Butler McIntyre and Butler

[2014] FWCA 2659

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Tarac Technologies Pty Ltd
(AG2014/5699)

TARAC TECHNOLOGIES 2014 ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT - TRADES

Manufacturing and associated industries
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT O'CALLAGHAN	ADELAIDE, 28 APRIL 2014

Application for approval of the Tarac Technologies 2014 Enterprise Agreement - Trades.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Tarac Technologies 2014 Enterprise Agreement - Trades (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Tarac Technologies Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 6 May 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 May 2016.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union, sought approval of the Tarac Technologies 2014 Enterprise Agreement - Trades. The respondent, Tarac Technologies, opposed the application, arguing that the agreement did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The case was heard by the Fair Work Commission, which is tasked with resolving workplace disputes and approving enterprise agreements.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act. This involved assessing whether the agreement provided for the fair and efficient determination of terms and conditions of employment, and whether it had been made in good faith. The Commission also needed to consider whether the agreement contained any provisions that were contrary to public policy or that would have an adverse effect on the employees' terms and conditions of employment.

In its decision, the Commission found that the agreement met the necessary criteria for approval. The Commission determined that the agreement provided for the fair and efficient determination of terms and conditions of employment, and that it had been made in good faith. The Commission also concluded that none of the provisions in the agreement were contrary to public policy or had an adverse effect on the employees' terms and conditions of employment. The Commission approved the agreement and directed that it be registered with the Fair Work Commission.

The Commission's decision was based on a detailed analysis of the provisions of the agreement and the evidence presented by both parties. The Commission found that the agreement provided for a fair and efficient process for determining terms and conditions of employment, and that it contained provisions that were consistent with the principles of the Fair Work Act. The Commission also noted that the agreement had been negotiated in good faith, and that it did not contain any provisions that were contrary to public policy or that would have an adverse effect on the employees' terms and conditions of employment. The Commission's decision was therefore based on a careful consideration of the evidence and the relevant legal principles.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established