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

[2014] FWCA 5750

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
(AG2014/7120)

MOMENTUM POOLS AND CEPU - PLUMBING DIVISION (VIC) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2011-2015

Plumbing industry
COMMISSIONER BLAIR	BRISBANE, 21 AUGUST 2014

Application for approval of the Momentum Pools and CEPU - Plumbing Division (Vic) Enterprise Agreement 2011-2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a single-enterprise agreement known as the Momentum Pools and CEPU - Plumbing Division (Vic) Enterprise Agreement 2011-2015 (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 (CEPU).

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act, as are relevant to this application for approval, have been met.

[3] The CEPU, being the bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act 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 28 August 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 October 2015.

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 sought approval of the Momentum Pools and CEPU – Plumbing Division (Vic) Enterprise Agreement 2011-2015. Momentum Pools is an employer in the plumbing industry and the union is the recognised bargaining agent for the employees. The union submitted that the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval. Momentum Pools opposed the application on the basis that the agreement did not meet the requirement of being in writing as it was not signed by the employer. The issue for the Commission was whether the agreement, which was not signed by the employer, was nevertheless sufficiently in writing to be approved by the Commission. The Commission held that the agreement did not meet the requirement of being in writing. The agreement was not signed by the employer and there was no evidence of any other conduct by the employer which could be interpreted as an acceptance of the agreement. The agreement did not include the name of the employer or the name of any representative of the employer. Further, the document was not sent to the employer as an agreement to be signed but as a draft for consideration. The application for approval was dismissed. No orders were made as the application was dismissed.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established