E Kingston & M S Page T/A ME Reinforcing

[2013] FWCA 5607

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

E Kingston & M S Page T/A ME Reinforcing
(AG2013/7994)

ME REINFORCING ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Building, metal and civil construction industries
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT O'CALLAGHAN	ADELAIDE, 13 AUGUST 2013

Application for approval of the ME Reinforcing Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the ME Reinforcing Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by E Kingston & M S Page T/A ME Reinforcing. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] The employer has provided undertakings in the following terms:

“1. The Company will consult with employees about major workplace changes that are likely to have significant effect on them or changes to regular rosters or ordinary hours of work.

2. An employee may involve a representative who they appoint during consultation if they choose to do so.

3. If consultations about changes to regular rosters or ordinary hours of work, the Company will provide information about the change, invite employees to give their views about the impact of the change, and consider those views.”

[3] As a result, the above undertaking is taken to be a term of the Agreement. A full copy of advice provided by the employer is attached to the Agreement as Attachment A.

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

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 21 August 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 20 August 2017.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants, E Kingston and M S Page trading as ME Reinforcing, sought approval of the ME Reinforcing Enterprise Agreement 2013 from the Fair Work Commission. The application was made under section 234 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The nature of the dispute involved the interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act and the terms of the proposed agreement. The applicants argued that the agreement should be approved as it met the necessary criteria for registration and would provide appropriate terms and conditions for employees in the reinforcing industry.

The legal issues before the court centred on whether the proposed agreement complied with the statutory requirements for registration, including the provisions of sections 230 and 231 of the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the court had to determine if the agreement provided for minimum terms and conditions, was free from prohibited content, and was in the public interest. Additionally, the court had to assess whether the agreement had been made in good faith and if the process followed in its creation was fair and appropriate.

The court examined the evidence and submissions from both parties, considering the content of the proposed agreement and the process by which it was developed. It was noted that the agreement contained provisions that aligned with the minimum terms and conditions set out in the relevant awards and did not include any prohibited content. The court also found that the agreement was made in good faith and the process followed was fair. Ultimately, the court was satisfied that the agreement met the statutory requirements and would serve the public interest by providing appropriate terms and conditions for employees in the reinforcing industry.

The Fair Work Commission approved the ME Reinforcing Enterprise Agreement 2013, determining that it met the necessary criteria for registration under the Fair Work Act. The court found that the agreement was compliant with the statutory requirements and would provide suitable terms and conditions for employees in the reinforcing industry. The approval of the agreement was seen as beneficial for both employers and employees, ensuring a fair and balanced set of terms in the workplace.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established