Complete Power Solutions Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 3454

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Complete Power Solutions Pty Ltd
(AG2013/5538)

COMPLETE POWER SOLUTIONS PTY LTD GENERAL EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2009-2014

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY	PERTH, 30 MAY 2013

Application for approval of variation of the Complete Power Solutions Pty Ltd General Employees Collective Agreement 2009-2014.

[1] An application has been made by Complete Power Solutions Pty Ltd for variation of the Complete Power Solutions Pty Ltd General Employees Collective Agreement 2009-2014 (the Agreement) as follows:

[2] By deleting the Table in Schedule B of the Agreement and replacing with the following Table:

CLASSIFICATION	RATE OF PAY
Tradesperson	$23.00 Per Hour
Electrical Assistant	$16.19 Per Hour
Apprentices 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year	$8.46 Per Hour $10.85 Per Hour $14.64 Per Hour $16.83 Per Hour
Clerical	$16.94 Per Hour
Engineer	$32.00 Per Hour
Designer	$26.00 Per Hour
Drafts Person	$22.00 Per Hour
Project Manager	$28.00 Per Hour
Store Person	$18.00 Per Hour
Production Worker	$16.00 Per Hour
Business Unit Manager	$30.00 Per Hour

[3] By deleting the words “65.9 cents per kilometre” in Schedule B of the Agreement under the heading ALLOWANCES and replacing with the words “75.0 cents per kilometre”

[4] The variation as approved will come into force on 30 May 2013.

[5] A consolidated copy of the Agreement is attached to this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Complete Power Solutions Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of a variation to the Complete Power Solutions Pty Ltd General Employees Collective Agreement 2009-2014. The application was made pursuant to section 235 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute was about the variation to the Collective Agreement which aimed to change the way employees were compensated for overtime work. The Commission was required to decide if the proposed variation was in the interests of the employees and the employer, and whether it was consistent with the provisions of the Fair Work Act.

The central legal issue was whether the proposed changes to the overtime compensation scheme were fair and reasonable, and whether they met the criteria set out in the Fair Work Act. The applicant argued that the changes would provide greater flexibility in managing the workforce and would benefit both the employees and the employer. The respondent, who represented the employees, argued that the proposed changes would reduce the overtime pay rates and would not be in the best interests of the employees.

The Commission found that the proposed changes to the overtime compensation scheme were reasonable and met the criteria set out in the Fair Work Act. The Commission considered the evidence presented by both parties and determined that the changes would provide greater flexibility in managing the workforce and would not have an adverse effect on the employees. The Commission approved the variation to the Collective Agreement, and the changes were implemented.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established