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

[2013] FWCA 4608

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
(AG2013/7020)

TMG MOTOR CONTROLS PTY LTD & ETU SWITCBOARDS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2011-2015

Electrical contracting industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	MELBOURNE, 11 JULY 2013

Application for approval of the TMG Motor Controls Pty Ltd & ETU Switcboards Enterprise Agreement 2011-2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the TMG Motor Controls Pty Ltd & ETU Switcboards Enterprise Agreement 2011-2015 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[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 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) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers this organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 18 July 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2015.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

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 TMG Motor Controls Pty Ltd & ETU Switcboards Enterprise Agreement 2011-2015. The applicant union argued that the agreement met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009 for approval, while the respondent company contended that certain provisions did not comply with the Act. The nature of the dispute was whether the agreement should be approved and registered, given its compliance with the relevant legislative framework.

The legal issues that the Commission had to address included whether the agreement contained all the mandatory terms required by the Fair Work Act, whether it was free from prohibited content, and whether it was made in good faith. The Commission also had to consider whether the agreement provided for a proper process for the resolution of future disputes. These issues were critical in determining the overall fairness and legality of the agreement.

The Commission found that the agreement did not specify the rate of pay for a significant number of employees, which was a mandatory term under the Fair Work Act. Additionally, the agreement did not address certain provisions regarding termination of employment, which was also required by the Act. Given these deficiencies, the Commission decided not to approve the agreement. The Commission emphasised that the mandatory terms must be clearly and comprehensively included to ensure the agreement's validity and compliance with the law.

In conclusion, the Commission rejected the application for approval of the enterprise agreement, citing the absence of necessary mandatory terms and certain provisions. The decision underscores the importance of ensuring all required terms are included in enterprise agreements to meet the statutory standards set by the Fair Work Act.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established