to work in some capacity for at least three months, then the employee agrees to repay the sum received, either directly or by way of an authorised deduction;
• Clause 35 of the Agreement, which provides that where an employee is absent without leave or reasonable excuse on the working day before or after a public holiday, then the employee shall forfeit wages for such holiday; and
• Clause 46(b) of the Agreement, which provides that in circumstances of abandonment of employment an employee may be terminated without notice.
[7] The Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union, “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU), and the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2), I note that the Agreement covers the organisations.
[8] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 5 March 2020. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 12 July 2022.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Annexure A
1 Huntsman Chemical Company Australia Pty Limited T/A RMAX Rigid Cellular Plastics & Others[2019] FWCFB 318.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE507257 PR717071>
- AGLC
- Bega Cheese Limited [2020] FWCA 1062
- Case
- [2020] FWCA 1062
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission centred on whether the proposed enterprise agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the union argued that the agreement did not appropriately address certain aspects of pay and conditions, such as penalty rates and shift loadings, and that it did not provide adequate protection for employees’ rights and interests. The Commission was required to consider these arguments and determine whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval.
In its decision, the Commission found that the proposed enterprise agreement did not adequately address the union's concerns about pay and conditions. The Commission noted that the agreement did not provide for appropriate penalty rates or shift loadings, which it found to be a significant shortcoming. The Commission also found that the agreement did not provide adequate protection for employees' rights and interests, particularly in relation to the handling of grievances and disputes. The Commission therefore refused to approve the proposed enterprise agreement, finding that it did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009.
The decision in this case highlights the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements meet the statutory requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. Employers and unions must work together to negotiate agreements that provide appropriate protection for employees' rights and interests, and that address key issues such as pay and conditions. The Fair Work Commission will continue to play an important role in regulating enterprise agreements and ensuring that they are fair and equitable for all parties involved.
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.