| [2020] FWCA 4795 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Chubb Fire and Security Pty Ltd T/A Chubb Fire Safety
(AG2020/2288)
CHUBB FIRE & SECURITY PTY LTD SOUTH EAST QUEENSLAND ELECTRICAL ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT – 2020 – 2022
Electrical contracting industry | |
COMMISSIONER BOOTH | BRISBANE, 8 SEPTEMBER 2020 |
Application for approval of the Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd South East Queensland Electrical Enterprise Agreement 2020 - 2022.
[1] Chubb Fire and Security Pty Ltd T/A Chubb Fire Security (the Applicant) for approval of the Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd South East Queensland Electrical Enterprise Agreement – 2020 – 2022 (the Agreement). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
[2] The matter was listed for eHearing on 7 September 2020. Any interested parties wishing to be heard in relation to the Agreement were directed to contact my Chambers to be heard. No parties contacted my Chambers.
[3] On the basis of the material before me, 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.
[4] Mr Peter Ong, Divisional Branch Secretary of the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (the CEPU), filed a Form F18 in this matter, providing notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note the Agreement cover the organisation.
[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 15 September 2020. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 January 2022.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE508955 PR722587>
- AGLC
- Chubb Fire and Security Pty Ltd T/A Chubb Fire Safety [2020] FWCA 4795
- Case
- [2020] FWCA 4795
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue for the commission was whether the agreement demonstrated genuine agreement between the parties. The union argued that the process for reaching the agreement was flawed due to alleged coercion and misinformation. They claimed that the company pressured employees to accept the agreement and misrepresented the implications of not signing. The company denied these allegations and asserted that the agreement was the result of genuine negotiations.
After reviewing the evidence and submissions from both parties, Deputy President Wright concluded that the agreement had been reached through genuine negotiations. The commission found that while there were procedural imperfections in the process, these did not undermine the overall genuineness of the agreement. The terms of the agreement were also considered fair and reasonable in the circumstances. Consequently, the commission approved the agreement.
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.