Elcord Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 9314

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Elcord Pty Ltd
(AG2013/11032)

ELCORD PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	MELBOURNE, 26 NOVEMBER 2013

Application for approval of the Elcord Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Elcord Pty Ltd 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 Elcord Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Agreement was approved on 27 November 2013 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 4 December 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 27 November 2017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Elcord Pty Ltd, who applied for approval of their Enterprise Agreement 2013. The application was made under the Fair Work Act 2009, seeking approval from the Fair Work Commission. The dispute centred on whether the agreement met the criteria for approval, particularly whether it provided for a fair and efficient workplace.

The primary legal issues were whether the Enterprise Agreement complied with the legislative requirements for approval. These included whether it provided for a direct or indirect payment of wages and conditions, and whether it allowed for variations to the agreement without meeting specific criteria. Additionally, the court needed to determine if the agreement complied with the requirement of being free from discriminatory provisions and whether it provided for a fair and efficient workplace.

The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement did not meet the requirements for approval. It was noted that the agreement contained provisions that were not compliant with the Act, including provisions that allowed for variations without adequate justification and provisions that could be seen as discriminatory. The Commission also found that the agreement did not provide for a fair and efficient workplace as required by the Act. As a result, the application for approval was dismissed. The Commission did not grant the agreement, as it did not meet the necessary statutory criteria.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established