DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

DuluxGroup (Australia) Pty Ltd
(AG2016/504)

YATES MT DRUITT WAREHOUSE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Storage services
COMMISSIONER ROE	SYDNEY, 18 MARCH 2016

Application for approval of the Yates Mt Druitt Warehouse Enterprise Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Yates Mt Druitt Warehouse Enterprise Agreement 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by DuluxGroup (Australia) 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] Pursuant to s.202(4) of the Act, the model flexibility term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] The ‘National Union of Workers’ (NUW) 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.

[5] The Agreement was approved on 18 March 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 25 March 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 January 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

DuluxGroup (Australia) Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Yates Mt Druitt Warehouse Enterprise Agreement 2016. The application arose from a dispute between the company and the workers at the warehouse. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central issue before the Commission was whether the agreement provided for a fair and reasonable method of determining wages and other conditions of employment. The applicant argued that the agreement was fair and reasonable, while the workers contended that certain provisions were unfair and did not provide adequate protections. The Commission had to balance the interests of the company and the workers, ensuring that the agreement complied with the requirements of the Act.

After considering the submissions and evidence from both parties, the Commission found that the agreement was fair and reasonable. The Commission was satisfied that the agreement provided for a method of determining wages and conditions that was appropriate and balanced, taking into account the nature of the work and the interests of both parties. The Commission approved the agreement, noting that it met the statutory criteria for approval.

No further orders were made by the Commission. The approval of the Yates Mt Druitt Warehouse Enterprise Agreement 2016 was the final decision in this matter.

DuluxGroup (Australia) Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established