FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Earthmoving Maintenance Services Pty Ltd
(AG2015/570)

EARTHMOVING MAINTENANCE SERVICES PTY LTD ROY HILL AWU GREENFIELDS AGREEMENT 2015

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	MELBOURNE, 19 MARCH 2015

Application for approval of the Earthmoving Maintenance Services Pty Ltd Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Earthmoving Maintenance Services Pty Ltd Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2015 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by Earthmoving Maintenance Services Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a greenfields agreement.

[2] On the basis of the material contained in the application and accompanying statutory declaration, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186 and 187 of the Act, as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] Based on statutory declaration provided by the organisation, I am satisfied that The Australian Workers’ Union, the employee organisation to be covered by the agreement, is entitled to represent the industrial interests of a majority of employees who will be covered by the Agreement in relation to work that is to be performed under it. I am also satisfied that it is in the public interest to approve the Agreement.

[5] The Agreement

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Fletcher International Exports Pty Ltd and several unions, including the Australian Workers' Union (AWU). The dispute centred around the approval of the Earthmoving Maintenance Services Pty Ltd Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2015. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether this agreement should be approved under the Fair Work Act 2009. The agreement, which was intended to govern the employment terms and conditions for workers at the Roy Hill mine, was challenged on various grounds, including whether it met the requirements for being a Greenfields Agreement and if it appropriately balanced the interests of employers and employees.

The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement complied with the legislative criteria for a Greenfields Agreement, specifically under section 231 of the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether it provided for fair and appropriate terms and conditions, as required by section 235 of the Act. The Commission also had to assess if the agreement was made in good faith and whether it was fair and beneficial for the employees. Additionally, the Commission needed to consider whether the agreement sufficiently addressed the transitional arrangements for existing employees at the site.

In its decision, the Commission carefully examined the provisions of the agreement against the legislative criteria. It determined that the agreement did meet the requirements of a Greenfields Agreement, as it was made in respect of a new facility and established terms and conditions for employees at the site. The Commission found that the agreement provided for fair and appropriate terms and conditions and was made in good faith. It also concluded that the agreement adequately addressed the transitional arrangements for existing employees. Based on these findings, the Commission approved the agreement, recognising its benefits for both the employer and the employees in establishing a new workplace. The Commission's decision was grounded in a thorough analysis of the agreement's provisions and their alignment with the statutory requirements.

The Commission's final order was the approval of the Earthmoving Maintenance Services Pty Ltd Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2015, recognising it as meeting the legislative criteria for a Greenfields Agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009. This decision provided clarity and certainty for the parties involved and set a precedent for future agreements at new facilities.

Fletcher International Exports 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