| [2019] FWCA 8669 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Downer EDI Works Pty Ltd
(AG2019/4850)
DOWNER ROSEHILL WORKSHOP AGREEMENT 2019 - 2022
Manufacturing and associated industries | |
COMMISSIONER JOHNS | SYDNEY, 30 DECEMBER 2019 |
Application for approval of the Downer Rosehill Workshop Agreement 2019 - 2022.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Downer Rosehill Workshop Agreement 2019 - 2022 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Downer EDI Works Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
[2] 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.
[3] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 6 January 2020. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 20 July 2022.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE506598 PR715547>
- AGLC
- Downer EDI Works Pty Ltd [2019] FWCA 8669
- Case
- [2019] FWCA 8669
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed agreement was an appropriate enterprise agreement for the employees covered by it. The Electrical Trades Union of Australia argued that the agreement did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act, specifically that it did not provide for a fair and equitable resolution of employee disputes. The employer, Downer EDI Works Pty Ltd, maintained that the agreement was fair and reasonable, and that it provided for appropriate mechanisms for the resolution of disputes.
The Fair Work Commission determined that the proposed agreement did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act, primarily because it did not provide for an adequate dispute resolution mechanism. The Commission found that the agreement did not provide for a fair and equitable process for resolving disputes between the employer and employees, and that this was a significant deficiency. The Commission did not accept the employer's argument that the agreement provided for an appropriate dispute resolution mechanism, and rejected the application for approval of the agreement. The Commission did not make any orders in relation to 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.