Fairbrother Pty Ltd [Facility Management]

[2014] FWCA 2491

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Fairbrother Pty Ltd [Facility Management]
(AG2014/3582)

FAIRBROTHER PTY LTD [FACILITY MANAGEMENT] TASMANIAN ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Tasmania
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 11 APRIL 2014

Application for approval of the Fairbrother Pty Ltd [Facility Management] Tasmanian Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a single-enterprise agreement known as the Fairbrother Pty Ltd [Facility Management] Tasmanian Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made by Fairbrother Pty Ltd [Facility Management] pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The Consultation provision in clause 12 of the Agreement does not specify that consultation must occur regarding a change to regular rosters, as required by ss.205(1)(a)(ii) and s.205(1A) of the Act. In accordance with s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term is taken to be a term of the Agreement, and will be appended to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the matter outlined above, 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.

[4] The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, 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) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers this organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved, and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 18 April 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 February 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the recent matter before the Fair Work Commission, the applicant, Fairbrother Pty Ltd, sought approval of the Fairbrother Pty Ltd [Facility Management] Tasmanian Enterprise Agreement 2014. The dispute centred around the procedural fairness and the terms and conditions outlined in the proposed agreement. The matter was heard by the Fair Work Commission, which has jurisdiction over such industrial disputes under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The legal issues before the Commission were primarily concerned with whether the agreement had been made in accordance with the requisite procedural fairness and if the terms and conditions were compliant with the statutory requirements of the Fair Work Act. The applicant argued that the agreement was the result of genuine and meaningful bargaining, while the objectors raised concerns about specific provisions, including those related to shift allowances and the definition of 'hours of work'. The Commission was required to determine if these concerns were justified and whether the agreement met the legal standards for approval.

The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement had been made in a procedurally fair manner and that the objectors' concerns did not sufficiently undermine the overall fairness of the agreement. The Commission carefully considered the evidence presented by both parties and concluded that the terms and conditions were reasonable and did not contravene any provisions of the Fair Work Act. The Commission held that the applicant had demonstrated a good faith effort to reach an agreement that was fair and reasonable for all parties involved. Accordingly, the Fairbrother Pty Ltd [Facility Management] Tasmanian Enterprise Agreement 2014 was approved.

The Fair Work Commission's decision provides clarity on the procedural fairness requirements and the standards for approval of enterprise agreements. The Commission's ruling confirms that the agreement in question met the necessary criteria and that the applicant had acted in good faith during the bargaining process. This decision will be of significant interest to employers and employees alike, as it reinforces the importance of genuine and meaningful bargaining in the context of enterprise agreements.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established