DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia
(AG2017/277)

SIPHONIC SOLUTIONS (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD AND CEPU PLUMBING DIVISION PLUMBING UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2015 – 2019

Plumbing industry
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 17 FEBRUARY 2017

Application for approval of the Siphonic Solutions (Australia) Pty Ltd and CEPU Plumbing Division Plumbing Union Collective Agreement 2015-2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Siphonic Solutions (Australia) Pty Ltd and CEPU Plumbing Division Plumbing Union Collective Agreement 2015 – 2019 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia. 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] 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) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 24 February 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 October 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia applied for approval of the Siphonic Solutions (Australia) Pty Ltd and CEPU Plumbing Division Plumbing Union Collective Agreement 2015-2019. The applicant union contended that the agreement was a lawful agreement for the purposes of section 231 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The respondent employer opposed the application, contending that the agreement was not a lawful agreement, as it did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, including the provisions concerning the registration of an agreement.

The central legal issue was whether the agreement was a lawful agreement for the purposes of section 231 of the Fair Work Act 2009. This involved considering whether the agreement satisfied the requirements of the Act, including the provisions concerning the registration of an agreement. The Commission considered the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009, as well as the evidence and arguments presented by the parties. The Commission found that the agreement did not meet the requirements of the Act, as it did not include certain provisions that were required by the Act, such as provisions concerning the payment of wages and conditions of employment.

The Commission held that the agreement was not a lawful agreement for the purposes of section 231 of the Fair Work Act 2009, as it did not include certain provisions that were required by the Act. The Commission noted that the agreement did not include provisions concerning the payment of wages and conditions of employment, which were required by section 113 of the Act. The Commission also noted that the agreement did not include provisions concerning the registration of the agreement, which were required by section 231 of the Act. As a result, the application for approval of the agreement was dismissed.

The Fair Work Commission dismissed the application for approval of the agreement, on the basis that the agreement did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission noted that the agreement did not include certain provisions that were required by the Act, such as provisions concerning the payment of wages and conditions of employment. The Commission also noted that the agreement did not include provisions concerning the registration of the agreement, which were required by the Act. As a result, the agreement was not a lawful agreement for the purposes of section 231 of the Act, and the application for approval was dismissed.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established