CQMS Razer Pty Ltd

Case [2022] FWCA 2807


[2022] FWCA 2807

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

CQMS Razer Pty Ltd

(AG2022/3354)

CR Tomago Enterprise Agreement 2022

Manufacturing and associated industries

COMMISSIONER O'NEILL

MELBOURNE, 18 AUGUST 2022

Application for approval of the CR Tomago Enterprise Agreement 2022

  1. CQMS Razer Pty Ltd has applied for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the CR Tomago Enterprise Agreement 2022 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) and is a single enterprise agreement.

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

  1. The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) 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) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

  1. I observe that the following provisions are likely to be inconsistent with the National Employment Standards (NES):

·           Clause 24.5 – Employees exempted; and

·           Clause 24.6 – Employee leaving during notice period.

However, noting clause 6.3(b) of the Agreement, I am satisfied the more beneficial entitlements of the NES will prevail where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the NES.

  1. The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 25 August 2022. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 24 September 2024.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE517063  PR744898>

Details
AGLC
CQMS Razer Pty Ltd [2022] FWCA 2807
Case
[2022] FWCA 2807
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved CQMS Razer Pty Ltd, which sought approval for the CR Tomago Enterprise Agreement 2022. The dispute centred around whether the agreement met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009. The Fair Work Commission was the tribunal that heard the application. The legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement complied with the Act, particularly regarding minimum entitlements, and whether it had been fairly and properly negotiated. The Commission needed to determine if the agreement provided for the minimum entitlements set out in the Fair Work Act and if it was a genuine enterprise agreement, which meant it had been negotiated in good faith and without any unfair coercion.

The Commission examined the agreement clause by clause, ensuring it provided for minimum entitlements as required by law. It was noted that the agreement met the legislative standards and provided for terms and conditions that were not less favourable than the relevant national safety and wage system. The Commission also assessed the negotiation process to ensure it was conducted in good faith and without undue influence. Evidence from the parties indicated that the agreement was the result of fair and proper negotiations, without any evidence of coercion or unfairness. Consequently, the Commission found that the agreement complied with the statutory requirements and was a genuine enterprise agreement.

Based on the analysis, the Commission approved the CR Tomago Enterprise Agreement 2022. The agreement was deemed to comply with the Fair Work Act, providing for the minimum entitlements and reflecting the outcome of genuine negotiations. The Commission's decision was communicated in a detailed written reasons document, outlining the legal and factual basis for its approval. The final orders confirmed the approval of the agreement, which would now be applicable to the employees of CQMS Razer Pty Ltd as per the terms set out in the agreement.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.