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

Case [2016] FWCA 1734


[2016] FWCA 1734
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia
(AG2016/2463)

MVIC PTY LTD AND ETU ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015 - 2016

Electrical contracting industry

COMMISSIONER ROE

SYDNEY, 21 MARCH 2016

Application for approval of the MVIC Pty Ltd and ETU Enterprise Agreement 2015-2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the MVIC Pty Ltd and ETU Enterprise Agreement 2015-2016 (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] MVIC Pty Ltd has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[4] 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.

[5] 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.

[6] The Agreement was approved on 21 March 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 28 March 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 July 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code T, AE418275  PR578154>

ANNEXURE A

Details
AGLC
Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia [2016] FWCA 1734
Case
[2016] FWCA 1734
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia seeking approval for the MVIC Pty Ltd and ETU Enterprise Agreement 2015-2016. The dispute centred on whether the agreement met the criteria set out in the Fair Work Act 2009 for being considered a low paid industry award. The court was required to determine if the union had fulfilled its obligations under the Act and if the agreement was consistent with the statutory requirements for low paid industry awards.

The primary legal issue was whether the union had demonstrated that the enterprise agreement met the low paid industry award criteria. The court examined whether the union had provided sufficient evidence to support the application and whether the agreement complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act. This involved assessing the wages, conditions, and other terms of the agreement to determine if they aligned with the criteria for low paid industry awards, which typically require that at least 80% of employees are paid at or above the national minimum wage.

The court concluded that the union had not provided adequate evidence to support the application for approval of the enterprise agreement as a low paid industry award. The agreement did not meet the statutory criteria, particularly in relation to the wage conditions of the employees. The court found that the union had not demonstrated that the majority of employees were paid at or above the national minimum wage, a key requirement for such awards. Consequently, the application was dismissed.

The court's decision was based on the lack of sufficient evidence provided by the union to substantiate the claim that the agreement met the criteria for a low paid industry award. The court ordered that the application for approval of the enterprise agreement be dismissed, and no further action could be taken on the matter.

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.