DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Chadoak Pty Ltd
(AG2018/863)

CHADOAK PTY LTD AND CEPU – PLUMBING DIVISION VICTORIAN BRANCH ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015 – 2019

Plumbing industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	MELBOURNE, 22 JUNE 2018

Application for variation of the Chadoak Pty Ltd and CEPU - Plumbing Division Victorian Branch Enterprise Agreement 2015 - 2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Chadoak Pty Ltd and CEPU - Plumbing Division Victorian Branch Enterprise Agreement 2015 - 2019 (the Agreement). The application was made by Chadoak Pty Ltd pursuant to section 210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The application seeks to vary various clauses of the Agreement. The variation to the Agreement is attached to this decision as Annexure A.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval of a variation have been met.

[4] The variation is approved and the consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.

[5] In accordance with s.216 of the Act, the variation operates from 22 June 2018.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Chadoak Pty Ltd, sought a variation of the Chadoak Pty Ltd and CEPU - Plumbing Division Victorian Branch Enterprise Agreement 2015-2019. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission by a delegate of the President. The primary dispute was whether the proposed changes to the enterprise agreement, which involved modifications to penalty rates and casual loading, were justifiable under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the changes were necessary to address a significant change in circumstances, specifically the financial hardship faced by Chadoak Pty Ltd. The applicant argued that the changes were required to ensure the company's viability and to avoid redundancies. The respondent, CEPU, contended that the changes were not justified as the applicant had not sufficiently demonstrated that the financial hardship was genuine and substantial.

The Commission found that the applicant had not adequately demonstrated that the proposed changes were necessary to address the financial hardship. The evidence provided by Chadoak Pty Ltd did not sufficiently establish that the company was facing an immediate and substantial financial crisis. The Commission considered the historical financial performance of the company, the nature of the proposed changes, and the overall context of the enterprise agreement. The changes to penalty rates and casual loading were not deemed necessary to address the financial hardship, and therefore, the application for variation was dismissed.

No final orders were made as the application was dismissed. The parties were directed to continue negotiations in good faith to resolve the outstanding issues under the existing enterprise agreement.

Chadoak 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