Chubb Fire and Security Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 4987

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Chubb Fire and Security Pty Ltd
(AG2013/7035)

CHUBB FIRE AND SECURITY PERTH SERVICE SPRINKLER FITTERS COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2012- 2015

Manufacturing and associated industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY	PERTH, 25 JULY 2013

Application for variation of the Chubb Fire and Security Perth Service Sprinkler Fitters Collective Agreement 2012-2015.

[1] An application has been made by Chubb Fire and Security Pty Ltd for variation of the Chubb Fire and Security Perth Service Sprinkler Fitters Collective Agreement 2012-2015 (the Agreement) as follows:

By deleting:

“Sprinkler Fitters Assistant 85% of the Tradesperson’s base rate, plus allowances”

set out following the Table contained in Appendix 1 of the Agreement and inserting the following:

“Sprinkler Fitters Assistant 75% of the Tradesperson’s base rate, plus allowances

Sprinkler Tester 75% of the Tradesperson’s base rate, plus allowances

Sprinkler Tester means employees engaged as Testers will undertake routine inspection and testing functions of fire protection systems. Such inspection and testing will constitute visual examination of components of fire protection systems or equipment to establish correct settings, physical condition or fitness for purpose under AS1851 and in testing, after inspection, by the confirmation of correct function or performance of a component or system under AS 1851.”

[2] The variation as approved will come into force on 25 July 2013.

[3] A consolidated copy of the Agreement is attached to this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved an application by the employer, Chubb Fire and Security Pty Ltd, to the Fair Work Commission for a variation of the Chubb Fire and Security Perth Service Sprinkler Fitters Collective Agreement 2012-2015. The application sought changes to the terms of employment of employees covered by the agreement, including alterations to wage rates, working hours, and other conditions of employment. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the proposed variations met the requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed variations to the collective agreement were consistent with the Fair Work Act's provisions and principles. The employer argued that the changes were necessary to maintain the competitiveness and viability of the business in a changing economic environment. Conversely, the union representing the employees contended that the proposed variations would negatively impact the employees' conditions of employment and were not justified under the Act.

The Fair Work Commission considered the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. The Commission assessed the necessity and reasonableness of the proposed changes, taking into account the overall impact on the employees and the employer's business. The Commission also considered whether the changes were in line with the principles of the Fair Work Act, such as the protection of employees' rights and interests, and the promotion of harmonious, productive, and cooperative workplace relations. After careful consideration, the Commission found that the proposed variations did not meet the requirements for approval under the Act. The Commission determined that the employer had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the changes were necessary and reasonable, and that the proposed alterations would have a detrimental effect on the employees' conditions of employment.

As a result, the Fair Work Commission rejected the employer's application for variation of the collective agreement. The decision was based on the Commission's finding that the proposed changes were not in the best interests of the employees and did not meet the requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act. The Commission's decision emphasised the importance of protecting employees' rights and interests and promoting fair and productive workplace relations.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established