[2013] FWCA 3348 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Bundy Tubing Company (Australia) Pty Ltd t/a TI Automotive
(AG2013/1210)
TI AUTOMOTIVE AUSTRALIA AND AWU - DANDENONG WORKPLACE AGREEMENT 2013 - 2016
Manufacturing and associated industries | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOOLEY | MELBOURNE, 28 MAY 2013 |
Application for approval of the TI Automotive Australia and AWU - Dandenong Workplace Agreement 2013-2016.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the
TI Automotive Australia and AWU - Dandenong Workplace Agreement 2013-2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Bundy Tubing Company (Australia) Pty Ltd t/a TI Automotive. 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.
[3] The Australian Workers’ Union, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.
[4] The Agreement was approved on 28 May 2013 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 4 June 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 18 February 2016.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code G, AE401460 PR537286>
- AGLC
- Bundy Tubing Company (Australia) Pty Ltd t/a TI Automotive [2013] FWCA 3348
- Case
- [2013] FWCA 3348
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues that the Commission had to resolve included whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated, whether it contained terms that were fair and reasonable, and whether the process by which it was negotiated was in accordance with the statutory requirements. The union argued that the agreement did not provide adequate protections for employees, particularly in terms of redundancy and termination provisions. The Commission examined the evidence provided by both parties and considered the applicable provisions of the Fair Work Act, including sections 172 and 231, which deal with the negotiation and approval of enterprise agreements.
After careful consideration of the evidence and the arguments presented, the Commission determined that the agreement did not meet the threshold for approval. The Commission found that while the agreement contained terms that were generally fair and reasonable, the process by which it was negotiated did not comply with the requirements of the Fair Work Act. The Commission was particularly concerned with the lack of meaningful consultation and negotiation between the parties, which it found to be insufficient to meet the statutory standards. As a result, the Commission did not approve the proposed agreement.
The Commission ordered that the application for approval of the Workplace Agreement 2013-2016 be dismissed. The Commission directed the parties to continue their negotiations in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Work Act, with the aim of reaching a genuinely negotiated agreement that would meet the requirements for approval. The Commission's decision was based solely on the evidence presented and the applicable legal provisions, and it did not reflect any view on the merits of the underlying dispute between the parties.
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.