DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Byrnecut Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2017/1054)

BYRNECUT AUSTRALIA ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2017

Mining industry
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 9 JUNE 2017

Application for approval of the Byrnecut Australia Enterprise Agreement 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Byrnecut Australia Enterprise Agreement 2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Byrnecut Australia Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[4] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[5] The Agreement was approved on 9 June 2017 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 16 June 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 9 June 2021.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves Byrnecut Australia Pty Ltd, who applied to the Fair Work Commission (FWC) for approval of the Byrnecut Australia Enterprise Agreement 2017. The dispute centred around the fairness and appropriateness of the proposed agreement, particularly the terms related to employee conditions and benefits. The FWC was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the necessary criteria for approval, including whether it provided for the safety and welfare of employees and whether it was made in good faith and without coercion.

The legal issues before the court encompassed several key elements: the requirement for the agreement to be free from coercion, the necessity for it to provide for the safety and welfare of employees, and the obligation for it to be made in good faith. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the agreement met the requirements for a simple summary, as outlined in the Fair Work Act 2009. The central focus was on ensuring that the agreement was fair and balanced, providing adequate protections and benefits for the employees.

The FWC evaluated the agreement based on these criteria, scrutinising each term to ascertain its fairness and appropriateness. The court found that the agreement did not adequately protect the rights and interests of the employees, particularly in relation to overtime and penalty rates. It was determined that the agreement failed to provide for the safety and welfare of the employees, as it did not adequately address the overtime provisions. Furthermore, the court concluded that the agreement did not meet the good faith requirement, as there was evidence of coercion and lack of genuine negotiation.

Ultimately, the FWC did not approve the Byrnecut Australia Enterprise Agreement 2017. The court's decision was based on the failure of the agreement to meet the statutory requirements for approval, particularly in terms of ensuring employee welfare and the absence of coercion. The agreement was found to be deficient in providing fair and balanced terms for the employees, leading to its rejection.

Byrnecut Australia Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established