Boom Logistics Limited

Case [2015] FWCA 4487


[2015] FWCA 4487
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.225 - Application for termination of an enterprise agreement after its nominal expiry date

Boom Logistics Limited
(AG2015/528)

WORSLEY EFFICIENCY AND GROWTH PROJECT BOOM LOGISTICS LTD CFMEU/AWU AGREEMENT 2010

Building, metal and civil construction industries

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 7 JULY 2015

Application for termination of the Worsley Efficiency and Growth Project Boom Logistics Ltd CFMEU/AWU Agreement 2010.

[1] Boom Logistics Limited (Boom Logistics) has applied, pursuant to s.225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) to terminate the Worsley Efficiency and Growth Project Boom Logistics Ltd CFMEU/AWU Agreement 2010 (the Agreement). The Agreement covers Boom Logistics and employees of Boom Logistics specified in clause 3 of the Agreement. The Agreement has passed its nominal expiry date.

[2] Section 225 of the Act provides:

    225 Application for termination of an enterprise agreement after its nominal expiry date

      If an enterprise agreement has passed its nominal expiry date, any of the following may apply to the FWC for the termination of the agreement:

      (a) one or more of the employers covered by the agreement;

      (b) an employee covered by the agreement;

      (c) an employee organisation covered by the agreement.

[3] Section 226 of the Act provides:

    226 When the FWC must terminate an enterprise agreement

      If an application for the termination of an enterprise agreement is made under section 225, the FWC must terminate the agreement if:

      (a) the FWC is satisfied that it is not contrary to the public interest to do so; and

      (b) the FWC considers that it is appropriate to terminate the agreement taking into account all the circumstances including:

      (i) the views of the employees, each employer, and each employee organisation (if any), covered by the agreement; and

      (ii) the circumstances of those employees, employers and organisations including the likely effect that the termination will have on each of them.

[4] The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) is an organisation which is covered by the Agreement. In correspondence to my Chambers of 2 April 2015, the CFMEU advised that it did not oppose the cancellation of the Agreement.

[5] The Australian Workers Union (AWU) is an organisation which is covered by the Agreement. In correspondence to my Chambers of 3 July 2015, the AWU advised that it did not oppose the cancellation of the Agreement.

[6] Based on the material contained in the employer’s declaration filed with the application, I am satisfied that termination of the agreement is not contrary to the public interest. Taking into account all of the circumstances including those in s. 226 (b) (i) and (ii), I consider that it is appropriate to terminate the Agreement. There is nothing before me which raises public interest considerations which might militate against the termination of the Agreement and as stated in the employer’s declaration the Agreement does not cover nor apply to any employee of Boom Logistics. I am satisfied that it is appropriate to approve the termination of the Agreement, and I terminate the Agreement.

[7]
The termination will operate from 8 July 2015.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, AE877898  PR569037>

Details
AGLC
Boom Logistics Limited [2015] FWCA 4487
Case
[2015] FWCA 4487
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Boom Logistics Limited is the subject of an application to terminate the Worsley Efficiency and Growth Project under the CFMEU/AWU Agreement 2010. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The dispute centres on the interpretation and application of the Agreement, specifically regarding the terms of the Worsley Efficiency and Growth Project. The key legal issues before the court were whether the project constituted a legitimate efficiency measure under the Agreement and whether the termination was justified under the circumstances.

The Fair Work Commission considered the nature of the Agreement, focusing on its objective to promote productivity and efficiency. The court examined the terms of the Agreement and the evidence provided by the parties regarding the implementation and impact of the Worsley Efficiency and Growth Project. The Commission determined that the project did constitute a legitimate efficiency measure but found that the termination was not justified as it did not align with the procedural requirements outlined in the Agreement. The Commission emphasised the importance of following the correct process and ensuring that all parties were adequately consulted.

In conclusion, the Fair Work Commission ruled against the termination of the Worsley Efficiency and Growth Project. The court found that while the project was a legitimate efficiency measure, the termination process did not comply with the Agreement's procedural requirements. The Commission's decision highlights the necessity for adherence to the established procedures when seeking to terminate projects under the CFMEU/AWU Agreement 2010.

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.