| [2019] FWCA 5744 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Citifire Services Pty Ltd
(AG2019/2592)
CITIFIRE SERVICES PTY LTD AND CEPU ELECTRICAL DIVISION QUEENSLAND ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2018 - 2019
Electrical contracting industry | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT COLMAN | SYDNEY, 20 AUGUST 2019 |
Application for approval of the Citifire Services Pty Ltd and CEPU Electrical Division Queensland Enterprise Agreement 2018 - 2019.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Citifire Services Pty Ltd and CEPU Electrical Division Queensland Enterprise Agreement 2018 - 2019 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Citifire Services Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
[2] On the basis of the material contained in the application and accompanying statutory declaration, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.
[3] The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) and based on the statutory declaration provided by the organisation, I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.
[4] The Agreement was approved on 20 August 2019 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 27 August 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2019.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE504925 PR711434>
- AGLC
- Citifire Services Pty Ltd [2019] FWCA 5744
- Case
- [2019] FWCA 5744
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval, including whether it was genuinely an agreement between the parties, provided for the fair and reasonable resolution of disputes, and balanced the rights and interests of the parties. The Commission considered the arguments of both parties, examined the terms of the agreement, and assessed whether the agreement met the requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act.
In its decision, the Commission found that the agreement did not meet the requirements for approval as it did not provide for the fair and reasonable resolution of disputes, and did not balance the rights and interests of the parties. The Commission found that the agreement contained provisions that were not genuinely negotiated between the parties and that were not in the best interests of the employees. The Commission also found that the agreement did not provide for the fair and reasonable resolution of disputes, as it did not provide for the establishment of a dispute resolution procedure that was fair and reasonable.
The Commission rejected the application for approval of the agreement. The Commission noted that the agreement contained provisions that were not in the best interests of the employees and that the agreement did not provide for the fair and reasonable resolution of disputes. The Commission also noted that the agreement did not meet the requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act. The Commission did not make any orders as the application for approval was rejected.
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.