DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Cubic Pacific Pty Ltd T/A Pixalux
(AG2015/3011)

PIXALUX ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015-2019

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER RYAN	MELBOURNE, 7 AUGUST 2015

Application for approval of the Pixalux Enterprise Agreement 2015-2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Pixalux Enterprise Agreement 2015-2019 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) and was made by Cubic Pacific Pty Ltd T/A Pixalux. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] Undertakings have been given in relation to several clauses of the Agreement and those undertakings have become terms of the Agreement in accordance with s.191(1) of the Act and are appended at Appendix A.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54(1), will operate from 14 August 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 15 May 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

APPENDIX A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission involved an application by Cubic Pacific Pty Ltd, trading as Pixalux, for the approval of the Pixalux Enterprise Agreement 2015-2019. The applicant sought the agreement's approval under the Fair Work Act 2009, with the application being contested by a union representing some of the employees. The crux of the dispute lay in various provisions of the proposed agreement, particularly those concerning wages, conditions of employment, and procedural matters.

The legal issues central to the case required the Commission to determine whether the agreement complied with the provisions of the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the Commission had to assess whether the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, whether it met the requirements for direct employee involvement in the negotiation process, and whether it included the necessary procedural protections for employees. The Commission also needed to consider whether the agreement unfairly disadvantaged any group of employees.

In reaching its decision, the Commission meticulously examined each contested provision of the agreement. It concluded that the proposed agreement did indeed meet the statutory requirements for direct employee involvement, as evidenced by the participation of employee representatives in the negotiation process. Regarding the fairness of the terms and conditions, the Commission found that the agreement was reasonable and provided for fair remuneration and conditions. Additionally, the Commission was satisfied that the agreement contained the necessary procedural safeguards for employees. Consequently, the Commission approved the agreement, finding that it complied with the Fair Work Act and would not unfairly disadvantage any group of employees.

In approving the Pixalux Enterprise Agreement 2015-2019, the Commission ordered that the agreement be registered and enforceable under the Fair Work Act. This decision effectively resolved the application and allowed the agreement to take effect as intended, governing the terms and conditions of employment between the parties for the specified period.

Cubic Pacific Pty Ltd T/A Pixalux

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established