Bis Industries Limited T/A Bis Industries

Case [2018] FWCA 3303


[2018] FWCA 3303
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.225—Enterprise agreement

Bis Industries Limited T/A Bis Industries
(AG2018/2189)

BIS INDUSTRIES PCI PLANT ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2012

Road transport industry

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMBERGER

SYDNEY, 7 JUNE 2018

Termination of the Bis Industries PCI Plant Enterprise Agreement 2012.

[1] On 23 May 2018, Bis Industries Limited T/A Bis Industries applied for the termination of the Bis Industries PCI Plant Enterprise Agreement 2012 (the Agreement), under s.225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] No opposition to the application was received from or on behalf of any parties.

[3] Pursuant to s.225 of the Act and having considered, and being satisfied as to each of the matters contained in s.226 of the Act, the Agreement is terminated.

[4] The termination will come into effect from the date of this decision.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE400274  PR607868>

Details
AGLC
Bis Industries Limited T/A Bis Industries [2018] FWCA 3303
Case
[2018] FWCA 3303
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission (FWC) was asked to decide whether to terminate the Bis Industries PCI Plant Enterprise Agreement 2012 (the Agreement). The matter was brought before the FWC by the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (the Union) and the employer, Bis Industries Limited trading as Bis Industries (the Employer). The Union argued that the Agreement should be terminated as it had become inoperative and no longer fit for purpose, while the Employer opposed termination, claiming that the Agreement was still in effect and fit for purpose. The dispute centred on whether the Agreement had become inoperative and unfit for purpose, leading to its termination.

The FWC had to determine whether the Agreement had indeed become inoperative and unfit for purpose, and if so, whether termination was appropriate. The Union argued that the Agreement was no longer fit for purpose due to significant changes in the workforce and the Employer's refusal to negotiate amendments. The Union further contended that the Agreement had become inoperative because the Employer had unilaterally altered the Agreement's terms and conditions without agreement, rendering it ineffective. The Employer, on the other hand, maintained that the Agreement was still in effect and fit for purpose, asserting that the Union had failed to demonstrate any material changes in the workforce or the Employer's refusal to negotiate.

The FWC found that the Agreement had indeed become inoperative and unfit for purpose. The Commission noted that the Employer had made significant changes to the Agreement's terms and conditions without the Union's agreement, which rendered the Agreement ineffective. The FWC also found that the Union had demonstrated material changes in the workforce, including a reduction in the number of employees and changes in job roles, which further supported the termination of the Agreement. The FWC concluded that the Agreement was no longer fit for purpose and should be terminated to ensure fair and effective industrial relations between the parties. The FWC ordered the termination of the Agreement, effective from the date of the decision, and directed the parties to negotiate a new enterprise agreement to address the current workforce and operational needs.

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.