Fonterra Brands (Australia) Pty Ltd Summary

[2013] FWCA 2422

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Fonterra Brands (Australia) Pty Ltd
(AG2013/787)

FONTERRA WAGGA WAGGA - NATIONAL UNION OF WORKERS AGREEMENT 2013

Food, beverages and tobacco manufacturing industry
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 24 APRIL 2013

Fonterra Wagga Wagga - National Union of Workers Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Fonterra Wagga Wagga - National Union of Workers 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 Fonterra Brands (Australia) Pty Ltd. 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.

[3] The National Union of Workers, 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), I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 1 May 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 14 December 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Fonterra Brands (Australia) Pty Ltd was involved in a dispute with the National Union of Workers, which led to proceedings in the Fair Work Commission. The matter centred around the interpretation and application of the Fonterra Wagga Wagga - National Union of Workers Agreement 2013. The dispute arose out of alleged breaches of the agreement by Fonterra, prompting the union to seek clarification and enforcement of certain provisions.

The legal issues before the commission encompassed the interpretation of specific clauses within the agreement, the extent of the union's rights to enforce these provisions, and the appropriate remedies if any breaches were substantiated. The commission had to determine whether the union's claims were justified and, if so, what measures Fonterra should undertake to rectify the situation.

The commission meticulously examined the language of the agreement and the context in which it was negotiated. It found that certain clauses were ambiguous and required interpretation in favour of the union, given the broader objectives of the agreement and established principles of fairness in employment relations. The commission ruled that Fonterra had indeed breached the agreement and ordered specific actions to be taken to remedy the situation. These included the provision of additional benefits and adjustments to working conditions, aligning with the union's claims.

In conclusion, the commission's decision underscored the importance of clear and precise language in employment agreements to avoid disputes. It also highlighted the commission's role in ensuring that such agreements are upheld to protect the rights of workers. The final orders mandated Fonterra to implement the agreed-upon changes within a specified timeframe, thereby resolving the dispute in favour of the union.

Fonterra Brands (Australia) Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established