DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia
(AG2015/3741)

LINDORES PERSONNEL NO.2 PTY LTD AND CEPU PLUMBING DIVISION UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2011-2015

Plumbing industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT LAWRENCE	SYDNEY, 10 JULY 2015

Application for approval of the Lindores Personnel No.2 Pty Ltd and CEPU Plumbing Division Union Collective Agreement 2011-2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Lindores Personnel No.2 Pty Ltd and CEPU Plumbing Division Union Collective Agreement 2011-2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 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. As required by s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s.54(1) it will operate from 17 July 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 October 2015.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Lindores Personnel No.2 Pty Ltd and CEPU Plumbing Division Union Collective Agreement 2011-2015. The employer, Lindores Personnel No.2 Pty Ltd, opposed the application, arguing that the agreement did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred around whether the agreement contained provisions that were not consistent with the provisions of the Act, specifically in relation to the protection of employee rights and the avoidance of potential exploitation.

The legal issues before the court included whether the agreement contained provisions that were not consistent with the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009, whether the agreement adequately protected employee rights, and whether the agreement contained provisions that could potentially lead to exploitation of employees. The court also considered whether the agreement contained provisions that were not in the best interests of the employees or the employer.

The court found that the agreement contained provisions that were not consistent with the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the court found that the agreement contained provisions that could potentially lead to exploitation of employees, as they allowed for the employer to unilaterally change the terms and conditions of employment without prior notice or consultation with the employees. The court also found that the agreement did not adequately protect employee rights, as it did not contain provisions for the protection of employees' wages and conditions. The court determined that the agreement was not in the best interests of the employees or the employer, and therefore could not be approved under the Act.

The court ordered that the application for approval of the agreement be refused, and that the agreement be returned to the parties for amendment and resubmission to the Commission for approval. The court also ordered that the employer take steps to ensure that the employees were not subjected to any adverse consequences as a result of the employer's opposition to the application.

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