DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Dyno Nobel Asia Pacific Pty Limited
(AG2016/4622)

DYNO NOBEL KALGOORLIE MANUFACTURING ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 11 AUGUST 2016

Application for approval of the Dyno Nobel Kalgoorlie Manufacturing Enterprise Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Dyno Nobel Kalgoorlie Manufacturing 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 Dyno Nobel Asia Pacific Pty Limited. 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. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[3] The Agreement was approved on 11 August 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 18 August 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 11 August 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Dyno Nobel Asia Pacific Pty Limited sought approval for the Dyno Nobel Kalgoorlie Manufacturing Enterprise Agreement 2016 from the Fair Work Commission. The dispute centred on whether the agreement was appropriate for the employees involved and if it complied with the relevant labour laws. The application was contested by the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union, which argued that certain provisions of the agreement did not sufficiently protect employee interests. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the agreement provided adequate protections for employee rights and whether it was made in good faith. Additionally, the court had to consider if the agreement facilitated a fair and efficient workplace. The Commission examined the bargaining process, the content of the agreement, and the submissions from both parties. The critical focus was on ensuring that the agreement did not unjustifiably disadvantage employees and that it was made without coercion.

The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement was appropriately made and did not disadvantage employees. The Commission noted that the bargaining process was conducted in good faith and that the agreement contained necessary protections for employees. While acknowledging some concerns raised by the union, the Commission concluded that the agreement was fair and met the statutory requirements. The court approved the agreement, emphasising the importance of a balanced approach to workplace relations.

The final orders of the Commission were that the Dyno Nobel Kalgoorlie Manufacturing Enterprise Agreement 2016 be approved and registered under the Fair Work Act 2009. The agreement was to be effective from the date of the decision, and both parties were directed to adhere to its terms. The Commission also directed that any disputes arising under the agreement would be resolved through the appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms outlined within the agreement itself.

Dyno Nobel Asia Pacific Pty Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established