DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Commonwealth Steel Company Pty Ltd t/a Moly-Cop Australasia
(AG2015/6280)

MOLY-COP WARATAH ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 8 DECEMBER 2015

Application for approval of the Moly-Cop Waratah Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Moly-Cop Waratah Enterprise Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Commonwealth Steel Company Pty Ltd t/a Moly-Cop Australasia. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] 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] 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.

[4] The Australian Workers’ Union, “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) and Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia 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 these organisations.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 15 December 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 September 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the Fair Work Act 2009, the Commonwealth Steel Company Pty Ltd, trading as Moly-Cop Australasia, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Moly-Cop Waratah Enterprise Agreement 2015. The applicant sought to have the agreement certified as a single-employer agreement under section 232 of the Act, which would ensure that it would be the only applicable enterprise agreement for the employees covered by the agreement. The application was opposed by the National Tertiary Education Industry Union, who raised concerns about the provisions in the agreement, particularly those related to redundancy and the definition of shiftwork.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the provisions in the agreement were consistent with the provisions of the Fair Work Act and the Fair Work Regulations. The Commission had to consider whether the agreement provided for a fair and reasonable system for determining redundancy payments and whether the definition of shiftwork was in line with the relevant legislative provisions. The Commission also had to assess whether the agreement met the requirements for single-employer certification under section 232 of the Act.

After considering the arguments presented by both parties, the Commission found that the agreement was consistent with the provisions of the Fair Work Act and the Fair Work Regulations. The Commission was satisfied that the provisions in the agreement provided for a fair and reasonable system for determining redundancy payments and that the definition of shiftwork was in line with the relevant legislative provisions. The Commission also determined that the agreement met the requirements for single-employer certification under section 232 of the Act. The Commission approved the agreement as a single-employer agreement, subject to certain modifications to the definition of shiftwork.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Moly-Cop Waratah Enterprise Agreement 2015 as a single-employer agreement, subject to certain modifications to the definition of shiftwork. The Commission found that the agreement was consistent with the provisions of the Fair Work Act and the Fair Work Regulations and that it met the requirements for single-employer certification. The modifications to the definition of shiftwork were made to ensure compliance with the relevant legislative provisions.

Commonwealth Steel Company Pty Ltd t/a Moly-Cop Australasia

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established