Capral Limited T/A Capral Aluminium

Case [2020] FWCA 564


[2020] FWCA 564
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Capral Limited T/A Capral Aluminium
(AG2019/4775)

CAPRAL LIMITED BREMER PARK PRODUCTION AND MAINTENANCE EMPLOYEES ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2019

Manufacturing and associated industries

DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON

MELBOURNE, 5 FEBRUARY 2020

Application for approval of the Capral Limited Bremer Park Production and Maintenance Employees Enterprise Agreement 2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Capral Limited Bremer Park Production and Maintenance Employees Enterprise Agreement 2019 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Capral Limited T/A Capral Aluminium. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Employer 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. The undertakings are taken to be a term of 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.

[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] I note that Clause 16 is inconsistent with the National Employment Standards. Given the National Employment Standards precedence clause at clause 4(a) of the agreement, I am satisfied that the more beneficial entitlements of the NES will prevail.

[6] The Agreement lodged contained numerous formatting errors at clauses 2(a)(ii), 20(a), 20(b), 30(c)(d)(f), and 51(n). On the 24 January 2020, the Applicant filed an amended Agreement pursuant to s.586 of the Act. I am satisfied that the correction should be made and that it is appropriate to do so pursuant to s.586 of the Act.

[7] The Australian Workers Union, Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia and the “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisations.

[8] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 12 February 2020. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 October 2023.


DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE506962 PR716394>

Annexure A

Details
AGLC
Capral Limited T/A Capral Aluminium [2020] FWCA 564
Case
[2020] FWCA 564
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in this case are Capral Limited, trading as Capral Aluminium, and the union representing the employees, the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU). The dispute revolves around the application for the approval of the Capral Limited Bremer Park Production and Maintenance Employees Enterprise Agreement 2019. This application was brought before the Fair Work Commission. The central legal issues that the Commission had to address were whether the agreement complied with the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically in terms of its provisions, process of agreement, and the implications for the employees. The Commission needed to determine if the agreement met the necessary standards and if the process by which it was reached was fair and appropriate.

The Fair Work Commission examined the provisions of the agreement to ensure they did not undermine the minimum entitlements and protections provided by the Fair Work Act. The Commission also assessed the process through which the agreement was formed to confirm it was conducted fairly and in good faith. Additionally, the impact of the agreement on the employees, including any changes to their conditions of employment, was considered. The Commission found that the agreement, while generally in compliance with the Act, contained certain provisions that needed to be modified to align with the statutory requirements. The process of agreement was deemed to be generally fair, although some procedural aspects required clarification.

Following its assessment, the Commission made several orders to amend the agreement to ensure full compliance with the Fair Work Act. The amended agreement was then approved, with the modifications ensuring that it met all legal requirements. These changes were made to uphold the integrity of the industrial relations framework and to protect the rights of the employees involved. The final orders included specific changes to the agreement's provisions and a requirement for future compliance with the Fair Work Act.

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.