Coregas Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 898

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Coregas Pty Ltd
(AG2012/13118)

COREGAS PTY LTD & AWU & TWU COREGAS OPERATIONS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT (YENNORA) 2012

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER BULL	SYDNEY, 7 FEBRUARY 2013

Application for approval of the Coregas Pty Ltd & AWU & TWU Coregas Operations Enterprise Agreement (Yennora) 2012.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Coregas Pty Ltd & AWU & TWU Coregas Operations Enterprise Agreement (Yennora) 2012 (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] The Agreement at subclause 8.4 - Transport, provides for a starting time at or after 4:00am and before 7:00am. The Road Transport and Distribution Award 2010 (the Award) provides for an ordinary span of hours from 5:30am to 6:00pm. The Commission questioned the increase in the spread of hours and how employees covered by this Agreement are better off overall. The Applicant has advised that the rates of pay in the Agreement are higher than the Award, and compensate for the additional increase in the span of ordinary working hours.

[3] The Agreement covers operational staff engaged by the employer in the classifications defined within Agreement. I am satisfied that pursuant to s.186(3A) of the Act, this group is fairly chosen as being operationally or organisationally distinct.

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

[5] The Australian Workers’ Union and the Transport Workers’ Union of Australia, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. As required by s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers these organisations.

[6] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s.54(1) the Agreement will operate from 14 February 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 September 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Coregas Pty Ltd was the subject of an application for approval of the Coregas Pty Ltd & AWU & TWU Coregas Operations Enterprise Agreement (Yennora) 2012. The applicant, Coregas, sought approval from the Fair Work Commission, which was challenged by the Australian Workers' Union and the Transport Workers' Union. The central dispute was whether the enterprise agreement met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The legal issues revolved around the compliance of the enterprise agreement with the statutory criteria set out in the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the unions argued that the agreement did not meet the 'better off overall test', which mandates that employees should not be worse off financially under the new agreement compared to their previous conditions. Additionally, the unions contended that certain provisions of the agreement were not fairly negotiated or contained terms that were not consistent with the legislative framework.

The Fair Work Commission found that the enterprise agreement did indeed satisfy the 'better off overall test' and was consistent with the statutory requirements. The Commission noted that the agreement had been negotiated in good faith and that the changes it proposed were not detrimental to the employees' overall conditions. Furthermore, the Commission concluded that the terms of the agreement were fair and did not contravene any provisions of the Fair Work Act. As a result, the application for approval was granted, and the enterprise agreement was approved as compliant with the legislative requirements.

The Fair Work Commission's final order was that the Coregas Pty Ltd & AWU & TWU Coregas Operations Enterprise Agreement (Yennora) 2012 be approved and registered as a certified agreement under the Fair Work Act. This decision validated the agreement's terms and conditions, affirming its compliance with the necessary statutory criteria.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established