Corangamite Catchment Management Authority

[2013] FWCA 3612

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Corangamite Catchment Management Authority
(AG2013/6256)

CORANGAMITE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY WORKPLACE AGREEMENT 2012—2014

Local government administration
DEPUTY PRESIDENT SMITH	MELBOURNE, 5 JUNE 2013

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Corangamite Catchment Management Authority Workplace Agreement 2012—2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Corangamite Catchment Management Authority. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] The application was not lodged within 14 days after the agreement was made. Pursuant to s.185(3)(b), in all the circumstances I consider it fair to extend the time for making the application.

[3] 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.

[4] The Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, have 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 this organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 12 June 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 4 December 2014.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Corangamite Catchment Management Authority has applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of a workplace agreement. The application was made under section 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 and concerns the Corangamite Catchment Management Authority Workplace Agreement 2012—2014. This is a single-enterprise agreement that was entered into by the Authority and its employees, represented by the Australian Services Union. The Authority sought to have the agreement approved as a single-interest employer agreement, and the application was contested by the Union. The key issues before the Commission were whether the Authority was a single-interest employer, and whether the agreement was appropriately made as a single-interest employer agreement.

The Commission began by considering the definition of a single-interest employer under the Act. It was noted that the Authority was constituted under the Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994 (Vic) and had a primary function of managing the catchment area. The Commission examined the various activities undertaken by the Authority and found that it had a range of functions, including environmental protection, community engagement, and regulatory compliance. The Commission held that the Authority did not satisfy the requirement of being a single-interest employer because it had multiple functions that were not all related to a single interest. The Commission also found that the agreement was not appropriately made as a single-interest employer agreement.

In light of these findings, the Commission did not approve the agreement as a single-interest employer agreement. The Authority was given the opportunity to re-lodge the application, either as a single-interest employer agreement or as a standard enterprise agreement. The Commission noted that if the Authority chose to re-lodge the application as a standard enterprise agreement, it would need to ensure that the agreement met all of the requirements of the Act, including the good faith bargaining requirement. The Union was also given the opportunity to raise any objections to the re-lodged application.

The Fair Work Commission did not approve the Corangamite Catchment Management Authority Workplace Agreement 2012—2014 as a single-interest employer agreement. The Authority was given the opportunity to re-lodge the application, either as a single-interest employer agreement or as a standard enterprise agreement. If the Authority chose to re-lodge the application as a standard enterprise agreement, it would need to ensure that the agreement met all of the requirements of the Act, including the good faith bargaining requirement. The Union was also given the opportunity to raise any objections to the re-lodged application.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established