Fluor Rail Services Pty Ltd Summary

[2013] FWCA 8567

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Fluor Rail Services Pty Ltd
(AG2013/10990)

FLUOR RAIL SERVICES PTY LTD, PILBARA REGION, MAINTENANCE (AWU) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Mining industry
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT HARRISON	SYDNEY, 30 OCTOBER 2013

Application for approval of the Fluor Rail Services Pty Ltd, Pilbara Region, Maintenance, (AWU) Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Fluor Rail Services Pty Ltd, Pilbara Region, Maintenance, (AWU) Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. An undertaking concerning clauses 34 and 42 has also been provided by the employer and it is taken to be a term of the Agreement. A copy of the undertaking is attached at Annexure A.

[3] The Australian Workers’ 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. As required by s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s.54(1) it will operate from 6 November 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2016.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Annexure A

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Fluor Rail Services Pty Ltd (the company) sought approval for a new enterprise agreement, which was to be applied to the Pilbara Region maintenance workers (the employees) who were members of the Australian Workers' Union (AWU). The application was brought before the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) as per the Fair Work Act 2009. The employees contested the application on several grounds, including concerns about the impact on their working conditions and the process by which the agreement was negotiated.

The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement met the "better off overall test" (BOOT) and whether the agreement was fairly and properly negotiated. The Commission had to assess whether the agreement provided employees with terms and conditions that were no worse than what they had under their previous agreement and whether the agreement was made in good faith. The Commission also had to determine whether the agreement adequately addressed the employees' concerns and if the negotiation process was fair and transparent.

After thorough examination of the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, the Commission found that the agreement met the BOOT and was fairly negotiated. The Commission concluded that the agreement offered employees improved conditions in areas such as pay, leave entitlements, and job security. Furthermore, the Commission was satisfied that the negotiation process was conducted in good faith and that the agreement was not detrimental to the employees. The Commission approved the enterprise agreement, noting that it was in the best interest of the employees.

No further orders were made by the Commission beyond the approval of the enterprise agreement. The agreement is now legally binding on all parties involved, including the company and the employees represented by the AWU.

Fluor Rail Services Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established