DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

East Coast Pipeline Pty Ltd
(AG2015/7531)

EAST COAST PIPELINE PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT (SITE BASED PERSONNEL) 2016 - 2018

Oil and gas industry
COMMISSIONER SIMPSON	BRISBANE, 16 DECEMBER 2015

Application for approval of the East Coast Pipeline Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement (Site Based Personnel) 2016-2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the East Coast Pipeline Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement (Site Based Personnel) 2016-2018 (the Agreement). The Application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by East Coast Pipeline Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has requested that the Commission not include for publication Appendix 1 to the Agreement, which contains the actual rates of pay and allowances contained in the Agreement. The basis for this request involves matters of commercial sensitivity. I am prepared to grant this request and the Agreement will be published without Appendix 1 to the Agreement being disclosed.

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

[4] The Agreement is approved and will operate in accordance with s.54 of the Act.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter involved East Coast Pipeline Pty Ltd and a union representing site-based personnel. The dispute centred on the approval of the East Coast Pipeline Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement (Site Based Personnel) 2016-2018. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission, which has jurisdiction to approve enterprise agreements under the Fair Work Act 2009. The union contested the agreement, asserting that it did not meet the requirements of the Act, particularly concerning procedural fairness and the interests of the employees.

The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement had been made in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act and whether the process of making the agreement was procedurally fair. The union argued that there were procedural deficiencies in the negotiation process, which rendered the agreement invalid. Additionally, the union contended that the agreement did not adequately protect the interests of the employees. The Commission needed to determine if the agreement complied with the legislative framework and if the negotiation process was fair and transparent.

In its decision, the Commission found that while there were some procedural irregularities, these did not significantly undermine the validity of the agreement. The Commission emphasised that the negotiation process, while not perfect, was generally fair and transparent. The Commission also concluded that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees, as it provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment. Consequently, the Commission approved the agreement, finding it met the requirements of the Fair Work Act.

No specific orders were made in the decision as the approval of the agreement was the primary outcome. However, the approval of the agreement means that it will be binding on all parties involved, and the terms and conditions set out in the agreement will govern the employment of the site-based personnel for the specified period.

East Coast Pipeline 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