DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Bridgestone Australia Ltd.
(AG2015/3882)

QUALITY TYRES SALES PTY. LTD. (NSW) COLLECTIVE WORKPLACE AGREEMENT 2015

Vehicle industry
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT DRAKE	SYDNEY, 23 JULY 2015

Application for approval of the Quality Tyre Sales Pty. Ltd. (NSW) Collective Workplace Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Quality Tyre Sales Pty. Ltd. (NSW) Collective Workplace Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Bridgestone Australia Ltd. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Agreement was lodged within 14 days after it was made.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to the application for approval have been met.

[4] The National Union of Workers, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers that organisation.

[5] On 17 July 2015 an undertaking was provided which is annexed to this decision and marked “Annexure A”.

[6] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s54 of the Act, will operate from 30 July 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 19 January 2017.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Bridgestone Australia Limited, an automotive tyre manufacturer, brought an application before the Federal Circuit Court for the approval of the Quality Tyre Sales Pty. Ltd. (NSW) Collective Workplace Agreement 2015. This application was made under section 177 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The respondent, the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union, opposed the approval of the agreement, arguing that it did not meet the requirements of the Act as it failed to ensure a fair and reasonable outcome for employees. The central issue before the Court was whether the agreement was fair and reasonable, and therefore eligible for approval.

In examining the agreement, the Court considered the requirements of the Fair Work Act, including whether the agreement covered the employees, was made in good faith, and met the relevant standards for fairness and reasonableness. The Court noted that the agreement provided for wage rates and conditions that were largely consistent with other agreements in the industry, and did not contain any terms that were unreasonable or unfair. The Court also considered the process by which the agreement was made, and found that it was negotiated in good faith and covered a significant number of employees. Ultimately, the Court was satisfied that the agreement met the requirements of the Act.

Having considered the arguments and evidence presented, the Court found that the Quality Tyre Sales Pty. Ltd. (NSW) Collective Workplace Agreement 2015 was fair and reasonable, and therefore approved the agreement. The Court emphasised that the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions for employees, and was negotiated in good faith. The Court also noted that the agreement provided for a fair and reasonable outcome for employers, and was consistent with industry standards. The Court rejected the argument that the agreement was unfair or unreasonable, and approved the agreement under section 177 of the Fair Work Act.

In light of the Court's decision, the Quality Tyre Sales Pty. Ltd. (NSW) Collective Workplace Agreement 2015 was approved, and the application brought by Bridgestone Australia Limited was successful. The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union's opposition to the approval of the agreement was dismissed. The Court's decision provides clarity on the requirements for approving collective workplace agreements under the Fair Work Act, and provides a useful guide for employers and unions in negotiating and approving such agreements.

Bridgestone Australia Ltd.

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established